HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/18/2014 (6)PROCLAMATION
DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 24 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30, 2014, AS
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM WEEK IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
511
WHEREAS, George Washington, in the first Thanksgiving Proclamation issued on October 3,
1789, noted: "It is the duty to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be
grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor"; and
WHEREAS, much of the ideology of the American Revolution was developed by ministers and
promulgated from the pulpits of various churches throughout the colonies, but dominated by no one
church or set of beliefs; and
WHEREAS, as set out in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, adopted in 1785, "... all
men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and
that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities; and
WHEREAS, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, "Among the most inestimable of our blessings
is that ... of liberty to worship our Creator in the way we think most agreeable to His will; a liberty
deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be
its best support"; and
WHEREAS, the recognition of the natural right of every individual American to religious
freedom means that men and women are free to pursue their highest aspirations, be they religious or
hilosophic, free from the threat of political passions and is embodied in the First Amendment to the
onstitution of the United States of America, which states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, the week of November 24 through
November 30, 2014, be known and set aside as RELIGIOUS FREEDOM WEEK in Indian River
County, in recognition of the right to worship, however one chooses, which has played so crucial a role
in the development and success of the American Republic.
Adopted this 18th day of November, 2014. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
IN N RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
tgoti73
Peter D. O'Bryan, Chairm
<7t --
Wesley S. Davis, Vice Chairman
•seph E. Flescher
Solari
PROCLAMATION
DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 16 THROUGH NOVEMBER 22, 2014, AS
NATIONAL HUNGER AND HOMELESSNESS AWARENESS WEEK
5-6
WHEREAS, The Homeless Family Center of Indian River County has provided
emergency shelter, food, clothing, hygiene, counseling and employment assistance to over
117 homeless families this year; and
WHEREAS, despite Indian River County boasting one of the highest per capita
passive incomes nationwide, the average "working poor" income of Indian River County is
$650 per month; and
WHEREAS, 100% homeless people served in the programs offered by the
Homeless Family Center were families with children; and
WHEREAS, the Homeless Family Center, in cooperation with The Source, Camp
Haven, and the Samaritan Center, as part of National Hunger and Homelessness
Awareness Week, desire to raise awareness of this issue and its severity in our County.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, that the week of November 16, 2014,
through November 22, 2014, be designated as
NATIONAL HUNGER AND HOMELESSNESS AWARENESS WEEK
Adopted this 18th day of November, 2014.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Peter D. O'Bryan, Chairma
Wesley S. D
ph E. Flescher
Tim
(
711-
PROCLAMATION
&
PROCLAIMTION
HONORING KYLE WALLACE ON HIS RETIREMENT FROM THE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY SER VICES/FIRE RESCUE
WHEREAS, Kyle Wallace retired from Indian River County frire Rescue effective
November 30, 2019; and
WHEREAS, Kyle Wallace began his firefighting career on February 2, 1981 as a
Firefighter with the South Indian River County Fire District. He became a
Firefighter/EMT on July 6, 1982, and advanced to the position of Driver/Engineer on
February 9, 1996, with Indian River County Fire Rescue. He was promoted to
Lieutenant on November 28, 2008, and continued in this capacity until his retirement;
and
WHEREAS, Kyle Wallace, has served this County and the Public with distinction and
selflessness. During his thirty-three years of service, he was dedicated and his work
was greatly appreciated by the employer, citizens and co-workers alike; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDL4N RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board
applauds Kyle Wallace's efforts on behalf of the County, and the Board wishes to
express their appreciation for the dedicated service he has given to Indian River
County for the last thirty-three years; and
BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Board of County Commissioners and staff
extend heartfelt wishes for success in all his future endeavors!
Adopted this 18`h day of November 2014.
0 T
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDL4N RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Peter D. O'Bryan, Chairman
tr-A*
_
!A,
This is to certzb that
Walface
is &red.), presented this
• fttirement Award
for outstanding performance and
faithfid service to
Inefi4nfiver County
Board of County Commissioners
For tfiirty-three years of service
On this .30th day of Arovem6er 2014
John RYng Teter D. O'Biya
Director ofEmergenry Services 03oare !of County Commissioner, Chairman
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
Assistant County Administrator /
Department of General Services
To:
Thru:
The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
From: Michael C. Zito, Assistant County Administrator
Date: November 10, 2014
Subject: Winter Holiday Hours of Operation —
Thanksgiving through New Year's Day, January 1, 2015
Please refer to the attached list of Indian River County's public facilities showing dates and times
for closure during the holidays.
No Board action is required
Attachment:.2014/2015 Winter Holidays Hours of Operation
Approved Agenda ItemL/
BY: \/t�� a ) /'1 0-4/i !
FOR:
Joseph A. Baird
County Administrator
November 18, 2014
Indian River Co.
F: \Assistant
Approved
Date
Administration
40
f
(%1 /3)�
County Attorney
(' %�
4I MBudget
i
t !f 4
Department
.1-- j
/
Risk Management --
anagement
F:\Assistant County Administrator\AGENDA ITEMS \2014\BCC 11 NOV 2014\BCC Memo - 2014-2015 Holiday Hours.doc
5
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
2014/2015 WINTER HOLIDAYS - HOURS OF OPERATION
IN OBSERVANCE OF THANKSGIVING, CHRISTMAS
AND NEW YEAR'S HOLIDAYS
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2014 - THANKSGIVING
OPEN County Beaches and Parks - All locations will be Open - Lifeguards on duty 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
OPEN Sandridge Golf Course - last 18 hole tee time will be 10:44.
OPEN Sandridge Golf Pro Shop - Closes at 2:00 p.m.
CLOSED COUNTY ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX - Closed
CLOSED All Libraries - Closed
CLOSED Gifford Aquatic Center - Closed
CLOSED North County Aquatic Center - Closed
CLOSED Shooting Range - Closed
CLOSED Veteran Services Offices - Closed
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2014 - DAY AFTER THANKSGIVING
OPEN County Beaches and Parks - All locations will be Open - Lifeguards on duty 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
OPEN Sandridge Golf Course - Regular Hours
OPEN Sandridge Golf Pro Shop - Regular Hours
OPEN Shooting Range - Closed
CLOSED COUNTY ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX - Closed
CLOSED All Libraries - Closed
CLOSED Gifford Aquatic Center - Closed
OSED North County Aquatic Center - Closed
OSED Veteran Service Offices - Closed
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 24, 2014 - CHRISTMAS EVE (to be observed on Friday)
OPEN County Beaches and Parks - All locations will be Open - Lifeguards on duty 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
OPEN Sandridge Golf Course - last 18 hole tee time will be 10:44.
OPEN Sandridge Golf Pro Shop - Closes at 2:00 p.m.
OPEN COUNTY ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX
OPEN Veteran Services Offices
EARLY CLOSURE FOR LIBRARIES - Main, Brackett and North County Libraries will close at 5:00 p.m.
EARLY CLOSURE FOR Gifford Aquatic Center - Closing at 3:00 pm
EARLY CLOSURE FOR North County Aquatic Center - Closing at 3:00 pm
CLOSED Shooting Range - (normally Closed on Wednesday)
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 25, 2014 - CHRISTMAS DAY
OPEN County Beaches and Parks - All locations will be Open - Lifeguards on duty 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
CLOSED COUNTY ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX - Closed
CLOSED All Libraries - Closed
CLOSED Gifford Aquatic Center - Closed
CLOSED North County Aquatic Center - Closed
CLOSED Five Customer Convenience Centers will be Closed
CLOSED Sandridge Golf Course & Shop -Closed
CLOSED Human Services - Closed
41?
OSED Shooting Range - Closed
OSED Veteran Services Services
6
FRO
Fe,
AY, DECE-. EER 26, 2014 - CHRISTMAS HOLIIDAY
OPEN County Beaches and Parks - All locations will be Open - Lifeguards on duty 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
OPEN Shooting Range - Regular Hours
®LOSED COUNTY ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX - Closed
CLOSED All Libraries - Closed
CLOSED Gifford Aquatic Center - Closed
CLOSED North County Aquatic Center - Closed
OPEN Sandridge Golf Course - Normal Hours of operation. Open - 6:45 am to 5:30 pm
CLOSED Human Services - Closed
CLOSED Veteran Services Offices - Closed
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 31, 2014 - New Year's Eve
OPEN County Beaches and Parks - All locations will be Open- Lifeguards on duty 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
OPEN Sandridge Golf Course - Normal Hours of operation. Open - 6:45 am to 5:30 pm
EARLY CLOSURE FOR LIBRARIES - Main, Brackett and North County Libraries will close at 5:00 p.m.
Open COUNTY ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX - Closed
OPEN Gifford Aquatic Center - Open 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
OPEN North County Aquatic Center - 6:00 am to 6:00 p.m.
CLOSED Shooting Range - Closed (normally Closed on Wednesday)
OPEN Veteran Services Offices
THURSDAY, JANUARY 1, 2015 - New Year's Day
OPEN County Beaches and Parks - All locations will be Open - Lifeguards on duty 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
OPEN Sandridge Golf Course - Open - 6:45 am to 5:30 pm
CLOSED COUNTY ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX - Closed
OSED All Libraries - Closed
LOSED Gifford Aquatic Center
CLOSED North County Aquatic Center
CLOSED Human Services - Closed
CLOSED Shooting Range - Closed
CLOSED Veteran Services Offices - Closed
7
JEFFREY R. SMITH, CPA, CGFO, CGMA
Clerk of Circuit Court & Comptroller
Finance Department
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
TO:
FROM: DIANE BERNARDO, FINANCE DIRECT
THRU: JEFFREY R. SMITH, COMPTROLLER
DATE: October 30, 2014
HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS
October 24, 2014 to October 30, 2014
In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all warrants (checks and electronic
payments) issued by the Board of County Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board
minutes.
® Approval is requested for the attached list of warrants, issued by the Comptroller's office, for the
time period of October 24, 2014 to October 30, 2014.
Attachment:
DB: MS
8
•
CHECK NBR
318661
318662
318663
318664
318665
318666
318667
318668
318669
318670
318671
318672
318673
318674
318675
318676
318677
318678
318679
318680
318681
318682
318683
318684
318685
318686
318687
318688
318689
318690
318691
318692
318693
318694
318695
318696
318697
318698
318699
318700
318701
318702
318703
318704
318705
318706
318707
318708
318709
318710
318711
318712
318713
318714
318715
318716
318717
318718
CK DATE
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
CHECKS WRITTEN
VENDOR
PAUL CARONE
PAUL JULIN
LINDSEY GARDENS APARTMENTS
CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XVI LTD
PINNACLE GROVE LTD
VERO CLUB PARTNERS LTD
DAVID SPARKS
INDIAN RIVER INVESTMENT REALTY INC
THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH
ED SCHLITT LC
JOHN COLONTRELLE
ARTHUR PRUETT
JOSEPH LOZADA
LUCY B HENDRICKS
HFB OF FLORIDA LLC
EARRING POINT PROPERTIES
ANDRE DORAWA
MARK KNOWLES
PAULA WHIDDON
COURTYARD VILLAS OF VERO LLC
JAMES W DAVIS
NITA EZELL
MISS INC OF THE TREASUE COAST
DANIEL CORY MARTIN
CRAIG LOPES
PAULA ROGERS & ASSOCIATES INC
FIVE STAR PROPERTY HOLDING LLC
WILLIAM LEE
ALCURT VERO BEACH LLC
MARK BAER
33 MILES EAST INVESTMENTS LLC
FRESH START HOUSING LLC
SABEL CHASE
ROBERTS J GORMAN
JUAN CHAVES
REID REALTY
MELISSA CAMARATA
PORT CONSOLIDATED INC
JORDAN MOWER INC
TEN -8 FIRE EQUIPMENT INC
RANGER CONSTRUCTION IND INC
VERO CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC
RICOH USA INC
VELDE FORD INC
RUSSELL CONCRETE INC
AT&T WIRELESS
AT&T WIRELESS
DELTA SUPPLY CO
E -Z BREW COFFEE & BOTTLE WATER SVC
KELLY TRACTOR CO
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC
REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA
AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP
AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP
AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP
GAYLORD BROTHERS INC
HACH CO
PHYSIO CONTROL INC
AMOUNT
3,673.00
623.00
789.00
286.00
1,401.00
1,984.00
388.00
481.00
454.00
544.00
670.00
409.00
1,212.00
573.00
613.00
528.00
630.00
634.00
553.00
560.00
293.00
480.00
3,053.00
1,277.00
350.00
650.00
797.00
1,264.00
510.00
25,534.00
567.00
948.00
478.00
424.00
700.00
478.00
1,018.00
70,171.48
422.21
4,455.72
294.00
63.60
194.33
444.80
79.10
187.54
2,683.39
1,129.09
27.95
2,203.47
149.52
10.85
128.65
2,269.57
2,487.18
529.22
186.79
25,226.76
1
CHECK NBR
318719
318720
318721
318722
318723
318724
318725
318726
318727
318728
318729
318730
318731
318732
318733
318734
318735
318736
318737
318738
318739
318740
318741
318742
318743
318744
318745
318746
318747
318748
318749
318750
318751
318752
318753
318754
318755
318756
318757
318758
318759
318760
318761
318762
318763
318764
318765
318766
318767
318768
318769
318770
318771
318772
318773
318774
318775
318776
318777
318778
CK DATE
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/3 0/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
VENDOR
NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOC
HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD
BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC
EGP INC
VERO INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC
JAMAR TECHNOLOGIES INC
FLORIDA VETERINARY LEAGUE
TIRESOLES OF BROWARD INC
GENERAL PART INC
GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER
BAKER & TAYLOR INC
MIDWEST TAPE LLC
NORTHERN SAFETY CO INC
JONAS SOFTWARE USA INC
MICROMARKETING LLC
K & M ELECTRIC SUPPLY
PALM TRUCK CENTERS INC
GREENE INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP LTD
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HEALTH DEPT
MEDICAL EXAMINERS OFFICE
VICTIM ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
ROGER J NICOSIA
CITY OF VERO BEACH
CITY OF VERO BEACH
CITY OF VERO BEACH
STEPHEN WOJTASZEK
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF
LIVINGSTON PAGE
JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA INC
PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS
PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS
PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS
PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS
WAL MART STORES EAST LP
INTERNATIONAL GOLF MAINTENANCE INC
FLORIDA WATER & POLLUTION CONTROL
DUMONT COMPANY INC
FEDERAL EXPRESS
FEDERAL EXPRESS
DON LAWLESS
SPRINT SPECTRUM LP
SPRINT SPECTRUM LP
TIMOTHY ROSE CONTRACTING INC
TRAFFIC PARTS INC
CALLAWAY GOLF SALES COMPANY
FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT
ROLAND DEBLOIS
JAMES GRAY JR
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION
IRC HOUSING AUTHORITY
BRE-CLEARWATER OWNER LLC
STATE ATTORNEY
STRUNK FUNERAL HOMES & CREMATORY
CHRISTOPHER R MORA
COX GIFFORD SEAWINDS
FIRST CHURCH OF GOD
GERALD A YOUNG SR
HENRY SMITH
ALAN C KAUFFMANN
WOODS & POOLE ECONOMICS INC
AMOUNT
165.00
8,193.84
242.16
1,385.58
124.06
546.90
34.00
3,003.54
2,320.25
838.68
13,051.38
1,822.56
195.59
332.55
84.98
383.15
86.83
3,306.25
44,543.41
24,888.58
5,568.58
1,500.00
2,432.75
2,052.23
11,662.50
47.98
30.00
80.00
1,327.49
0.00
90.00
67.85
80.32
265.53
85,581.00
320.00
490.50
45.26
58.17
60.00
29.28
230.16
165,258.05
1,152.00
24.40
34,891.56
65.00
124.85
1,610.00
450.00
476.00
33,992.42
425.00
39.00
425.00
1,306.20
90.00
175.00
210.00
605.00
CHECK NBR
318779
318780
318781
318782
318783
318784
318785
318786
318787
318788
318789
318790
318791
318792
318793
318794
318795
318796
318797
318798
318799
318800
318801
318802
318803
318804
318805
318806
318807
318808
318809
318810
318811
318812
318813
318814
318815
318816
318817
318818
318819
318820
318821
318822
318823
318824
318825
318826
318827
318828
318829
318830
318831
318832
318833
318834
318835
318836
318837
318838
CK DATE
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
VENDOR
FRED FOX ENTERPRISE INC
COMCAST
COMCAST
INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL INC
TIM GEIB
PINNACLE GROVE LTD
LAKEWOOD VILLAGE RO ASSOC INC
LELCO FB TALLAHASSEE LLL
ENVISIONWARE INC
RUSSELL PAYNE INC
FLORIDA DEPT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE
VAN WAL INC
JOSEPH W VASQUEZ
FLORIDA RURAL LEGAL SERVICES INC
UNITED RENTALS NORTH AMERICA INC
SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC
JOHNS EASTERN COMPANY INC
MBV ENGINEERING INC
LARRY STEPHENS
JOSE RIVERA
ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES INC
DAYSPRING
SUPREME INTERNATIONAL LLC
KENNY CAMPBELL JR
SUNCOAST REALTY & RENTAL MGMT LLC
FLORIDA ASSOC OF HUMAN SRV ADMIN
JOHNNY B SMITH
DANE MACDONALD
CHARLES A WALKER
INDIAN RIVER RDA LP
CEMEX
DANIEL IOFFREDO
PATRICIA CRAWFORD
PROQUEST LLC
RENAE CHANDLER
TRADEWINDS POWER CORP
TREASURE COAST FOOD BANK INC
NICOLACE MARKETING INC
CCG SYSTEMS INC
RAINBOW GROUP LLC
KNAPHEIDE TRUCK EQUIPMENT SOUTHEAST
JANET & DAMO PHILLIPS
ALMM LLC
BOULEVARD TIRE CENTER
YOUR AQUA INSTRUCTOR LLC
DELRAY MOTORS
JOSEPH CATALANO
RAYMOND J DUCHEMIN
CCH INC
TAP PUBLISHING COMPANY
KEITH GROCHOLL
STEVE SCHRAW
SHADOWBROOK AT VERO
BORRELLI & PARTNERS INC
YP LLC
FREDDA LOZADA
JOSHUA GHIZ
EQUIPMENT 911 LLC
AMERICAN MESSAGING SERVICES LLC
LOWES HOME CENTERS INC
AMOUNT
47,525.94
83.81
113.14
78.95
60.00
500.00
440.11
99.00
2,184.20
262.08
20,200.96
9.00
160.00
2,618.11
79.98
1,225.00
7,337.65
3,452.23
60.00
100.00
25,211.00
250.00
191.68
60.00
500.00
93.00
210.00
105.00
110.00
500.00
1,663.50
120.00
400.00
4,867.00
80.00
37,328.00
71.82
100.00
7,425.27
597.50
79.84
237.19
700.00
2,613.88
40.00
134.27
120.00
190.00
1,890.00
651.49
60.00
6.58
1,200.00
23,604.00
89.07
500.00
301.25
4,376.50
12.49
7,377.03
3
11
CHECK NBR
318839
318840
318841
318842
318843
318844
318845
318846
318847
318848
318849
318850
318851
318852
318853
318854
318855
318856
318857
318858
318859
318860
318861
318862
318863
318864
318865
318866
318867
318868
318869
318870
318871
318872
318873
318874
318875
318876
318877
318878
318879
318880
318881
318882
318883
318884
318885
318886
318887
318888
318889
318890
318891
318892
318893
318894
318895
318896
318897
318898
CK DATE
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
VENDOR AMOUNT
CARDINAL HEALTH 110 INC 643.44
ALEX MIKLO 60.00
DAVID J HAESELER 420.00
SOUTH WIDE INDUSTRIES INC 15,363.90
US NETSERVICES LLC 1,095.00
PENGUIN RANDOM HOUSE LLC 834.37
STRAIGHT OAK LLC 314.88
OAC ACTION CONSTRUCTION CORP 142,908.92
MARK BAER 500.00
STEWART & STEVENSON FDDA LLC 410.25
VINCENT OUTLER 30.00
GONZALEZ SAGGIO & HARLAN LLP 7,821.90
COURSE TRENDS INC 300.00
WADE WILSON 100.00
BAKER DONELSON BEARMAN CALDWELL & BERKOW 555.00
COAST TO COAST COMPUTER PRODUCTS 475.99
RICHARD BEECHER 60.00
JEFF PASSARETTI 140.00
HUNTER SOUTHWEST PRODUCTIONS LLC 750.00
A & ASSOCIATES 8,340.80
INTEGRITY LAWNS LLC 1,750.00
LANGHAM CONSULTING SERVICES INC 3,510.00
TONY MCCLOUD 75.00
NETWORK VISION SOFTWARE INC 817.50
RONALD NICHELSON 60.00
ELAINE RAGLEY 50.00
UTIL REFUNDS 15.35
UTIL REFUNDS 33.59
UTIL REFUNDS 143.61
UTIL REFUNDS 35.06
UTIL REFUNDS 87.80
UTIL REFUNDS 21.83
UTIL REFUNDS 22.04
UTIL REFUNDS 54.44
UTIL REFUNDS 7.80
UTIL REFUNDS 12.25
UTIL REFUNDS 42.61
UTIL REFUNDS 47.23
UTIL REFUNDS 86.83
UTIL REFUNDS 48.80
UTIL REFUNDS 331.16
UTIL REFUNDS 311.86
UTIL REFUNDS 55.62
UTIL REFUNDS 57.43
UTIL REFUNDS 33.96
UTIL REFUNDS 39.32
UTIL REFUNDS 51.08
UTIL REFUNDS 71.21
UTIL REFUNDS 2.38
UTIL REFUNDS 6.09
UTIL REFUNDS 7.27
UTIL REFUNDS 59.00
UTIL REFUNDS 59.62
UTIL REFUNDS 23.06
UTIL REFUNDS 9.00
UTIL REFUNDS 7.04
UTIL REFUNDS 62.32
UTIL REFUNDS 45.37
UTIL REFUNDS 7.34
UTIL REFUNDS 38.84
4
CHECK NBR
318899
318900
318901
318902
318903
318904
318905
318906
318907
318908
318909
318910
318911
318912
318913
318914
318915
Grand Total:
CK DATE
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
VENDOR
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
UTIL REFUNDS
AMOUNT
32.58
16.36
1.72
36.34
9.24
20.99
29.74
35.35
35.21
100.00
19.80
11.51
60.97
22.99
69.64
79.27
970.71
1,029,594.69
5
•
•
•
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS - WIRE & ACH
TRANS NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
3248 10/24/201, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER 238,889.25
3249 10/24/201, NACO/SOUTHEAST 20,903.51
3250 10/24/201, ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION 9,537.18
3251 10/24/201, FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES, INC 5,647.57
3252 10/24/201, NACO/SOUTHEAST 471.97
3253 10/24/201, BENEFITS WORKSHOP 11,379.19
3254 10/24/201, TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION #769 5,316.00
3255 10/24/201, IRC FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOC 6,180.00
3256 10/24/201, ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION 2,140.30
3257 10/24/201, BENEFITS WORKSHOP 155.03
3258 10/24/201, FL SDU 8,345.50
3259 10/24/201, CLOSE CONSTRUCTION LLC 107,560.28
3260 10/24/201, KIMLEY HORN & ASSOC INC 593.08
3261 10/24/201, R J SULLIVAN CORP 17,765.00
3262 10/27/201, IRS -PAYROLL TAXES 356,988.01
Grand Total: 791,871.87
1
•
TRANS. NBR
1005055
1005056
1005057
1005058
1005059
1005060
1005061
1005062
1005063
1005064
1005065
1005066
1005067
1005068
1005069
1005070
1005071
1005072
1005073
1005074
1005075
1005076
1005077
1005078
1005079
1005080
1005081
1005082
1005083
1005084
1005085
1005086
1005087
1005088
1005089
1005090
1005091
1005092
1005093
1005094
1005095
1005096
1005097
1005098
1005099
1005100
1005101
1005102
1005103
1005104
1005105
1005106
1005107
1005108
1005109
1005110
1005111
1005112
ELECTRONIC PAYMENT - VISA CARD
DATE
10/24/201
10/24/201
10/24/201,
10/24/201,
10/24/201
10/24/201
10/24/201,
10/24/201
10/24/201
10/24/201,
10/24/201
10/24/201
10/24/201,
10/24/201
10/24/201
10/24/201
10/24/201,
10/24/201,
10/24/201
10/24/201,
10/27/201,
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201,
10/27/201
10/27/201,
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201,
10/27/201
10/27/201,
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201
10/27/201,
10/27/201,
10/27/201
10/30/201,
10/30/201
10/30/201,
10/30/201,
10/30/201
10/30/201
10/30/201
10/30/201,
10/30/201,
10/30/201,
10/30/201
10/30/201
10/30/201,
10/30/201
10/30/201
VENDOR
PARKS RENTAL & SALES INC
PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION SOUTHEAST LLC
COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL
SAFETY PRODUCTS INC
COLD AIR DISTRIBUTORS WAREHOUSE
DAVIDSON TITLES INC
DAVES SPORTING GOODS & TROPHIES
RELIABLE SEPTIC AND SERVICE
ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORP
RECORDED BOOKS LLC
ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL LLC
SOUTHERN COMPUTER WAREHOUSE
CENGAGE LEARNING CORPORATION
COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALISTS
GLOBAL GOLF SALES INC
COMPLETE ELECTRIC INC
CAPITAL OFFICE PRODUCTS
CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC
OFFICE DEPOT BSD CUSTOMER SVC
BRIDGESTONE GOLF INC
OFFICE DEPOT BSD CUSTOMER SVC
WASTE MANAGEMENT INC
WHEELABRATOR RIDGE ENERGY INC
EVERGLADES FARM EQUIPMENT CO INC
HENRY SCHEIN INC
NORTH SOUTH SUPPLY INC
LIGHTSOURCE IMAGING SOLUTIONS LLC
MIKES GARAGE & WRECKER SERVICE INC
MEEKS PLUMBING INC
HOMELAND IRRIGATION
METTLER TOLEDO INC
FIRST HOSPITAL LABORATORIES INC
NEC CORPORATION OF AMERICA
GLOBAL GOLF SALES INC
MIDWEST MOTOR SUPPLY CO
ECONOLITE CONTROL PRODUCTS INC
HARCROS CHEMICALS, INC.
JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES
METRO FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES INC
S & S AUTO PARTS
HYDRA SERVICE (S) INC
WRIGHT FASTENER COMPANY LLC
AT&T
COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL
COMO OIL COMPANY OF FLORIDA
CAPITAL OFFICE PRODUCTS
CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC
COPYCO INC
ARCO GARAGE DOOR CO INC
ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL LLC
ROGER CLEVELAND GOLF INC
PRIDE ENTERPRISES
COMPLETE ELECTRIC INC
RECHTIEN INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS
SYNAGRO-WWT INC
SOUTHERN JANITOR SUPPLY INC
PROTRANSMASTERS II INC
PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC
AMOUNT
209.75
32.67
210.00
255.39
515.97
1,314.00
2,234.40
45.00
2,616.26
20.85
386.85
766.52
723.98
46,015.88
72.20
344.68
1,461.47
397.54
1,485.81
92.37
439.12
2,261.02
2,773.80
401.22
2,506.00
13.72
157.15
4,859.73
665.75
161.45
2,790.00
25.50
320.00
260.00
536.00
1,572.00
12,186.60
381.36
601.70
16.49
2,543.96
369.00
19,519.06
444.73
42.58
444.81
1,684.14
30.50
415.00
743.89
1,558.40
23.00
6,300.00
442.28
45,320.19
3,351.97
1,554.88
2,416.40
1
•
•
TRANS. NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
1005113 10/30/201, EVERGLADES FARM EQUIPMENT CO INC 727.32
1005114 10/30/201, ROBINSON EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 24.58
1005115 10/30/201, HENRY SCHEIN INC 7,768.48
1005116 10/30/201, COLD AIR DISTRIBUTORS WAREHOUSE 1,171.23
1005117 10/30/201, INDIAN RIVER BATTERY 1,096.30
1005118 10/30/201, MIKES GARAGE & WRECKER SERVICE INC 505.00
1005119 10/30/201, APPLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO 41.11
1005120 10/30/201, THE EXPEDITER 248.64
1005121 10/30/201, WORLD INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT INC 67,230.00
1005122 10/30/201, GROVE WELDERS INC 226.67
1005123 10/30/201, ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL LLC 70.13
1005124 10/30/201, DEERE & COMPANY 341.91
1005125 10/30/201, FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 8,559.52
1005126 10/30/201, GLOBAL GOLF SALES INC 484.15
1005127 10/30/201, COMPLETE ELECTRIC INC 1,100.00
1005128 10/30/201, SOUTHERN JANITOR SUPPLY INC 962.25
1005129 10/30/201, CAPITAL OFFICE PRODUCTS 768.83
1005130 10/30/201, METRO FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES INC 718.58
1005131 10/30/201, CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC 69.77
1005132 10/30/201, BENNETTAUTO SUPPLY INC 404.77
1005133 10/30/201, AUTO PARTNERS LLC 35.41
1005134 10/30/201, L&LDISTRIBUTORS 2,777.64
1005135 10/30/201, S & S AUTO PARTS 72.02
1005136 10/30/201, PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC 102.00
1005137 10/30/201, AT&T 6,303.60
1005138 10/30/201, OFFICE DEPOT BSD CUSTOMER SVC 682.83
Grand Total: 281,827.73
•
•
JEFFREY R. SMITH, CPA, CGFO, CGMA
Clerk of Circuit Court & Comptroller
Finance Department
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: DIANE BERNARDO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
THRU: JEFFREY R. SMITH, COMPTROLLER
DATE: November 6, 2014
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS
October 31, 2014 to November 6, 2014
In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all warrants (checks and electronic
payments) issued by the Board of County Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board
minutes.
Approval is requested for the attached list of warrants, issued by the Comptroller's office, for the
time period of October 31, 2014 to November 6, 2014.
Attachment:
DB: MS
17
•
•
CHECK:NM
• 318916
318917
318918
318919
318920
318921
318922
318923
318924
318925
318926
318927
318928
318929
318930
318931
318932
318933
318934
318935
318936
318937
318938
318939
318940
318941
318942
318943
318944
318945
318946
318947
318948
318949
318950
318951
318952
318953
318954
318955
318956
318957
318958
318959
318960
318961
318962
318963
318964
318965
318966
318967
318968
318969
318970
318971
318972
318973
CK DATE
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
CHECKS WRITTEN
VENDOR AMOUNT
GRACES LANDING LTD 191.00
LINDSEY GARDENS APARTMENTS 1,036.00
CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XVI LTD 2,432.00
TREASURE COAST HOMELESS SERVICES 260.00
PINNACLE GROVE LTD 597.00
VERO CLUB PARTNERS LTD 562.00
THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH 2,391.00
PELICAN ISLES LP 870.00
GHOLAMREZA TORKAMAN 736.00
INDIAN RIVER RDA LP 446.00
AHS HOLDINGS GROUP LLC 575.00
DANIEL CORY MARTIN 1,073.00
ALCURT VERO BEACH LLC 2,496.00
SARAH SPANN 891.00
MADISON CAY LTD 539.00
ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING & C D 517.58
ALL FLORIDA REALTY SERVICES INC 3,775.00
GERALD T CAPAK 278.00
VERO BEACH EDGEWOOD PLACE (305-113) 650.00
GRACES LANDING LTD 9,166.00
MICHAEL JACKOWSKI 430.00
TERRYA LAWRENCE 62.00
LINDSEY GARDENS APARTMENTS 10,263.00
BRYAN D BLAIS 771.00
RIVER PARK ASSOCIATES 15,711.00
RICHARD C THERIEN 550.00
CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XVI LTD 3,429.00
DAVID YORK 506.00
ST FRANCIS MANOR OF VERO BEACH 583.00
CITY OF VERO BEACH 198.00
TREASURE COAST HOMELESS SERVICES 2,201.00
FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 391.00
FULCHINI ENTERPRISES INC 284.00
VENETIAN APARTMENTS OF VERO BEACH 872.00
HERMOSA PROPERTIES LLC 301.00
PINNACLE GROVE LTD 6,346.00
VERO CLUB PARTNERS LTD 19,840.00
FORT PIERCE HOUSING AUTHORITY 505.58
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY 315.00
CRAIG MERRILL 1,515.00
CHRISTINE SALTER 508.00
HAGGERTY FAMILY LTD 303.00
THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH 12,563.00
THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH 688.00
FELLSMERE COMM ENRICHMENT PROGRAM INC 83.00
HENRY 0 SPEIGHT 522.00
DAVID CONDON 586.00
HILARY MCIVOR 626.00
PAULA LANE 405.00
JOHN A CAPPELLO 335.00
TCG SONRISE 11 LLC 459.00
PELICAN ISLES LP 5,892.00
SUNCOAST REALTY & RENTAL MGMT LLC 7,392.00
OAK RIVER PROPERTIES INC 533.00
MICHAEL KANNER 611.00
RICHARD JOHN KELLER 535.00
ADINA GOLDMAN 553.00
INDIAN RIVER RDA LP 315.00
1
CHECK NBR
318974
318975
318976
318977
318978
318979
318980
318981
318982
318983
318984
318985
318986
318987
318988
318989
318990
318991
318992
318993
318994
318995
318996
318997
318998
318999
319000
319001
319002
319003
319004
319005
319006
319007
319008
319009
319010
319011
319012
319013
319014
319015
319016
319017
319018
319019
319020
319021
319022
319023
319024
319025
319026
319027
319028
319029
319030
319031
319032
319033
CK DATE
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/3/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
VENDOR
GEORGE THUYNS
LAZY J LLC
SYLVIA MCNEILL
SKOKIE HOLDINGS INC
ROGER WINSLOW
TAMMY MEEKS
COURTYARD VILLAS OF VERO LLC
VINCENT PILEGGI
OSLO VALLEY PROPERTIES INC
VICKY L STANLEY
CORY J HOWELL
CHOICE RENTALS INC
OSCEOLA COUNTY SECTION 8
WYNN OWLE
WILLIAM NEUWIRTH
ANTHONY ARROYO
AHS HOLDINGS GROUP LLC
YVONNE KOUTSOFIOS
ALAN R TOKAR
VILLAS OF VERO BEACH
BRIAN E GALLAGHER
MANUEL V CAMACHO SR LLC
HOUSING AUTHORITY
ALCURT VERO BEACH LLC
STEPHANIE WATCHEK FOUNTAIN ESTATE
FRANKLIN TODD MARCHANT
MICHAEL STILES
BLTREJV3 PALM BEACH LLC
CARROLL CAUDILL JR
LINDA KAY SHORT
RACHEL G SIDMAN
SCOT WILKE
MARK BAER
WANELL DONNELLI
ARTHUR ARGENIO
J & K PALMER ENTERPRISES LLC
REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA
DICKERSON FLORIDA INC
FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP
CARDINAL HEALTH 110 INC
NEEL-SCHAFFER INC
PORT CONSOLIDATED INC
STURGIS LUMBER & PLYWOOD CO
JORDAN MOWER INC
RANGER CONSTRUCTION IND INC
VERO CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC
STEWART MINING INDUSTRIES INC
RUSSELL CONCRETE INC
DATA FLOW SYSTEMS INC
PARALEE COMPANY INC
B G KENN INC
DELTA SUPPLY CO
E -Z BREW COFFEE & BOTTLE WATER SVC
GRAINGER
KELLY TRACTOR CO
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC
PULSAFEEDER INC UNIT OF IDEX CORP
REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA
MY RECEPTIONIST INC
AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP
AMOUNT
589.00
396.00
647.00
744.00
482.00
176.00
446.00
376.00
779.00
797.00
339.00
825.00
639.58
569.00
646.00
295.00
4,770.00
407.00
710.00
483.00
470.00
622.00
629.58
9,789.00
241.00
645.00
532.00
1,763.00
479.00
443.00
472.00
393.00
1,058.00
353.00
480.00
221.00
18,207.10
324,064.81
14,928.70
421.50
5,771.93
67,086.97
20.32
3,656.76
282.10
62.20
273.72
158.20
2,471.60
808.00
217.00
309.29
6.49
311.84
77.66
259.50
966.82
94.00
382.11
2,745.37
2
CHECK NBR
319034
319035
319036
319037
319038
319039
319040
319041
319042
319043
319044
319045
319046
319047
319048
319049
319050
319051
319052
319053
319054
319055
319056
319057
319058
319059
319060
319061
319062
319063
319064
319065
319066
319067
319068
319069
319070
319071
319072
319073
319074
319075
319076
319077
319078
319079
319080
319081
319082
319083
319084
319085
319086
319087
319088
319089
319090
319091
319092
319093
CK DATE VENDOR
11/6/2014 DAILY COURIER SERVICE INC
11/6/2014 GAYLORD BROTHERS INC
11/6/2014 3M CO
11/6/2014 ALLIED ELECTRONICS INC
11/6/2014 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD
11/6/2014 PETES CONCRETE
11/6/2014 EGP INC
11/6/2014 VERO INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC
11/6/2014 JAMAR TECHNOLOGIES INC
11/6/2014 EXPRESS REEL GRINDING INC
11/6/2014 T1RESOLES OF BROWARD INC
11/6/2014 FIRESTONE COMPLETE AUTO CARE
11/6/2014 DELL MARKETING LP
11/6/2014 GENERAL PART INC
11/6/2014 BLAKESLEE SERVICES INC
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
BAKER & TAYLOR INC
MIDWEST TAPE LLC
NORTHERN SAFETY CO INC
BASS CARLTON SOD INC
HUDSON PUMP & EQUIPMENT
MICROMARKETING LLC
K & M ELECTRIC SUPPLY
BAKER DISTRIBUTING CO LLC
SUNSHINE SAFETY COUNCIL INC
CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XVI LTD
PING INC
PARKS AND SON INC
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER
CITY OF VERO BEACH
ILLINOIS STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT
CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE
COMPBENEFITS COMPANY
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT INS CO
AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE ASSURANCE CO
INDIAN RIVER ALL FAB INC
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE INC
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY LLC
LIVINGSTON PAGE
B/C B/S OF FL ADM FEE
B/C B/S OF FL ADM FEE
JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA INC
PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS
PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS
ACUSHNET COMPANY
DUMONT COMPANY INC
IRC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
FEDERAL EXPRESS
JOHN KING
FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT
FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT
COLLEEN PETERSON
BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD of FLORIDA
PHILLIP J MATSON
TAYLOR MADE GOLF CO INC
GIFFORD YOUTH ACTIVITY CENTER INC
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
STRUNK FUNERAL HOMES & CREMATORY
BE SAFE SECURITY ALARMS INC
AMOUNT
1,160.00
200.35
2,025.00
936.39
6,679.71
3,425.00
90.00
70.25
80.25
2,000.00
605.12
1,807.34
1,042.15
251.50
710.00
4,317.84
2,424.15
127.33
93.00
247.02
59.45
388.79
770.19
525.00
95.00
131.17
3,429.54
6,559.00
87,399.32
142.32
478.38
200.14
84.72
16,233.10
991.84
76.64
13,108.74
220.00
1,701.00
40.00
33,316.65
9,940.05
849.18
90.00
101.60
1,449.62
1,679.50
50,370.15
83.22
125.00
6,921.99
1,857.00
74.63
1,519.96
89.42
181.89
6,873.91
255.00
425.00
120.00
3
CHECK NBR
319094
319095
319096
319097
319098
319099
319100
319101
319102
319103
319104
319105
319106
319107
319108
319109
319110
319111
319112
319113
319114
319115
319116
319117
319118
319119
319120
319121
319122
319123
319124
319125
319126
319127
319128
319129
319130
319131
319132
319133
319134
319135
319136
319137
319138
319139
319140
319141
319142
319143
319144
319145
319146
319147
319148
319149
319150
319151
319152
319153
CK DATE
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
VENDOR
GERALD A YOUNG SR
HENRY SMITH
ALAN C KAUFFMANN
IDEA GARDEN ADVERTISING
TIM GEIB
BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC
C & C ELECTRIC WORKS INC
HAYTH,IIAYTH & LANDAU
ARCADIS U S INC
THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH
RUSSELL PAYNE INC
TREASURE COAST MATS
CELICO PARTNERSHIP
FLORIDA FARM BUREAU
ALLSTATE
MUTUAL OF OMAHA
MUTUAL OF OMAHA
MUTUAL OF OMAHA
MUTUAL OF OMAHA
JOSEPH W VASQUEZ
FL ASSOC OF COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AGENTS
CENTRAL PUMP & SUPPLY INC
MCMAHON ASSOCIATES INC
DAVID SILON
ADMIN FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
ADMIN FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
ADMIN FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
COAST TO COAST BUILDERS OF FLORIDA INC
LARRY STEPHENS
JOSE RIVERA
SUPREME INTERNATIONAL LLC
KENNY CAMPBELL JR
SUNCOAST REALTY & RENTAL MGMT LLC
PAK MAIL
JAMES SEXTON
JOHNNY B SMITH
DANE MACDONALD
GLOBALSTAR USA
CHARLES A WALKER
INDIAN RIVER RDA LP
DANIEL IOFFREDO
SOUTHEAST SECURE SHREDDING
TREASURE COAST FOOD BANK INC
SANDY ARACENA
HELPING ANIMALS LIVE -OVERCOME
DE LA HOZ BUILDERS INC
HEALTH ADVOCATE
HEALTH ADVOCATE
WITTENBACH BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC
STERLING WATER TECHNOLOGIES LLC
211 PALM BEACH/TREASURE COAST INC
JOSEPH CATALANO
OVERDRIVE INC
FCC ENVIRONMENTAL LLC
LINDSAY ADAMS
EUTEK SYSTEMS
RAYMOND J DUCHEMIN
KEITH GROCHOLL
VEROTOWN LLC
NEWSOM OIL COMPANY
AMOUNT
135.00
150.00
210.00
150.00
100.00
3,088.57
395.00
125.00
1,069.40
569.00
244.65
485.00
120.03
45.00
447.76
1,859.50
6,263.31
6,275.13
16,474.75
150.00
100.00
271.52
17, 892.60
120.00
219.41
222.39
124.09
9,054.00
80.00
160.00
824.35
40.00
398.00
282.55
100.90
170.00
70.00
119.29
160.00
456.00
110.00
111.64
177.56
180.00
26.00
47,432.00
328.35
1,100.55
203.50
7,357.02
7,000.00
120.00
789.57
122.36
125.00
486.60
170.00
120.00
450.00
385.00
4
CHECK NBR
319154
319155
319156
319157
319158
319159
319160
319161
319162
319163
319164
319165
319166
319167
319168
319169
319170
319171
319172
319173
319174
319175
319176
319177
319178
319179
319180
319181
319182
319183
319184
319185
319186
319187
319188
319189
319190
319191
319192
319193
319194
319195
Grand Total:
CK DATE VENDOR
11/6/2014 CENTRAL FLORIDA GOLF CARS INC
11/6/2014 REHMANN GROUP LLC
11/6/2014 REPROGRAPHIC SOLUTIONS INC
11/6/2014 LOWES HOME CENTERS INC
11/6/2014 LABOR READY SOUTHEAST INC
11/6/2014 AMG SF LLC
11/6/2014 ALEX MIKLO
11/6/2014 BURNETT LIME CO INC
11/6/2014 SOUTHWIDE INDUSTRIES INC
11/6/2014 0 SPORTSWEAR LLC
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
COMMERCIAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE
TREASURE COAST TURF INC
PENGUIN RANDOM.HOUSE LLC
STRAIGHT OAK LLC
MICHAEL YOUNG
C E R SIGNATURE CLEANING
VINCENT OUTLER
RYAN HERCO PRODUCTS CORP
CHEMTRADE CHEMICALS CORPORTATION
KATE P COTNER
WADE WILSON
SUMMIT CONSTRUCTION OF VERO BEACH LLC
FAMILY SUPPORT REGISTRY
COAST TO COAST COMPUTER PRODUCTS
EXTREME GOLF INC
RICHARD BEECHER
VALERIE WATERS
JEFF PASSARETTI
AXIS DATA SOLUTIONS INC
BERNARD EGAN & COMPANY
STS MAINTAIN SERVICES INC
ANDREW D. FLEISHER, ESQ
NAPIER & ROLLIN PLLC
TONY MCCLOUD
CHADWICK PRESTON SMALLEY
THEODORE BARTOSIEWICZ
SKECHERS USA INC
RONALD NICHELSON
PATREECE GREEN
SUN LIFE FINANCIAL
ZEFFERT & ASSOCIATES
UTIL REFUNDS
AMOUNT
166.82
40,000.00
40.32
1,164.90
10,467.84
2,618.98
60.00
3,238.20
7,288.00
858.00
1,643.00
5,568.00
328.50
219.96
40.00
850.00
30.00
4,419.47
3,664.93
275.00
120.00
950.00
9.66
819.95
370.00
120.00
420.00
100.00
2,869.55
9,591.91
1,450.00
1,417.04
400.00
45.00
1,950.00
468.00
584.14
100.00
50.00
21,060.76
590.00
11,729.78
1,156,179.88
5
•
•
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS - WIRE & ACH
TRANS NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
3263 10/31/201, JMC SERVICES INC 45,605.88
3264 10/31/201, SENIOR RESOURCE ASSOCIATION 469,229.90
3265 10/31/201, KIMLEY HORN & ASSOC INC 23,388.75
3266 10/31/201, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS 72,425.59
3267 10/31/201, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF 3,234,510.24
3268 10/31/201, CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT 78,885.33
3269 11/3/2014 BENEFITS WORKSHOP 4,514.79
3270 11/3/2014 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMIN 13,173.89
3271 11/3/2014 FL RETIREMENT SYSTEM 400,137.75
3272 11/3/2014 I R C HEALTH INSURANCE - TRUST 450,101.36
3273 11/4/2014 CDM SMITH INC 10,052.50
3274 11/5/2014 I R C HEALTH INSURANCE - TRUST 51,726.58
3275 11/5/2014 BENEFITS WORKSHOP 5,084.05
3276 11/5/2014 BENEFITS WORKSHOP 3,556.73
Grand Total: 4,862,393.34
1
ELECTRONIC PAYMENT - VISA CARD
TRANS. NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
1005139 11/4/2014 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION SOUTHEAST LLC 708.05
1005140 11/4/2014 ROBINSON EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 2,313.04
1005141 11/4/2014 COPYCO INC 203.41
1005142 11/4/2014 SAFETY PRODUCTS INC 1,551.64
1005143 11/4/2014 ABCO GARAGE DOOR CO INC 122.00
1005144 11/4/2014 ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORP 5,199.12
1005145 11/4/2014 RECORDED BOOKS LLC 433.40
1005146 11/4/2014 ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL LLC 785.31
1005147 11/4/2014 SOUTHERN COMPUTER WAREHOUSE 466.76
1005148 11/4/2014 VERO COLLISION CENTER 1,150.60
1005149 11/4/2014 HD SUPPLY FACILITIES MAINTENANCE LTD 1,537.87
1005150 11/4/2014 SCRIPPS TREASURE COAST PUBLISHING LLC 599.50
1005151 11/4/2014 SHRIEVE CHEMICAL CO 2,963.15
1005152 11/4/2014 RECHTIEN INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 1,266.52
1005153 11/4/2014 POLYDYNE INC 2,507.00
1005154 11/4/2014 BENNETT AUTO SUPPLY INC 526.70
1005155 11/4/2014 PROTRANSMASTERS II INC 2,046.40
1005156 11/4/2014 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC 102.00
1005157 11/5/2014 EVERGLADES FARM EQUIPMENT CO INC 831.32
1005158 11/5/2014 LIGHTSOURCE IMAGING SOLUTIONS LLC 172.26
1005159 11/5/2014 INDIAN RIVER BATTERY 202.90
1005160 11/5/2014 MIKES GARAGE & WRECKER SERVICE INC 55.00
1005161 11/5/2014 MEEKS PLUMBING INC 276.30
1005162 11/5/2014 ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORP 14,031.72
1005163 11/5/2014 IRRIGATION CONSULTANTS UNLIMITED INC 9.28
1005164 11/5/2014 HILL MANUFACTURING CO INC 1,572.00
1005165 11/5/2014 GROVE WELDERS INC 3,161.76
1005166 11/5/2014 SOUTHERN COMPUTER WAREHOUSE 1,489.06
1005167 11/5/2014 DEERE & COMPANY 73.00
1005168 11/5/2014 COMMUNITY ASPHALT CORP 146.88
1005169 11/5/2014 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 8,143.09
1005170 11/5/2014 COMO OIL COMPANY OF FLORIDA 142.92
1005171 11/5/2014 GLOBAL GOLF SALES INC 1,364.36
1005172 11/5/2014 MIDWEST MOTOR SUPPLY CO 187.00
1005173 11/5/2014 CAPITAL OFFICE PRODUCTS 648.37
1005174 11/5/2014 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC 948.33
1005175 11/5/2014 AUTO PARTNERS LLC 58.93
1005176 11/5/2014 FOXCROFT EQUIPMENT AND SERVICE COMPANT LLC 544.02
1005177 11/5/2014 CON -AIR INDUSTRIES INC 433.32
1005178 11/5/2014 S & S AUTO PARTS 713.30
1005179 11/5/2014 HYDRA SERVICE (S) INC 2,124.55
1005180 11/5/2014 HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC 500.20
1005181 11/6/2014 ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL LLC 780.74
1005182 11/6/2014 COMPLETE ELECTRIC INC 852.80
1005183 11/6/2014 OFFICE DEPOT BSD CUSTOMER SVC 892.17
1005184 11/6/2014 WASTE MANAGEMENT INC 3,872.64
Grand Total: 68,710.69
1
•
November 18, 2014
CONSENT ITEM
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: November 3, 2014
SUBJECT: 2015 Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy Committee (TCRPC CEDSC) District Appointment
Member Listing
FROM: Amy E. Sheridan, Commission Assistant, Districts 3 and 4
The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) has requested ratification of the Indian
River County Board of County Commission (The Board) appointments to the TCRPC
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Committee (see correspondence attached).
Commission Office Staff has contacted the current members, and all have indicated that they
would like to be reappointed to the committee.
It is requested the Board ratify the reappointments to TCRPC Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy Committee, and authorize the Chairman to notify the TCRPC of the
Board appointments.
Attachment
25
•
October 20, 2014
Mr. Joseph Baird, County Administrator
Indian River County
1801 27a' Street, Building A (South)
Vero Beach, FL 32960-3365
Subject: Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Committee
Dear Mr. Baird:
In accordance with. the Bylaws of the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), the
December meeting is designated as the Annual meeting, at which time the appointment of members and
alternates is to occur. It is therefore requested that the Board of County Commissioners take the
necessary action to appoint five members and five alternates for the. upcoming year.
The Strategy Committee must represent the main economic interests of the region, and must include
private sector representatives as a.majority of its membership. The Strategy Committee should include:
public officials; community leaders; representatives of workforce development boards; representatives of
institutions of higher education; minority and labor groups; and private individuals.
The Indian River County Board of Commissioners may want to consider ratifying its current
appointments for a one-year term (January 2015 — December 2015) or make new appointments. The
following members from Indian River County currently serve on the Treasure Coast. Regional Planning
Council C.EDS Committee:
District 1 — Mark Mathes
District 2 — Rich Stringer;
District 3 — Helene Caseltine;
District 4 — Randy Riley; and
District 5 — Glen I-Ieran
Michael J. Busha, MCP
Executive Director
cc: Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
"B -ringing Communities Together" • Est.1976
421 SW Camden Avenue - Stuart, Florida. 34994
Phone (772) 221-4060 - Fax (772) 221-4067 - wwzv.tcrpc.orj
26
•
•
District 1
District 2
District 3
2015
TREASURE COST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY COMMITTEE
Member, Mark D. Mathes
22 S. Orange Street
Fellsmere, FL 32948
(772) 223-9074 (H)
(772) 646-6315 (0)
(772) 834-3422 (C)
cdd@cityoffellsmere.org
Member, Rich Stringer
356 Concha Drive
Sebastian, FL 32958
(772) 581-0361 (H)
(772) 532-2153 (C)
thestringerfirm@aol.com
Member, Helene Caseltine
Indian River County Chamber of Commerce
P.O. Box 2947
Vero Beach, FL 32960
(772) 567-3491 (0)
Directored@indianriverchamber.com
District 4 Member, Randy Riley
965 4th Lane
Vero Beach, FL 32961
(772) 567-9973 (H)
(772) 770-0900 (0)
(772) 633-6929 (C)
Randy.Riley@lstpeoplesbank.com
Riley965Cabellsouth.net
District 5
Member, Glenn Heran
6985 57th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32967
(772) 473-7629 (C)
Glenn@hfbllc.com
27
2 L-
CONSENT AGENDA
November 18, 2014
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: October 23, 2014
SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY APPOINTMENTS TO THE ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITIES COUNCIL (EOC)
FROM: Laura E. Vasquez, Commissioner Assistant for District 2
Mr. Leonard Edwards, Executive Director of the Economic Opportunities Council (EOC) of
Indian River County, submitted the attached letter dated October 21, 2014 requesting the
consideration of the following individuals to be appointed to the EOC as the elected
official's designees for a one year term:
• Ms. Miriam Gross
• Ms. Jennifer Proper
• Ms. Linda McConkey
As stated in his letter "Community Action Agencies are the local grantees for Community
Services Block Grant Act 1998 Reauthorization, P.L. 105-285.
Required by the legislation is a tripartite Board structure; one-third elected officials, or their
designees, one-third low-income representatives, and one-third members of the
private/business community. In past years, commissioners' schedules have not allowed
direct participation, and have appointed designees to serve instead.
Mr. Edwards has provided the resumes of Ms. Gross, Ms. Proper, and Ms. McConkey, a
copy of which are on file in the Commission Office.
Attachments: Letter dated October 21, 2014 and Resumes
Encl; lev
28
PARTNERSHIPcommunity
110
Helping People. Changing Lives.
Economic Opportunities Council of Indian River County, Inc.
Post Office Box 2766
Vero Beach, Florida 32961-2766
•
Admin. office
(45601d Dixie Hwy.
Vero Beach, FL
32960
(772)362.4177
Fax (772) 794-7597
Community Services
1456 Old Dixie Hwy.
Vero Beach. FL
32960
(772)569.1030
Fax (772) 794-7597
Had Stan
Central Offices
8443 6415 Avenue
%basso. FL
32970
PO Box 2766
Vero Beach, FL
322961.2766
(772) 589.8008
Fax (772) 559-1191
Citrus
2771 4th Street
Vero Beach. FL
32968
(772) 778-0525
Fax (772) 770.032_9
Fellsmere
1339 N. Willow Street
Felhmcre. FL
32948
(772)371.1234
Fax (772)37)-9682
I ligMands
500 SW 2001 Street
Vem Beach. FL
32962
(772)794.2375
Fax (772) 794.1905
St. Helen's
333041SI S>, ct
Vero Bead. FL
32967
(772) 567-1347
Fax (772) 562-0373
Northside
1798 NW 96 Avenue
Okeechobee, FL
34973
(863) 337.8677
Fax (863)357-6817
United
:?way,,
October 21, 2014
Commissioner Joseph Flescher, Chair
Board of County Commissioners
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Commissioner Flescher,
Economic Opportunities Council of Indian River County, Inc. (EOC) is the federally
designated Community Action Agency for Indian River County. Charted in 1965,
EOC has provided services to low-income, county residents for over forty nine
years.
As the Commission may know, Community Action Agencies are the local
grantees for Community Services Block Grant, and operate under the
Community Services Block Grant Act 1998 Reauthorization, P.L. 105-285.
Required by the legislation is a tripartite Board structure; one third elected
officials, or their designees, one-third low- income representatives, and one third
members of the private/ business community.
Annually, EOC is required to document the Commission's appointments to its
board. In past years Commissioners schedules have not allow for direct
participation and have appointed designees to serve in their place. EOC
respectfully request consideration of the following individuals to be appointed
for a one-year term:
Miriam Gross
Jennifer Proper Linda McConkey
EOC appreciates your support and looks forward to working together and
helping those within our community who live in poverty and move towards self-
sufficiency.
As required, please find a copy of each individual's resume.
Sincerely,
,
Leonard Edwards
Executive Director
Voluntary Pre -K Head Start
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Community Services
29
•
•
Miriam Gross
3255 W. Brookfield Way
Vero Beach, FL 32966
(772) 567-4006
OBJECTIVE: Seeking a position where my customer service skills and interest in
working with people of diversified backgrounds will enable me to provide people with
the assistance, accountability, and professional integrity they expect and deserve.
EDUCATION AND QUALIFICATIONS:
Montclair State College (now University), Upper Montclair, NJ
Earned a Bachelor's Degree in Business Education, 1/75
NJ Department of Education Teaching Certificate, 1/ 75
For Secretarial Studies (and) General Business Studies
EMPLOYMENT:
State of Florida 1983-2007
Please note: employment was continuous, not broken. Held various assignments and
positions within this period of time. In addition, the agency name had been changed,
locations were changed, as well. My best attempt to summarize my employment is as
follows:
State of Florida (located at WorkForce One), Hollywood, FL 1999-2007
Employment Security Representative I- Interviewed clients, assisted them in obtaining
referrals to appropriate employment leads, reviewed resumes and cover letters, supplying
suggestions for improvement. Provided overall guidance in employability skills and
assisted them to be prepared for their interviews. Computer input and documentation of
job placements as well as other data as appropriate.
While at this office, from 1999-2006, was out -stationed at Sheridan Technical Center,
Hollywood, FL, where I provided assistance to students and graduates of the vocational
school. Gave job referrals, wrote job orders for employers. Helped plan and implement
arrangements for the school's annual Job Fair, Community Services Fair, as well as other
special events. Conducted Employability Skills Workshops to assist students to prepare
for job interviews, discussed cover letter and resume preparation, as well as other issues
they were likely to encounter when seeking employment.
30
•
Miriam Gross
Page Two
Employment Security Representative I in the Fort Lauderdale Office (since the office
moved sometime in the 1990's) 1989- 1999 includes my work in the following areas:
WAGES Specialist- Assisted clients who were receiving Aid For Dependent Children to
get off the welfare rolls. Coached them, provided appropriate job referrals, sanctioned
those who were not in compliance with program guidelines, provided job referrals,
vouchers for clothing, transportation, childcare services, etc., to encourage their transition
into the work force.
Alien Labor Certification Specialist- One of only nine specialists in the state. This
program resulted in certifying individuals from other countries to obtain Resident Alien
Cards. Reviewed applications from attorneys and employers for completion and
compliance with U.S. Department of Labor guidelines, notified individuals of
inappropriate entries or documentation, directed advertising to determine whether there
were suitable U.S. workers who were qualified and interested in the position, obtained
required documentation from attorneys or employers, prepared the files for transmittal for
Tallahassee, for eventual shipment to Atlanta where the Certifying Officer could make
any certification decisions.
Transitional Assistance Program Specialist-. Worked in this program for early -release
individuals from state prisons. Designed to encourage individuals to report, in order to
get job referrals to help them transition into society. Provided them with stipends, in
order to provide them with basic necessities, until that first paycheck could be earned.
Gave job referrals, and provided guidance as warranted.
State of Florida, Florida State Employment Service (initially, with subsequent agency
name changes!), Fort Lauderdale, FL 1983-1989
Assisted individuals to seek suitable employment, while working with employers in their
quest to locate appropriate individuals for their position vacancies. Conducted and
graded state typing and dictation testing and forwarded passing tests on to Tallahassee.
Also, from 1984-1985, along with a member from the State Office in Tallahassee, I
traveled to several Job Service of Florida offices, training their employees in the use of
the "ODDS" computer system, which was in effect for several years. This was a part-time
function, along with my regular role as Employment Interviewer.
31
Jennifer Proper
6225 Dorchester Way
Vero Beach, FL
32966
772-774-8644
Twnk5419cgmail.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE •
Project Ezrah, Englewood, NJ 2006 -May 2014
Director of Employment Services
• Managed employment services department staff.
• Created new effective on-line management tools recording
candidates' resumes and job search information.
• Designed and implemented community workshops for candidates.
• Maintained continious contact with candidates and matched them
with jobs resulting in high placement statistics.
• Enhanced candidates' job search skills through resume writing,
interview techniques, and social media workshops.
• Created seriesof computer courses for candidates, increasing their
employability.
• Interviewed all prospective candidates, offering customized job
search strategies and other resources as needed.
• Counseled and coached candidates throughout their job search.
• Increased violability of organization through LinkedIn and social
media. Oversaw maintenance and development of our web site.
Teaneck Recreation, Teaneck, NJ 2002 -May 2014
Board of Education
Art Teacher
• Designed program to include religious/secular art activities.
• Developed an art history multi -cultural curriculum.
• Taught year-long special education classes.
AT&T Solutions, Florham Park, NJ 1995-1997
Writer/Editor
• Developed proposals for all phases of e -Business.
• Technical Writing for RFP's received by AT&T.
• Designed monthly workshops on business topics.
• Produced 60 Proposals per year.
• Planned and conducted team meetings, which won recognition and
awards.
• Managed proposal team in absence of manager.
New Community Workforce Development, Newark, NJ 1993-1995
Director of Education
• Directed all academic instruction and evaluation.
• Established academic objectives and operational policies.
• Recruited multicultural students for all programs.
• Designed student computer room and reference library.
• Planned and monitored education budget.
• Designed strategic plan for the educational area
• Wrote the organization's mission statement.
• Prepared the academic institution for successful accreditation.
1
32
411 OTHER
OTHERE'MrLO1MEN1
Passaic County Community College, Paterson, NJ 1989-1993
Coordinator, Culinary Arts Department
• Directed/Taught Non Credit Culinary Training Program.
• Wrote grants to develop curriculum and maintained grant records.
• Designed curriculum and classroom strategies for developmentally
delayed students.
• Recruited students for non-credit certification programs.
• Developed community partnerships, and referred students to
supportive services and community agencies, including food
banks and health care.
• Wrote resumes, developed job referrals leading to student
employment.
• Designed brochure and promotional materials.
• Developed and administered a community relations plan.
• Adjunct professor in the science department, taught Health and Nutrition
and presented health and exercise. programs to the community.
• Secured over $1,000,000 through grant proposals.
Passaic County Community College, Paterson, New Jersey
Teacher of Art
• Taught after-school art programs.
• Conducted immunity programs.
Computer Processing Institute, Paramus, NJ
Admissions Representative
• Assisted Director in expanding marketing materials.
• Interviewed potential students and parents leading to enrollment
• Developed community relations plan.
• Designed recruitment materials.
Hi -Core Technologies, Woodcliff Lake, NJ
Sales Representative
• Promoted sales of IBM Software and educational services.
• Developed contract training curriculum.
• Designed conference center workshops and materials.
• Recruited and managed office staff.
New Jersey Devils, East Rutherford, NJ
Sales/ Fundraising
• Designed and implemented telemarketing plan.
• Established fundraisers with community organizations.
• Promoted sales of season tickets and VIP programs.
• Increased corporate sales/fundraisers by 25%.
EDUCATION
Drew University, Madison, NJ, Doctorate 2006
William Paterson College, Wayne, NJ, MA, Education/Community Affairs
411 William Paterson College, Wayne, NJ, BA Art Education with permanent N7 certification
Fashion Institute of Technology /SUNY, NY, AA Textile Design
Computer Skills: Word, Excel, Power Point, and Social Media
2
33
•
Linda McConkey
180 Coral Lane Phone: 772-532-1314
Vero Beach, FL 32960 E-mail
verolindaraevahoo.com
Education
Associates of Art degree Indian River Community College
(Education) May 1998
CDA- A competency based program for Child Development National
Accreditation Program 1990
Graduate of Vero Beach High School 1970
Continuing in-service trainings provided by Indian River County Schools
Workshops offered by Florida Association of
Educational Office Professionals
Continuing training with Florida Children's Forum
Trainer for Birth to 3 Florida Standards and VPK
Florida Performance Standards
Experience
Teacher of Pre -School age children
Maitland Farm Pre -School 1980-1985and 1987-1990
Director of Christian Education Christ Methodist by the Sea
Coordinated all church educational activities 1985-1987
Worked with Mother's Day out Program First Baptist Church
Kindergarten Sunday school Teacher First United Methodist Church
Junior High youth counselor First United Methodist Church
Assistant Instructor for Lamaze childbirth
Senior counselor St. Edward's Summer Camp Program
Pre -K Early Intervention teacher (demonstration classroom)
Osceola Elementary and Rosewood Elementary 1990-1994
34
Summer School Secretary Indian River County schools 1992, 1993, 1994
Receptionist / Doctors Assistant Dr. Arthur Labella part time 1994-1996
Guidance Secretary Sebastian River High School 1994-1996
Administrative Assistant to the Executive Director of Secondary Education
and Instructional Programs 1996-1998
Supervisor of Indian River County Schools District Extended Day Program
1998-2003
Agriculture and Labor Program (ALPI) Early Childhood & Inclusion
Resource Specialist for Indian River County 2003 — 2005
Partners in Education and Research for Kindergarten Success (PERKS)
Specialist for the Florida Children's Forum Early Learning Coalition of
Indian River, Martin and Okeechobee Counties July 2006 —2008
Resource Coordinator for Early Learning Coalition of Indian River, Martin
and Okeechobee Counties July 2005 to July 2006 July 2007 to present
Awards
Indian River County School District
Non Instructional Employee of theYear1993-1994
Organizations
Indian River County Educational Office Professional member
Indian River County Educational Office Professional Secretary 1997-1996
Indian River County Educational Office Professional President 1998-1999
Early Childhood Association of Florida member
School Readiness Coalition member for Program Development,
Assessment, and Curriculum committees
Parent Teacher Education Partnership Committee of Indian River County
NAEYC member
35
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Joseph A Baird; County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Stan Boling, AIT9ommunity Development hector
John W. McCoy, AICP; Chief, Current Development
October 29, 2014
GHO Serenoa Corporation's Request to Replat a Portion Serenoa Phase I to be
Known as Serenoa Phase II [98110046-72714 / SD -13-11-04].
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of November 18, 2014.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
The Replat of Serenoa Phase II is a replat of a portion of a recorded plat (Serenoa Phase I)
consisting of 101 single-family lots on 45.66 acres. The replat affects only 28 single family lots.
All affect lots are under the ownership of the applicant/builder (developer). Located on the north
side of 5th Street SW, the overall Serenoa project is zoned RS -6 (Residential Single -Family, up to 6
units / acre), and has an L-2 (Low Density 2, up to 6 units / acre) land use designation. The overall
density for the Serenoa project is 2.27 units per acre.
On April 4, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners granted final plat approval for the Serenoa
Phase I plat, and the plat was recorded in Plat Book 21, Page 18 of the public records of Indian
River County. Although subdivision improvements were completed, there was no home
construction activity in the area of the replat. The applicant is the project's new developer/builder
and seeks the subject replat to deepen lots within a portion of Phase I by 1 5', re -configuring lots in
accordance with a recently approved re -configuration of the project's original conservation areas.
The Board is now to consider granting final plat approval for Serenoa Phase II.
ANALYSIS:
All of the required subdivision improvements serving the project were completed with the original
Phase I development, and a certificate of completion has been issued. The deepening of lots by 15'
required no additional construction of subdivision improvements, and will not affect any of the
existing, dedicated improvements such as streets or utilities. All of the existing improvements
within Serenoa are privately dedicated with the exception of certain utility improvements, which are
publically dedicated.
F:\Community Development\CurDev\Final Plats\BCC staff reports\2014\SerenoaPhase l replatnowPhase2.rtf
•
The replat deepens the lots by 15'. No other changes are proposed. All county requirements
applicable to the Phase II (partial replat of Phase I) have been satisfied.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
approval for Serenoa Phase II.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application
2. Location Map
3. Plat Layout
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM:
FOR: November 18, 2014
�c,(1'
BY:
Indian River Co,
Approved
Date
Admin.
iii/.3i/Y1
Legal
i !i
I (-U li
Budget
I � 7 ,�
11
Dept.
1.1/6//1
Risk Mgr.
-
•
F:\Community Development\CurDev\Final Plats\BCC staff reports\2014\SerenoaPhase I replatnowPhase2.rtf
2
•
FINAL PLAT (PLTF) APPLICATION
PROJECT NAME PRINT): Serenoa Subdivision Phase 2
NOTE: THIS IS THE NAME THAT WILL BE USED FOR ALL REFERENCE TO THIS PROJECT
(SUCH AS "WOODY BIG TREE SUBDIVISION").
CORRESPONDING PREL}ARY PLAT PROJECT NAME AND PLAN NUMBER:
(0 7t ?6'1/601/6 -- '7P?'7W
Serenoa Subdivision
PROPERTY OWNER: (PLEASE PRINT)
GHO Serenoa Corp.
NAME
590 NW Mercantile Place
ADDRESS
Port Saint Lucie, FL 34986
CITY, STATE, ZIP
561-688-2020 ext. 117
- PHONE NUMBER
hilth@ghnhomes corn_
EMAIL ADDRESS
William N. Handler
CONTACT PERSON
SD- 13 11 04 ✓
AGENT (PLEASE PRINT)
Schuike, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC
NAME
1717 Indian River Blvd, Suite 201
ADDRESS
Vero Beach, FL 32960
CITY, STATE, ZIP
772-770-9622
PHONE NUMBER
jschulkeRsbsengineers.com
EMAIL ADDRESS
Joseph W. Schuike, P.E.
CONTACT PERSON
l 111 /t'
SIGNkTUREIO OWNER OR GENT/
PROJECT ENGINEER: (PLEASE PRINT)
Same as Agent
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY, STATE, ZIP
PHONE NUMBER(s)
EMAIL ADDRESS
CONTACT PERSON
PROJECT SURVEYOR: (PLEASE PRINT)
Meridian Land Surveyors
NAME
1717 Indian River Blvd, Suite 201
ADDRESS
Vero Beach, FL 32960
CITY, STATE, ZIP
772-794-1213
PHONE NUMBER(s)
r1s5755(ailbellsouth.net
EMAIL ADDRESS
Charles Rlanchard
CONTACT PERSON
1801 27th Street, Vero Beach FL 32960
F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\ApplicationsWinalPlatApplieation.doc Revised January 2011
ATTACHMENT 1_
1 of 3
38
SITE PARCEL TAX ID#'S: 13192400000100000001 1
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (LDP) #: N/A - Exempt
DATE LDP ISSUED:
ZONING: RS -6 FLUE: L-2
TOTAL (GROSS) ACRES: 98.08 TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS: 28
AREA OF DEVELOPMENT (NET) ACREAGE:
DENSITY (UNITS PER ACRE): 1.71
16.4 +/-
**PLEASE COMPLETE SUBMISSION CEECKLIS T **
NOTE: "N/A" should be marked in the "YES" column if "Not Applicable"
MATERIAL YES NO
1. Fee - $1400.00 (checks payable to Indian River County) X
2. Completed Final Plat Application Form X
3. Ten (10) Copies of the Final Plat (Must be signed and sealed by surveyor) X
4. Letter of Authorization (if applicant is not owner) e p" fi=1 L,;'
5. Letter from developer providing timeline for achieving the
75% completion threshold for the overall subdivision improvement
NIA
6. ONE OF THE FOLLOWING SETS OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENT DOCUMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION COMPLETE - BUILD OUT:
(a) Certificate of Completion from Public Works or copy of letter to
Public Works and Utilities requiring inspection of improvements.
IF IMPROVEMENTS ARE DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC:
(b) Original Engineer's Certified Cost for Improvements(signed and sealed)
Failure to provide information on which option is being selected may result in a delay in
processing the application.
==OR
1801 27th Street, Vero Beach FL 32960
F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\Applications\FinalPlatApplication.doc Revised January 2011
ATTACHMENT
2 of3
39
-74 Ttet4 4j_ t#
1
1111=11111
0
i fAS ill 8 NI Oie ps! sn •
,----
llllllllllllllllllll
osmium:1 aro'
Li
IN
ill
Obi
004
Ii 100
Ni0
i
!le
Ilt
i
alb
ATTACHMENT 3 41
ATTACHMENT 3
42
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
THROUGH: Dori Roy, Assistant to County Administra
FROM: Will Rice, Manager, GIS Department
DATE: November 7, 2014
SUBJECT: 2015 Oblique Aerial Imagery Acquisition Project
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Aerial photographs are used by County staff on a daily basis to provide information on the
presence or absence of natural and man-made features and the condition of these features. For
the past decade, high resolution vertical orthoimagery has been used by staff in conjunction with
Computer Aided Design (CAD) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software for both
photo interpretive and planimetric mapping tasks. More recently, a newer type of aerial imagery,
oblique aerial imagery, has proved valuable in providing additional information and detail not
available in the traditional vertical aerial imagery.
Oblique aerial imagery, aerial photographs taken with the camera axis at an angle, provides side
and profile views of features that are more familiar to the user as compared to the vertical view
provided by vertical aerial imagery. Also, objects that are not visible in vertical aerial imagery
can often be detected and identified using oblique imagery. For example, houses or other
structures that are obscured by heavy tree canopy in vertical imagery can often be detected and
identified using oblique aerial images.
Pictometry International Corporation is a firm that specializes in acquiring oblique aerial
imagery. Pictometry oblique aerial imagery provides the "Birds Eye View" aerial photographs
found on the Microsoft Bing website. The Counties in Florida Pictometry currently contracts
with include Brevard, St. Lucie, Broward, Palm Beach, and Okeechobee County Property
Appraisers. Indian River County has previously contracted with Pictometry in 2011 and 2013.
Staff proposes contracting with Pictometry in 2014 to acquire new oblique and vertical aerial
imagery for the eastern half of Indian River County during the first quarter of 2015. The area of
coverage for the proposed project is 291 square miles and the specific limits of the project are
shown in Attachment 1. Each area in the project area would be imaged in 5 different directions,
north, south, east, and west, and a vertical view at approximately a 3" ground resolution.
The specific deliverables for the project are listed in Section A. Imagery deliverables for the
project include a digital image library containing the oblique aerial imagery and a single
seamless image mosaic created from the vertical imagery. Pictometry has specialized software
for viewing and working with the oblique and vertical imagery. Pictometry's software
applications include their Electric Field Study (EFS) desktop software, ConnectExplorer web
applications, Connect Mobile applications for tablets and smartphones, and Pictometry's
Page 1 of 2
43
Extension for ArcGIS which allows the County's ArcGIS users to view the Pictometry oblique
and vertical directly in their ArcGIS software.
A concern of staff is making sure that the oblique imagery, once acquired, is made available and
distributed as widely and quickly as possible. Under the terms of the Pictometry license
agreement, copies of the above image libraries and software can be made available to all
government entities located within Indian River County. Government entities would include all
municipal governments and Constitutional Officers including the Sheriffs Department and
Property Appraiser.
Due to the fact that we have a historical library of imagery provided by Pictometry, and that
Pictometry has a specialized nature of the oblique and vertical image library deliverables and
specialized software needed for viewing the oblique imagery, staff is requesting that Pictometry
be classified as a "sole source" provider and that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the requirement for bids be waived for this contract.
FUNDING
The total cost of the project is $118,054.00. Funds for the project are available in the Fiscal Year
2014-2015 GIS Department budget, Account# 505-103-519-033190.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests that the Board of County Commissioners classify Pictometry as the sole source
provider, waive the requirement for bids, authorize the execution of the attached contract with
Pictometry as described in Section A in the amount of $118,054.00, and requests that the Board
authorize the Chairman to sign the attached agreement and related documents.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Map of Aerial Imagery Coverage and Project Limits
2. Agreement between Pictometry International Corp. and Indian River County.
3. Section A — Product Descriptions, Prices and Payment Terms
4. Section B — License Terms
5. Sector Map — Pictometry Imagery Coverage Map
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM
BY:
�. (BouJio
FO j November / 2014
Page 2 of 2
Indian River Co
Appr?ed !
Date
Administrator
4 I
/) f/3 /
Legal
I' t
Budget
ii 7 i
oIsi
/. /zo
Porch g
(.
II/71/f
Risk
Management
jjade:
1/ - re -/d/
44
a
W
a
m 5-
0 O
= Z
WO
W U
Project Limits, 291 sq miles
Area Sectors (1 sq mile)
IRCGIS 10/22/2014
45
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
PICTOMETRY INTERNATIONAL CORP. ("Pictometrv") AND
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FL ("Customer")
This order form ("Order Form"). in combination with the contract components listed below:
Section A: Product Descriptions, Prices and Payment Terms
Section B: License Terms:
• Delivered Content Terms and Conditions of Use
• Software License Agreement
Section C: Non -Standard Terms and Conditions
(all of which, collectively, constitute this "Agreement") set forth the entire understanding between•Pictometry and Customer with
respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior representations, agreements and arrangements, whether oral or
written, relating to the subject natter hereof. Any modifications to this Agreement must be made in writing and be signed by
duly authorized officers of each party. Any purchase order or similar document issued by Customer in connection with this
Agreement is issued solely for Customer's internal administrative purposes and the terms and conditions set forth on any such
purchase order shall be of no force or effect as between the parties.
In the event of any conflict among any contract components comprising this Agreement, order of precedence for resolving such
conflict shall be, from highest (i.e., supersedes all others) to lowest (i.e., subordinate to all others): Non -Standard Terms and
Conditions; Product Descriptions, Prices and Payment Terms; License Terms in order as listed above under the heading 'Section
B: License Terns'; and Order Form.
3. .AII notices under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be sent to the following respective addresses:
CUSTOMER NOTICE ADDRESS
PICTOMETRY NOTICE ADDRESS
1800 27th Street
100 Town Centre Drive, Suite A
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Rochester, NY 14623
Attn: Will Rice, GIS Manager
Attn: Contract Administration
Phone: (772) 226-1609 Fax:
Phone: (585) 486-0093 Fax: (585) 486-0098
Either party may change their respective notice address by giving written notice of such change to the other party at the other
party's then -current notice address. Notices shall be given by any of the following methods: personal delivery; reputable express
courier providing written receipt; or postage -paid certified or registered United States mail, return receipt requested. Notice shall
be deemed given when actually received or when delivery is refused.
4. This Agreement, including all licenses granted pursuant to it, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto,
their successors and permitted assigns, but shall not be assignable by either party except that (i) Pictometry shall have the right to
assign its right to receive Fees under this Agreement, provided no such assignment shall affect Pictometry's obligations hereunder,
and (ii) Pictometry shall have the right to assign all its rights under this Agreement to any person or entity, provided the assignee
has assumed all of Pictometry's obligations under this Agreement.
5. IN NO EVENT SHALL EITHER PARTY BE LIABLE, UNDER ANY CAUSE OF ACTION OF ANY_KIND ARISING OUT
OF OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT (INCLUDING UNDER THEORIES INVOLVING TORT, CONTRACT,
NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, OR BREACH OF WARRANTY), FOR ANY LOST PROFITS OR FOR ANY
INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE, OR OTHER SPECIAL DAMAGES SUFFERED BY THE
OTHER PARTY OR OTHERS, EVEN IF A PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
6. With respect to any claims that Customer may have or assert against Pictometry on any matter relating to this Agreement, the
total liability of Pictometry shall, in the aggregate, be limited to the aggregate amount received by Pictometry pursuant to this
Agreement.
7. The waiver by either party of any default by the other shall not waive subsequent defaults of the same or different kind.
8. in the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held by a court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be
unenforceable, such provision will be enforced to the maximum extent permissible and the remaining portions of this Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect.
9. Pictometry shall not be responsible for any failure on its part to perform due to unforeseen circumstances or to causes beyond
Pictometry's reasonable control, including but not limited to acts of God, war, riot, embargoes, acts of civil or military authorities,
Page 1 of 10
Indian River County; FL — C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
46
fire, weather, floods, accidents, strikes, failure to obtain export licenses or shortages or delays of transportation, facilities, fuel,
energy, supplies, labor or materials. In the event of any such delay, Pictometry may defer performance for a period of time
reasonably related to the time and nature of the cause of the delay.
10. In consideration of, and subject to, payment by Customer of the Fees specified in Section A of this Agreement, Pictometry agrees
to provide Customer with access to and use of the products specified in Section A of this Agreement, subject to the terms and
conditions set forth in this Agreement. Customer hereby agrees to pay the Fees specified in Section A of this Agreement in
accordance with the stated payment terms and accepts and agrees to abide by the terms of this Agreement.
This Agreement shall become effective upon execution by duly authorized officers of Customer and Pictometry and receipt by
Pictometry of such fully executed document, such date of receipt by Pictometry being the "Effective Date."
PARTIES:
CUSTOMER
PICTOMETRY
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FL
PICTOMETRY INTERNATIONAL CORP.
(entity type)
a Delaware corporation
SIGNATURE:
SIGNATURE:
NAME:
NAME:
TITLE:
TITLE:
DATE:
EXECUTION DATE:
DATE OF RECEIPT (EFFECTIVE DATE)
Page 2 of 10
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
BY
"LAN REINGOLD
COUNTY ATTORNEY
Indian River County, FL — C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
47
SECTION A
Pictometry International Corp.
100 Town Centre Drive, Suite A
Rochester, NY 14623
PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS, PRICES AND PAYMENT TERMS
BILL TO
Indian River County, FL
Will Rice
1800 27th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
(772) 226-1609
wrice(u3ircgov.com
ORDER #
C161304
SHIP TO
Indian River County, FL
Will Rice
1800 27th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
(772) 226-1609
wrice(i)ircgov.com
CUSTOMER ID
SALES.REP
A116541
CDeca
FREQUENCY OF PROJECT
Biennial
QTY
PRODUCT NAME
PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
LIST PRICE
DISCOUNT
PRICE-(%)
AMOUNT'
1
Change Analysis Enterprise-
wide License
Perpetual Enterprice-wide License of Change Analysis.
$15,000.00
$0.00
(100%)
$0.00
1
E-911 Interface - Unlimited
seats in one PSAP
Perpetual License. Product enables system interface but
does not cover the actual integration. Licensee must
engage third party to provide this integration.
55,000.00
50.00
(100%)
$0.00
-
1
EAP PROGRAM
Refer to detailed description of EAP Program in attached
Agreement.
. 50.00
50.00
I
Electronic Field Study (EFS)
One copy of Electronic Field Study software, latest version.
50.00
50.00
291
I
IMAGERY -
NEIGHBORHOOD - 4 -way
(N5) (3in) Per Sector
Product includes: 3 -inch GSD oblique frame images (4-
way), 3 -inch GSD orthogonal frame images, 1 -meter GSD
ortho mosaic sector tiles and one area -wide 1 -meter GSD
mosaic (ECW format). Orthogonal GSD: 0.25 feet/pixel;
Nominal Oblique GSD (all values+/ -10%): Front Line:
0.24 feet/pixel, Middle Line: 0.28 feet/pixel, Back Line:
0.34 feet/pixel.
$450.00
$405.00
(I0%)
$117,855.00
1
Media Drive Capacity 931G -
Drive Model IT -
EXTPOWER
External USB 2.0 / eSATA Externally Powered. Delivery
media prices include copying a complete image library
onto media. Sub -warehousing sold separately.
$199.00
$199.00
291
Mosaic - Area Wide (4in
GSD; MrSID format;
individual) Per Sector
Available with purchase of corresponding tile -product.
New processing or re -processing to MRSID of individual
tiles of 4 -inch GSD imagery. Tiles are provided "as is."
Refer to Product Parameters for additional details.
52.00
$0.00
(100%)
50.00
1
Oblique Imagery Bundle with
Two (2) Years of EFS
Maintenance & Support
Includes digital copy of the Licensed Documentation for
the License Software, two (2) End User Training Sessions,
one (1) Advanced User Technical Training, one (1)
Administration / IT Training Session, ten (10) hours of
telephone support, one copy of Pictometry Electronic Field
Study (EFS) software, latest version, on the storage media
specified herein, and access to download updated versions
of the EFS Licensed Software for a period of two years
from the initial date of shipment of the EFS software, along
with a copy of the updated documentation.
$0.00
$0.00
1
State License Fee
State license fee.
$0.00
$0.00
1
Survey Report - Imagery
Project- Compiled To
Accuracy Statement
Available with corresponding imagery purchase. Product
Includes: Report signed/sealed by appropriately
credentialed personnel. Report details production statistics
including GPS/INS post processing and includes an
NSSDA compliant "Compiled To" accuracy statement.
$1,500.00
$0.00
(100%)
$0.00
.291
Tiles - Standard (4in GSD;
TIFF format) Per Sector
Available with corresponding 3" GSD or 4" GSD imagery
purchase. 4 -inch GSD Mosaic Tiles in TIFF Format. Tiles
are provided "as is." Refer to Product Parameters for
additional details.
$20.00
$0.00
(100%)
$0.00
291
Tiles - Standard Compressed
(4in GSD; MrSID format) Per
Sector
Available with purchase of corresponding tile product.
New processing or re -processing to MRSID of individual
tiles of 4 -inch GSD imagery. Tiles are provided "as is."
Refer to Product Parameters for additional details.
52.00
50.00
(100%)
50.00
Thank you for choosing Pictometry as your service provider.
'Amount per product = ((1 -Discount %) * Qty * List Price)
Page 3of10
TOTAL
$1 18,054.00
Indian River County, FL - C161304 20141024
CMT -00047-20141008
48
FEES; PAYMENT TERMS
All amounts due to Pictometry pursuant to this Agreement ("Fees") are expressed in United States dollars and do not include any duties, taxes (including;
without limitation, any sales, use, ad valorem or withholding, value added or other taxes) or handling fees, all of which are in addition to the amounts
shown above and, to the extent applicable to purchases by Customer, shall be paid by Customer to Pictometry without reducing any amount owed to
Pictometry unless documents satisfactory to Pictometry evidencing exemption from such taxes is provided to Pictometry prior to billing. To the
extent any amounts properly invoiced pursuant to this Agreement are not paid within thirty (30) days following the invoice due date, such unpaid
amounts shall accrue, and Customer shall pay, interest at the rate of 1.5% per month (or at the maximum rate allowed by law, if less). In addition.
Customer shall pay Pictometry all costs Pictometry incurs in collecting past due amounts amount due under this Agreement including, but not limited to,
attorneys' fees and court costs.
Due at Signing
Due at Initial Shipment of Imagery
$29.513.50
$88.540.50
Total Payments $1 18.054.00
PRODUCT PARAMETERS
IMAGERY
Product: IMAGERY - NEIGHBORHOOD - 4 -way (N5) (3in) Per Sector
Elevation Source: Customer Provided — LiDAR
Leaf Less than 30% leaf cover (Off)
Special Instructions:
Standard Ortho Mosaic Products: Pictometry standard onho mosaic products are produced through automated mosaicking processes that incorporate digital
elevation data with individual Pictometry ortho frames to create large -area mosaics on an extremely cost-effective basis. Because these products are produced
through automated processes, rather than more expensive manual review and hand -touched corrective processes, there may be inherent artifacts in some of the
resulting mosaics. While Pictometry works to minimize such artifacts, the Pictometry standard ortho mosaic products are provided on an 'AS IS' basis with
respect to visible cutlines along mosaic seams resulting from the following types of artifacts:
Disconnects in non -elevated surfaces generally caused by inaccurate elevation data;
ii. Disconnects in elevated surfaces (e.g., roadways, bridges, etc.) generally caused by elevated surfaces not being represented in the elevation data:
iii. Building intersect and clipping generally caused by buildings not being represented in the elevation data;
iv. Seasonal variations caused by images taken at different times during a season, or during different seasons;
v. Ground illumination variations caused by images taken under different illumination (e.g., sunny, high overcast, morning light; afternoon light, etc.)
within one flight day or during different flight days;
vi. Single GSD color variations caused by illumination differences or multiple-aircraft/camera captures;
vii. Mixed GSD color variations caused by adjacent areas being flown at different ground sample distances (GSDs); and
viii. Water body color variations caused by multiple individual frames being used to create a mosaic across a body of water (e.g.; lakes, ponds, rivers; etc.)
Other Pictometry products may he available that are less prone to such anifacts than the Pictometry standard ortho mosaic products.
Economic Alliance Partnership (EAP)
Customer is eligible for the EAP program described below for a period of two years from the Effective Date. Following payment to Pictometry of
amounts due with respect to each subsequent capture, Customer will be eligible for the then -current EAP program for a period of two years from
delivery of such subsequent capture.
A. Disaster Coverage Imagery at No Additional Charge — Pictometry will, upon request of Customer and at no additional charge, provide
updated imagery of up to 200 square miles of affected areas (as determined by Pictometry) upon the occurrence of any of the following events
during any period Customer is eligible for the EAP program:
• Hurricane: arcas affected by hurricanes of Category iI and higher. (Coverage for hurricanes below Category II and for areas exceeding
200 square miles will he, subject to Pictometry resource availability, available to Customer at the then -current EAP rates.)
• 'Tornado: areas affected by tornados rated EF4 and higher. (Coverage for tornados below EF4 and for areas exceeding 200 square miles
will be, subject to Pictometry resource availability, available to Customer at the then -current EAP rates.)
• Terrorist: areas affected by damage from terrorist attack. (Coverage for areas exceeding 200 square miles ‘will he, subject to Pictometry
resource availability, available to Customer at the then -current EAP rates.)
• Earthquake: areas affected by damage to critical infrastructure resulting from earthquakes measured at 6.0 or higher on the Richter scale.
(Coverage for earthquakes rated below 6.0 on the Richter scale and for areas exceeding 200 square miles will be, subject to Pictometry
resource availability. available to Customer at the then -current EAP rates.)
• Tsunami: areas affected by damage to critical infrastructure resulting from tsunamis. (Coverage for areas exceeding 200 square miles will
be. subject to Pictometry resource availability, available to Customer at the then -current EAP rates.)
B. Software — Use of Pictometry Change AnalysisT" — Pictometry's EAP program includes the use of Change Analysis software for a terns of
ninety days from the date of delivery of the EAP imagery. The Change Analysis software simultaneously compares pre and post disaster images
to aid recovery and restoration efforts.
Page 4 of 10
Indian River County, FL — C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
49
•
SECTION B LICENSE TERMS
PiCTOMETRY DELIVERED CONTENT
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF USE
These Pictometry Delivered Content Terms and Conditions of Use (the "Delivered Content Terms and Conditions") in combination. with the corresponding
Agreement into which these terms are incorporated, collectively set forth the terms and conditions that govern use of Delivered Content (as hereinafter defined) for use
within computing environments operated by parties other than Pictometry. As used in the Delivered Content Terms and Conditions the terms "you" and "your" in
uppercase or lowercase shall mean the Customer that entered into the Agreement into which the Delivered Content Terms and Conditions are incorporated.
I. DEFINITIONS
1.1 "Authorized Subdivision" means, if you are a county or a non -state consortium of counties, any political unit or subdivision located totally or substantially
within your boundaries that you authorize to have access to Delivered Content pursuant to the Delivered Content Terms and Conditions.
1.2 "Authorized System" means a workstation or server that meets each of the following criteria (i) it is owned or leased by you or an Authorized Subdivision,
(ii) it is located within and only accessible from facilities that are owned or leased by you or an Authorized Subdivision, and (iii) it is under the control of
and may only be used by you or Authorized Subdivisions.
1.3 "Authorized User" means any employee of you or Authorized Subdivisions that is authorized by you to have access to the Delivered Content through an
Authorized System.
1.4 "Delivered Content" means the images, metadata, data layers, models, reports and other geographic or structural visualizations or embodiments included in,
provided with, or derived from the information delivered to you by or on behalf of Pictometry pursuant to the Agreement.
1.5 "Project Participant" means any employee or contractor of persons or entities performing services for compensation for you or an Authorized Subdivision
that has been identified by written notice to Pictometry prior to being granted access to Delivered Content and, unless Pictometry expressly waives such
requirement for any individual, has entered into a written agreement with Pictometry authorizing such access.
2. GRANT OF RIGHTS; RESTRICTIONS ON USE; OWNERSHIP
2.1 Subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, you are granted nonexclusive, nontransferable, limited rights to:
(a) install the Delivered Content on Authorized Systems;
(b) permit access and use of the Delivered Content through Authorized Systems by:
(i) Authorized Users for performance of public responsibilities of you or Authorized Subdivisions that are to be performed entirely within
facilities of you or Authorized Subdivisions;
(ii) Project Participants under the supervision of Authorized Users for performance of tasks or preparation of materials using only hard copies (or
jpg copies) of Delivered Content solely for fulfilling public responsibilities of you or Authorized Subdivisions to be performed entirely within
facilities of you or Authorized Subdivisions; and
(iii) individual members of the public, but only through Authorized Users and solely for the purpose of making hard copies or jpg copies of
images of individual properties or structures (but not bulk orders of multiple properties or structures) to the individual members of the public
requesting them.
2.2 You may not reproduce, distribute or make derivative works based upon the Delivered Content in any mediunn, except as expressly permitted in the
Delivered Content Terms and Conditions.
2.3 You may not offer any part of the Delivered Content for commercial resale or commercial redistribution in any medium.
2.4 You may not distribute or otherwise make available any Delivered Content to Google or its affiliates, either directly or indirectly.
2.5 You may not exploit the goodwill of Pictometry, including its trademarks, service marks, or logos, without the express written consent of Pictometry.
2.6 You may not remove, alter or obscure copyright notices or other notices contained in the Delivered Content.
2.7 All right, title, and interest (including all copyrights, trademarks and other intellectual property rights) in Delivered Content in all media belong to
Pictometry or its third party suppliers. Neither you nor any users of the Delivered Content acquire any proprietary interest in the Delivered Content, or any
copies thereof, except the limited use rights granted herein.
3. OBLIGATIONS OF CUSTOMER
3.1 Geographic Data. If available, you agree to provide to Pictometry geographic data in industry standard format (e.g., shape, DBF) including, but not limited
to, digital elevation models, street centerline maps, tax parcel maps and centroids, which data, to the extent practicable, shall be incorporated into the
Delivered Content. You agree that any of this data that is owned by you may be distributed and modified by Pictometry as part of its products and services,
provided that at no time shall Pictometry claim ownership of that data.
3.2 Notification. You shall (a) notify Pictometry in writing of any claims or proceedings involving any of the Delivered Content within ten (10) days after you
learn of the claim or proceeding, and (b) report promptly to Pictometry all claimed or suspected defects in Delivered Content.
3.3 Authorized User Compliance. You shall at all times be responsible for compliance by each Authorized User with the Delivered Content Tenns and
Conditions.
3.4 Authorized Subdivision Compliance. You shall at all -times be responsible for compliance by each Authorized Subdivision with the Delivered Content
Terms and Conditions.
3.5 Project Participants. Each notice to Pictometry identifying a potential Project Participant shall include a detailed description of the scope and nature of the
Project Participants' planned work and the intended use of the Delivered Content in such work. Pictometry retains the right to restrict or revoke access to
Delivered Content by any Project Participant who does not comply with the terms of the Delivered Content Terris and Conditions.
4. LICENSE DURATION; EFFECT OF TERMINATION .
4.1 Term. The license granted to you in the Delivered Content Terms and Conditions is perpetual, subject to Pictometry's right to terminate the license in the
event you do not pay in full the Fees specified elsewhere in the Agreement, the Agreement is terminated for any reason other than a breach of the Agreement
by Pictometry, or as otherwise provided in the Agreement.
4.2 Effect of Termination. Upon termination of the license granted to you in the Delivered Content Terns and Conditions, you shall immediately cease all use
of the Delivered Content, promptly purge all copies of the Delivered Content from all workstations and servers on which any of it may be stored or available
at the time, and retum hard drive/media containing Delivered Content to Pictometry.
Page 5 of 10
Indian River County, Fl-- C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
50
5. TRADEMARKS; CONFIDENTIALITY
5.1 Use of Pictometry's Marks. You agree not to attach any additional trademarks, trade names, logos or designations to any Delivered Content or to any
copies of any Delivered Content without prior written approval from Pictometry. You may, however, include an appropriate government seal and your
contact information so long as the seal and contact information in no way obscure or deface the Pictometry marks. You further agree that you will not use
any Pictometry trademark, trade name, logo, or designation in connection with any product or service other than the Delivered Content. Your nonexclusive
right to use Pictometry's trademarks, trade name, logos, and designations are coterminous with the license granted to you in the Delivered Content Terms.
5.2 Confidentiality of Delivered Content. The Delivered Content consists of commercially valuable, proprietary products owned by Pictometry, the design and
development of which reflect an investment of considerable time, effort, and money. The Delivered Content is treated by Pictometry as confidential and
contains substantial trade secrets of Pictometry. You agree that you will not disclose; provide a copy of, or disseminate the Delivered Content (other than as
expressly permitted in the Delivered Content Terms and Conditions) or any pan thereof to any person in any manner or for any purpose inconsistent with the
license granted to you in the Delivered Content Terms and Conditions. You agree to use your best effons to assure that your personnel, and any others
afforded access to the Delivered Content, protect the Delivered Content against unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, and dissemination, and that access to
the Delivered Content and each pan thereof will he strictly limited.
6. LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES
6.1 Limited Warranties; Exclusive Remedy. Pictometry warrants that the Delivered Content will contain true and usable copies of the designated imagery as
of the date of capture. As the sole and exclusive remedy for any breach of the foregoing warranty, Pictometry shall use reasonable efforts to correct any
deficiency that precludes use of the Delivered Content in the manner intended.
6.2 Disclaimer of Other Warranties. Except as provided in Section 6.1, above, THE DELIVERED CONTENT IS PROVIDED TO YOU "AS IS" AND
"WITH ALL FAULTS." PICTOMETRY MAKES NO OTHER WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS, IMPLIED, OR
STATUTORY. ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF PERFORMANCE, MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND ACCURACY, ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED AND EXCLUDED BY PICTOMETRY.
6.3 Limitation of Liability. With respect to any other claims that you may have or assert against Pictometry on any matter relating to the Delivered Content,
the total liability of Pictometry shall, in the aggregate, be limited to the aggregate amount received by Pictometry in payment for Delivered Content during
the immediately preceding twenty-four (24) month period.
7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
7.1 Restricted Rights. Delivered Content acquired with United States Government funds or intended for use within or for any United States federal agency is
provided with "Restricted Rights" as defined in DFARS 252.227-7013, Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software and FAR 52.227-14, Rights in
Data -General, including Altemate 111, as applicable.
7.2 Governing Law. This License Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, excluding its
conflicts of law principles.
SEND OF DELIVERED CONTENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS]
Indian River County, FL — C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
51
•
SECTION B LICENSE TERMS
PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE
LICENSE AGREEMENT
PLEASE READ THIS SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT ("LICENSE") CAREFULLY BEFORE DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING OR USING
THE SOFTWARE. BY USING THE SOFTWARE, YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS
OF THIS LICENSE, DO NOT DOWNLOAD, INSTALL OR USE THE SOFTWARE.
I. GENERAL. The software ("Pictometry Software") and any written materials that accompany the software ("Documentation") in any media or form are
licensed, not sold, to you by Pictometry International Corp. ("Pictometry") for use only under the terms of this License. Pictometry reserves all rights not
expressly granted to you in this License.
2. LICENSE. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, you are granted a limited, non -transferable, terminable, non-sublicenseable, non-exclusive
license to install and use the Pictometry Software and the Documentation (collectively, the "Proprietary Materials") solely for internal use. Use of the
functionality provided by the Pictometry Software other than for your internal use is prohibited except with the prior written approval of Pictometry. You may
make one copy of the Pictometry Software in machine-readable form for backup purposes only; provided that the backup copy must include all copyright and
other proprietary notices contained in the original. You will not and will not enable others to decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, attempt to derive the
source code of, decrypt, modify, create derivative works of, or tamper with or disable any security or monitoring features within the Pictometry Software. Any
attempt to do so is a violation of the rights of Pictometry and its licensors.
3. TITLE. The Proprietary Materials are confidential information of, trade secrets of, and are proprietary to Pictometry. Title to the Proprietary Materials is and
will remain in Pictometry and ns licensors. All applicable rights to patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and other intellectual property rights in the
Proprietary Materials are and will remain in Pictometry and its licensors. You will not assert any right, title or interest in the Proprietary Materials provided to
you under this License, except for the express license granted to you hereunder. You will not remove any copyright or other proprietary notice or legend
contained on or included in any Proprietary Materials and you will reproduce all such information on all copies made hereunder. You will keep the Proprietary
Materials free of all claims, liens and encumbrances.
4. DISCLAIMERS OF WARRANTY. USE OF THE PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT
PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, THE PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITH ALL FAULTS AND WITHOUT WARRANTY
OF ANY KIND, AND PICTOMETRY HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH RESPECT TO THE PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE, WHETHER
EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND OF
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. PICTOMETRY DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE FUNCTIONS CONTAINED IN OR PROVIDED BY
THE PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS, THAT THE OPERATION OF THE PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE WILL BE
UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR -FREE, OR THAT DEFECTS IN THE PROPRIETARY MATERIALS WILL BE CORRECTED.
5. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. IN NO EVENT WILL PICTOMETRY BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF DATA,
BUSINESS INTERRUPTION OR ANY OTHER COMMERCIAL DAMAGES OR LOSSES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO YOUR USE OR
INABILITY TO USE THE PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE, HOWEVER CAUSED, REGARDLESS OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY (CONTRACT, TORT
OR OTHERWISE), EVEN IF PICTOMETRY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. IN NO EVENT WILL
PICTOMETRY'S TOTAL LIABILITY TO YOU FOR ALL DAMAGES (OTHER THAN AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW IN CASES
INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURY) CAUSED BY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY RELATED TO THE PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE EXCEED
THE AMOUNT OF FIFTY DOI.LARS (550.00). THE FOREGOING LIMITATIONS WILL APPLY EVEN IF THE ABOVE STATED REMEDY FAILS OF
ITS ESSENTIAL PURPOSE.
6. TERMINATION. This License will terminate automatically without notice from Pictometry if you fail to comply with any term of this License. Upon the
termination of this License, you will cease all use of the Pictometry Software and destroy all copies, full or partial, of the Proprietary Materials.
7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
A. Restricted Rights. Pictometry Software acquired with United States Govermnent funds or intended for use within or for any United States federal
agency is provided with "Restricted Rights" as defined in DEARS 252.227-7013, Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software and FAR 52.227-14,
Rights in Data -General, including Alternate III, as applicable. Pictometry must be notified in advance of any license grants to United States federal
governmental entities. The Pictometry Software is developed for general use in a variety of applications and is not developed or intended for use in any
inherently dangerous applications or applications that could lead to property damage, personal injury or death. If you use the Pictometry Software in such
applications, then you will be responsible for taking all appropriate fail-safe, backup, redundancy, and other measures to ensure the safe use of the
Pictometry Software in such applications, including but not limited to, in any nuclear, aviation, mass transit, public safety or medical applications.
B. Foreign Trade Restrictions The parties acknowledge that certain information, software technology, accompanying documentation and technical
information may be subject to United States export control laws. You will not directly or indirectly export or re-export the Pictometry Software in violation
of the Export Administration Regulations of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
C. Governing Law. This License will be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, excluding its conflict of laws
principles.
D. Assignment You may not assign this License without Pictometry's prior written consent. Any assignment in violation of this License will be null, void
and of no force and effect. For all purposes under this License, any merger, consolidation; spin-off, acquisition or change -in -control will be deemed an
assignment.
E. Partial Invalidity; Survival. If any provision of this License is held invalid or unenforceable by competent authority, that provision will be construed so
as to be limited or reduced to be enforceable to the maximum extent compatible with the law as it will then appear. The total invalidity or unenforceability of
any particular provision of this License will not affect its other provisions and this License will be construed in all respects as if the invalid or unenforceable
provision were omitted. The provisions of this License that by their nature would survive its termination will survive indefinitely.
Page 7 of 10
Indian River Couty, FL—C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
52
F. Force Majeure. Neither party will he liable for any costs or damages due to nonperformance under this License arising out of any cause not within the
reasonable control of such pang and without its fault or negligence. Neither party will be liable for any delay or failure in the performance of its
obligations under this License that directly results from any failure of the other parrto perform its obligations as set forth in this License.
G. Waiver. No waiver of a breach of any term of this License will be effective unless in writing and duly executed by the waiving party. No such waiver
will constitute a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same 01 any other term of this License. No failure on the pan of a party to exercise, and no delay
in exercising any of its rights hereunder will operate as a waiver thereof, nor will any single or partial exercise by a party of any right preclude any other
or future exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right. No course of dealing between the parties will be deemed effective to modify, amend or
discharge any part of this License or the rights or obligations of any party hereunder.
H. Entire Agreement; Construction. This License contains the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes
any prior or contemporaneous understandings regarding that subject matter. No amendment to or modification of this License will be binding unless in
\kriting and signed by Pictometry. There are no representations, warranties, or obligations of any party not expressly contained herein. The headings in
this License are for convenience only. They do not constitute a portion of this License and will not he used in any construction of it.
[END OF SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT
Page 8 of 10 Indian River County, FL—C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
53
SECTION C NON-STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS
0 I. Pictometry agrees that to use best commercial efforts to capture the imagery as specified herein under Section A., between January 1, 2015 and
March 31, 2015.
Page 9 of 10
IEND OF NON-STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONSI
Indian River County, FL — C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
54
Page 10 of 10
Indian River County; FL — C161304 20141024 CMT -00047-20141008
55
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph A. Baird,
County Administrator
FROM: Christopher R. Mora, P.E.,
Public Works Director
CONSENT AGENDA
SUBJECT: Providence Pointe Vero Beach LLC
Developer Agreements for Right -of -Way Dedications and Developer -
Funded Roadway and Drainage Improvements
DATE: October 30, 2014
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Providence Pointe Vero Beach LLC plans to build a mixed-use residential/commercial
development on a 157 -acre site located on the west side of 58th Avenue between 49th
Street and 53rd Street (see Exhibit "A").
To accommodate the Providence Pointe project, various transportation improvements must
be made to accommodate future traffic associated with the new development. Right-of-
way dedications and roadway/intersection widening projects must be funded and/or
accomplished by the developer along 53rd Street, 58th Avenue and 49th Street, in
accordance with the conditions listed in the rezoning/PD plan approved by the Board in
August, 2013.
The provisions within the attached two agreements, listed below, have been reviewed and
approved by staff.
AGREEMENT #1 (attached): DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY AND PROVIDENCE POINTE VERO BEACH LLC FOR OFF-SITE TRAFFIC
IMPROVEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION
AGREEMENT #2 (attached): AGREEMENT FOR THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The alternatives presented are:
Alternative No. 1
Approve Developer AGREEMENT #1 and Developer AGREEMENT #2
Alternative No. 2
Deny Approval
56
Providence Pointe Developer Agreements
CONSENT AGENDA Item
Page 2
FUNDING
To cover the non -developer -funded portion of projects listed within AGREEMENT #1 and
AGREEMENT #2, funding is identified and available within the current County 5 -year C.I.E.
from Optional Sales Tax and Gas Tax revenues as well as other developer funding sources
such as Waterway Village/Pulte Homes.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 — Approve both Developer Agreements
ATTACHMENTS
1. AGREEMENT #1: DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY AND PROVIDENCE POINTE VERO BEACH LLC FOR OFF-SITE
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION
2. AGREEMENT #2: AGREEMENT FOR THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
DISTRIBUTION
Jason Brown, Budget Director
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM
FOR 11/18/2014
Indian River County
Ap •� d
Date
Administration
0,0
1�l
T)3/4*h6 `C1Budget
County Attorney
.►.
Public Works
'/0;e
57
•
•
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
AND
PROVIDENCE POINTE VERO BEACH LLC
FOR OFF-SITE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY
DEDICATION
THIS DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
, 2014, by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, 1801 27`h Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960 ("County") and
PROVIDENCE POINTE VERO BEACH LLC, a Florida limited liability company, 660 Reef
Road, Vero Beach, FL 32963 ("Developer").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer proposes to develop a "Planned Development/Traditional
Neighborhood Design" (PD/TND) Community located between 49th Street and 53`d Street, along
and West of 58t11 Avenue in Indian River County, Florida, to be known as Providence Pointe, to
include a mix of residential, commercial, hotel, recreational, and other uses on real property
legally described as follows:
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF.
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting of August 20, 2013, the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County approved the Developer's Planned Development
Traditional Neighborhood Design ("PDTND") rezoning request and granted conceptual PD plan
approval for "Providence Pointe" (PD -13-04-01/2004110179-70350) ("Conceptual Plan"); and
WHEREAS, a developer's agreement for off-site traffic improvements and right-of-way
dedication is required as a condition of PD/TND approval; and
WHEREAS, the County and the Developer share mutual goals and have determined that
they can assist each other with respect to right-of-way acquisition, roadway and drainage
improvements, intersection improvements, and other improvements described herein and
required by the PD/TND approval; and
WHEREAS, the County and the Developer desire to enter into this Agreement to set
forth the terms and conditions to which they have agreed with respect to the matters contained
herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of these premises, Ten Dollars ($10.00),
and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
58
•
acknowledged, the County and the Developer do hereby covenant, stipulate, and agree as
follows:
1. Recitals: The foregoing recitals are incorporated as if fully restated herein.
2. Intersection Improvements: Developer shall contribute the following sums of
money or construction or both toward the Intersection Improvements specified
below. County acknowledges that the contributions or construction or both
described herein satisfy the Developer's entire obligation with respect to off-site
intersection improvements through build -out of Providence Pointe, except to the
extent that additional property or residential units or commercial development
may be added to Providence Pointe in the future. The County shall not withhold
any approval or permit, nor shall it deny any concurrency certificate, because of
the condition or state of any intersection in the County as long as the Developer is
in compliance with this Developer's Agreement.
A. 41St Street and 58th Avenue: (1) Prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Completion ("CC") for Phase I of the Conceptual
Plan, Developer shall optimize the signal timing at this
intersection. (2) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Completion for Phase II, as depicted on the Conceptual Plan, the
Developer shall construct a northbound right turn lane and shall
optimize the signal timing at this intersection. If the County has not
obtained the right-of-way needed for the Developer to construct a
northbound right turn lane as described herein, then the Developer
shall contribute the estimated cost for the design and construction
of the right turn lane to the County, as determined by a certified
cost estimate prepared by the project engineer and approved by the
County. (Wherever used in this Agreement, costs for "design" or
"construction" or both shall not include right-of-way acquisition
costs.)
B. 45th Street and 58th Avenue: Prior to the issuance of a CC for Phase
I as depicted on the Conceptual Plan, or within ninety (90) days
after the County provides the Developer with a fully executed
construction contract for the ultimate intersection and
improvements which include left turn lanes from all approaches,
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall contribute 13.9% of the
estimated construction costs as the Developer's Cost Share.
C. 49th Street and 58th Avenue:
(1) Prior to the issuance of a CC for Phase IA as depicted on
the Conceptual Plan, the Developer shall obtain a permit
j:\bruce\clients\providence pointe-barite\developer's agreement clean 10.28.14.docx
2
59
and install a temporary traffic signal consisting of a box -
span wire at this intersection.
(2) Prior to the issuance of a CC for Phase IA as depicted on
the Conceptual Plan, or within ninety (90) days after the
County provides the Developer with a fully executed
construction contract for the ultimate intersection and
improvements which include left turn lanes from all
approaches, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall
contribute 14.7% of the estimated construction costs as the
Developer's Cost Share.
D. 53rd Street and 58th Avenue: Prior to the issuance of a CC for Phase
IA as depicted on the Conceptual Plan, the Developer agrees to
plan, survey, design, permit, and construct intersection
improvements consisting of the west leg of the intersection as a
four lane road to the project's westernmost connection to 53r1
Street, for a distance of approximately 900 feet west of 58t1i
Avenue, together with an additional transition from a 4 -lane road
to a 2 lane road, provided, however, that the County shall be
responsible for and shall pay fifty percent (50%) of all such costs,
subject to the following additional terms and conditions:
(1)
The County's obligation for the cost of landscaping and
irrigation shall be limited to fifty percent (50%) of
$100,000.00 per mile.
(2) The County shall not be obligated to share in the cost of
site related roadway improvements, such as turn lanes into
the project.
(3)
The County shall have the right to approve the scope of
work and compensation for the design and engineering
phase of the project. The County shall not unreasonably
withhold or delay such approval. Failure to reply to the
Developer within thirty (30) days after the submittal of
design and engineering plans shall constitute approval.
(4) The Developer shall have no responsibility for the design
or engineering of 53rd Street west of the Developer's actual
construction of the west leg of the intersection as described
herein; however, prior to or concurrently with final plat
approval for Phase IIA as shown on the conceptual PD
plan, the Developer shall be required to escrow funds with
j:\brace\clients\providence pointc-barite\developer's agreement clean 10.28.14.docx
3
60
•
(5)
the County for Developer's share (37.5%) of the cost of the
construction of 53rd Street as a two lane road from the point
where the paved improvements described herein end to the
point which is 2,454 feet west of the project's east property
line.
The Developer's obligation with respect to 53rd Street, as
identified in this Developer's Agreement, shall be deemed
satisfied so long as the Developer is in compliance with this
Agreement, and the County shall not withhold any
approval, permit, or concurrency certificate because of the
condition of 53rd Street anywhere except adjacent to
Providence Pointe, provided the Developer is in
compliance with this Agreement.
(6) The Developer shall receive traffic impact fee credits for all
design, engineering, permitting, and construction costs
associated with the 53rd Street improvements described
herein paid or contributed by the Developer, except for:
those costs associated with site related turn lanes or other
site related improvements; and any landscaping in excess of
the landscaping required by County Ordinance. These shall
be considered "non -reimbursable costs".
4. 49th Street Improvements and Dedication:
A. Prior to the issuance of a Land Development Permit for
Phase IA of Providence Pointe, the Developer shall:
(i) Dedicate to the County ten feet (10') of right-of-way along
the project's 49th Street frontage from 58th Avenue West for a
distance of approximately 2,591 feet (the "Eastern Segment") see
Exhibit "B"; and
(ii) Dedicate to the County along the project's 49th Street
frontage sixty feet (60') of right-of-way from the West end of the
"Eastern Segment" to a point approximately 1,328 feet West (the
"Western Segment") see Exhibit "B".
B. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of completion for Phase IB,
Developer shall construct a two lane road for a distance of
approximately 3,260 feet from the existing paved road on 49th
Street, which ends approximately 700 feet west of 58th Ave., to the
western boundary of Providence Pointe, as shown on the
j:\brucc\clients\providence pointe-barile\developer's agreement clean 10.28.14.docx
4
61
•
•
Conceptual Plan. The construction may be completed in sections
which follow the progression of development of the Project.
5. 58th Avenue Dedication: Prior to the issuance of a Land Development Permit for
Phase IA for Providence Pointe, the Developer shall dedicate by right-of-way
deed free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, to the County, twenty five feet
(25') along the property's 58th Avenue frontage. (See Exhibit "C").
6. The Developer shall provide stormwater capacity for the following road
segments:
A. 58th Avenue, from the property's eastern boundary to the
centerline of a four -lane road, along the project's 58th Avenue
frontage.
B. 49th Street, along the project's entire frontage, for a two-lane road
width.
C.
Developer shall design and, construct a temporary swale system
within the County right-of-way for 53rd Street stormwater, as a
four -lane road, from 58th Avenue west for a distance of one-quarter
mile.
7. DOT Compliance: All road construction by the Developer pursuant to this
Agreement shall be in compliance with Florida Department of Transportation
standards.
8. Invoices: Any invoice submitted by the Developer to the County for the County's
payment shall be reimbursed by the County according to the Prompt Payment Act
(Sections 218.70 and 218.80, Florida Statutes).
9. Project Bids: The Developer shall not be required to publicly bid the work
described herein, but all work performed by the Developer shall be subject to the
reasonable determination by the County that the costs incurred for such work
were normal and customary.
10. Miscellaneous:
A. In the event of any litigation arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing
party shall recover attorneys' fees and costs from the non -prevailing party.
j:\bruce\clients\providence pointe-barile\developer's agreement clean 10.28.14.docx
5
62
•
B. No amendment, modification, change, or alteration of this Agreement
shall be valid or binding unless accomplished in writing and executed by
all of the parties hereto.
C. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the
parties hereto and their successors, and assigns.
D. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between_
the parties. No representation, statement, recital, undertaking, or promise
not specifically set forth herein shall be binding on any parties hereto. This
Agreement shall not be effective unless signed by the Developer and the
County.
E. The obligations of the Developer to this Agreement are expressly
conditioned upon the Developer's decision, at the Developer's sole
discretion, to proceed with the development of Providence Pointe.
F. No Building Permit, Certificate of Completion, or Certificate of
Occupancy shall be withheld or delayed by the County for Providence
Pointe or any portion thereof, nor shall the County delay or withhold any
other required permits, provided that the Developer is in compliance with
this Agreement, all applicable laws and regulations.
G. Except as described herein, and in the plans submitted by the Developer
and approved by the County, the County shall not require the Developer to
construct, contribute to, or share in the costs of any off-site traffic
improvements other than the payment of traffic impact fees.
H. This Agreement and all matters arising hereunder shall be governed by
and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. Venue
hereunder shall lie in Indian River County, Florida. Time shall be of the
essence.
This Agreement shall be deemed prepared jointly by each of the parties
hereto and shall be construed on parity as between the parties. There shall
be no canon of construction for or against any party by reason of the
physical preparation of this Agreement.
J. Whenever the singular number is used in this Agreement and when
required by the context, the same shall include the plural; and the
masculine, feminine, and neuter genders shall each include the others.
K. The County and the Developer shall grant such further assurances and
111) provide such additional documents as may be reasonably required by one
j:\bruce\clients\providence pointe-barile\developer's agreement clean 10.28.14.docx
6
63
•
another from time to time, and cooperate fully with one another in order to
carry out the terms and conditions hereof and comply with the express
intention of this Agreement.
L. Failure to insist upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants,
or conditions herein shall not be deemed a waiver of such terms,
covenants, or conditions, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any
right or power hereunder at any one time or times be deemed a waiver or
relinquishment of such right or power at any other time or times.
M. All words, terms, and conditions contained herein are to be read in concert
each with the other, and a provision contained under one paragraph may
be considered to be equally applicable under another in the interpretation
of this Agreement.
N. The words herein and hereof and words of similar import, without
referenced to any particular section or subdivision of this Agreement, refer
to this Agreement as a whole rather than to any particular section or
subdivision hereof.
0. In the event any term, conditions, or clause of this Agreement is declared
to be illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
declaration of illegality or unenforceability shall not affect or alter the
legality or enforceability of any remaining term, condition, or clause
hereof, provided of the parties, as set forth in this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and
year first above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of :
Print Name:
Print Name:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
By:
Chairman
j:\bruce\clients\providence pointe-barilc\developer's agreement clean 10.28.14.docx
7
64
•
Approved by:
101' .Y)0:u-,3
i seph A. Baird, County Administrator
Approved as to Fo and ::al Suffici
ounty Attorney
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
The foregoing instrument was
, 2014, by
Commissioners, and
BCC Approved:
Attest:
Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of the Circuit
Court
By:
Deputy Clerk
acknowledged before me this day of
, as Chairman of the Board of County
, as Deputy Clerk, for Jeffrey R.
Smith, and Jeffrey R. Smith, who are
(Notary Seal)
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the p9ence of:
Print Ake
Name: i
Print Name: ilLiVl'l c, y>Ar"; ( C
A-%d.CIL
personally known to me or who have produced
as identification.
Printed Name:
My Commission Expires:
PROVIDENCE POINTE VERO BEACH, LLC
By: T-' • g . LIMITED
TN
-•'.‘414;'Member
j:\brucelclientslprovidence pobite•barile\developer's agreement clean 10.28.14.docx
8
General artner
65
•
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF .E.55-eAG
The foregoing inst ent was acknowledged before me this 3 (day of OC -I 4 ptc.
2014, by 'Vo 16f ' J. 4/e.d , the General Partner of The Barile Family Limited
Partnership, the Managing Member of' Providence Pointe Vero Beach LLC, a Florida limited
liability company, who is personally known to me or who has produced (t(iv 4 -ft q -Z' as
identification.
(Notary Seal)
Prim Name: -try
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
j:\brute\clients\providence poime-barileldeveloper's agreement clean 1028.14.docx
9
Go JAL
BRENDA M.000LETTE
Notary Public • State of New York
No. 01G06168928
Qualified in Essex County
My Comm. Expires June 18, 2015
66
EXHIBIT "A" TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
z
C4 *11
1ia1NIOd aaNIQIAO2Id
1V1 IIaIHXa
m
r_V �
N Z
-40 -4D c
cz
N< rt
m rn
7J 7,2
Mai
O!
VO z
`cn oc)
V C C •
ora
O
ap A O
rn<SC-
mm z 2
r•-
O•
0 2
go
sa
mS
sD `
mw
m m
00 0 O
2
SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 113.27 ACRES. MORE OR LESS.
{OcZm> >zoo>m> >zoowmD >zoo.ID >zooOxD DDOOtmm°I> D�<m0I>
rmwml-O.1m mm -u0In ORm1z-oDmn OOmzv0mn OOz-oDmn ODz�Dmn O<GZjOSmn
n
z fn fn to fn
mpDtnr Dn<ZwuDi� Dn jZ��� axVDmrli aD-yirm- ajZ� - D�Domw,
G)���� m1,4--0) ,I ' m�rT-Ig mvMc{ifmccn m�mo0cnnw mvrcnn�N m 00ou �tn.�.
Z!`ly r"'iOCD� r-IOc 0> r'iOc> . - 0c0> r�1000D r mZ�D
�-iZ nm�Oo�D 00 JWOm m0Om�m mn�mOm oOOy�00n 0 c)m
z>00 OZO0' A OZO pm OZO0' > OZ0g0m OOOz02 O 4��Zm
pomp Z D D< m Z D<Z D< D m Z D D<- m Z D<_ m Z m N
Dmr1r.. fn m(n -1,1'.-4732-m •�r tnmA 'iZm -i :17" In Z(n , 21
ZNDcn D cn_m Dm -Op D cn_mm >,-.c.,
_O D -z-00 D m O
Mu'Zn ZOz-1 zo'om ZZ0zmi, ZZ0 XO ZzOz_lm Z=OZ�m Z DOr�
�m C-0 O�DNZx O73DmOm Ow>o2-i o�Z�m port>n.m 0 Zw�
T2 POZ 0 apZ x$$ flOZ Ox ap x a0- x a -10
0“-ip �pOm-im opOmmfli Wppm-Im opOmma �- irDI m <DON
zmm—I nmoo�� pA00ai� DAOOOD D"oocn� DDpZ� D mG��N
nZp �G)��x �0 Z mmr,4mi�'I m5*23-1N m�0 +o z �Nm
O mxrvmv� mxrvo m2rom aim,- 00 m 00 m cnzn
ODn { 0 y D <OZn O p 0-0z0 N mOzn 0 c vtoilo
OU)Z 30�ZNm �OOZmm OZ -mg 3pGz�Zmm ZZmm Zm02
23p73v OmDvm Om OT �D 0m Am 0 L) >N 0 �rTN
>0mN m>ZVDmO m>o mm m,o-P2m m>OD�O m Z��O m �n�-i
r1mo 0-tm-im„ OO<m-i ' O� iZm 0� -I O z1 0 p�m0
m0 m m� A• 0 mw mm� a 0 ,> i Am-
OCDC r mOm� r
MW r !Bo O r
MW r DO-im r m0
Dmf OOrmn umi OXm� �zcn v� (n Oz0-1 , Azm� DOZ=
ZO num zNN ZNN zNDm ZNN <NZN mcA;n-0
m�Oz zy-iw zDZm zy-i� 0DZm pD m mmmN
X$O 000m O0o0 0)80-1 -0tvu0 00c0n0 DcnAN
m vet Dm 0 D"m -i Dm Dm -I 0M07-1 Z71-,IXO
<m .ZZI�Zo �7 _N Oz .Z_73N++z frail -`N"Oz z-VNiOz mCD1
nrcnD boZ <mxN <vO-4 <1)=N -0iN Xmg_
DOCV/ mccnM mcmo mem- mcm� Cmc m-ViA
zAm-1 Mmp- Mm_i Zmp0 Mm _1 mm-, metra
DOO mr'n ,� nr ZO 00,Z nrz rr Z Mm z
r-,"RO 400,0 002 00-48 0QE2O On00 -IO OG)
ZDNet Zmmz zjmzm Zmm-i zmZ0 OmZ0
>z"3,0 fn
mO?0 - m444
oLeam ,o9O ozT, O L pf<il -o m,m DTyfDn
DoZ rOD w rOxN r0D fn r0z WO;qN Z Ci
OZ O Oen Z,,, Oen 'n to ONZx ONm� 1. mm O'im-
�zm0 DO<O Ommc -OmZo Grade O��e ODOm
p omc mg -4 Dcnm >oK-i NK -i D• ul
_aim r-i:UT r71fnx r��(n r-lcnx X�v)x OZO,Zpj
OZ00 (zo
(nn0 vn m v2nmo vin m �cci or D 2*DZ
T�Z--4 m� m co
mg? m -Im z cnG)
m m m m
p cur m0.w�mD
iiiiiiii
D cnnmm-1mD
0 ov0v)m.Dep� ,� 0c ZmpCZ{pn
D Z O �, o m< A m '� 3 Z w pC - r
D r In -
D mm �� m�Zo ;;;::
�W m�vlm2,TzD
rX m mN00 rOCDw00
X
mm mnz °�'n opo--fni oo�m
0 0-p OpL)x0� 'T�O�
r Z� c m D DGDmDZm-i ce z� w z ZO DZ Nn m30zz� ZDmO{ ? z�0�<DZ0 �jN'ImZ D�rDO�m2
Z 0o OC1x-O OD�2m'n G� o<(nZx�O
cn wG) �m>NDz tZpmm�z VZAOm�2
• ,x 000), OM N0 mrD-1cn z4Vim-icn
P Den cDilc<-i/pmnn MIMI
>m-DZO2cDn0
D �m 0?°po mmmmo0
m N� ZTAZ mO�Ar2
m 3{ Z).0,_17.c„ 30=c z�m',o p�Zylmj0
N p 0730021,
-iDva�m-a A-mG)mim-I
O • m 0zn=iilumi0m0z2Vv0ul0 mzm0ul0
A 0 *53mfnm ,m -4o %0O0mT=I
m $ cn r -D m men
MI
r <mmomx m>ZOOmmx NZOr m=
• mcn Z01 O•p cn {G)z m-IO� 0m��n L
m (n 02o0DnN ZN -"IDn) <ND 0m
co Dll•-n-20 CO Eliza,' N mm-, - in
N 01�p c >m -1 0 omO-I
mo -0- = zx�N„mr = ZN o =
0R�� Z mcmP z c018 2
Z- O� O 0 mco—O m rm-Cm- m
2 -,?--ns. - 0 m Og On O
DmZm m Zm2o m pram m
:Uu+.- In g
D�ZX i
<m00 ODw
�O-io O p0 Q, O
mrx_
O0mO Z
g-(7)29 Z fume Z
cm-0
-imm m 7-173= m
OZ rT- m
AZ S Tm c > 0 nX m1
0 v m G) m 3
In
m m
:NOIldINOSJO 1V031
67
n N
r
o N
INIOd aDI�IaQ 1 II •
1`AIAt:11: fcJ
A
T
0)
n
2
C
m
CO
/'rte
X_
0)
0
0
0
n
L--1Iiiii11111111l IluniiiI
2 I I
MUM :'ILI
68
•
EXRIBTT "B" TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(NOT A SURVEY)
DETAIL OF
SUBJECT
PARCEL
Z
lb
CO
in
O r7 .1.•
O d
O O
A
N f: Ci
00
CO
.A
O :r of
COZ
0
0
P.O.B.
1
0 0
0
0.8
ID ID
0°.
N
,o
N 41 01
L. NJ 0 0 CA
R)0fCoV1 IV) G. EASI LINE TRACT 7
o L. HEST UNE MCI 8
0 C3
a�`Z
EXHIBIT "B"
HEST LINE TRACT 6 I PEST UNE TRACT J
I�
Co01 01 0
W
I�
cl
q („
EAST UNE TRACT 6
HST LINE TRACT 7
Z o> �CA
=1yyt''t Z
7) p �:p - 1,^, --I
O? o00�� O 2c1
1,12:. g�
1
•II m a
n ▪ b P1 n A `2 -1
00 t� 'e `I v
CA z = ay
0A• Z ny NH
V oa0 m O. �� �C
I-II 1
09..) - 00 073124V No '
II 12454.63'
N 007▪ J24' E ((OAf)(8A.S7S OF BEARING')
KINGS HIGHWAY / 58TH AVE'. / C.R. 613
EAST LINE TRACT J
HST UNE TRACT 2
EAST LINE TRACT 2
War CINfhA
Z
0
o:
1-t
O ?
SKETCH OF `
DESCRIPTION fij° 300 600
I
GRAPHIC SCALE
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 600 ft.
PLAT OF SURVEY FOR: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
PROJ. NO. 12 -029 -PP -ROW DATE: 08-27-14
OWN. BY: C.H.B.
CKD. BY: S.P.T.
THIS PLAT AND REPORT ARE NOT VAUD WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL
RAISED SEAL OF THE FLORIDA REGISTERED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER NAMED HEREON
\WHICH SIGNATURE AND SEAL MAY 8E FOUND AT THE END OF THE ATTACHED REPORT.
THE PLAT AND REPORT ARE NOT FULL AND COMPLETE WITHOUT ONE ANOTHER.
MERIDIAN
LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BLVD, SPITE 201
VERO BEACH. FL. 32960 LE06905
PHONE: 772-794.1213, FAX: 772.791-1096
E•01AIL: LB6905WDELLSOLTH.NET
PAGE 1 OF 2
69
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(NOT A SURVEY)
Report of Survey. (Project # 12-029—PP—ROW
• TYPE OF SURVEY: SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION — NOT A FIELD BOUNDARY SURVEY
• THIS SURVEY PERFORMED BY:
HOUSTON, SCHULKE, BITTLE & STODDARD. INC. L.B.g6905
d.b.o. MERIDIAN LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, SUITE 201
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
* PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE:
CHARLES .H. BLANCHARD, P.S.M. #5755
EXHIBIT "B"
Legal Description:
A PORTION OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, ACCORDING TO
THE LAST GENERAL PLAT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY
SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST.
LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA; SAID LAND NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH,
RANGE 39 EAST; THENCE RUN S 00°13'24"W (BASIS OF BEARINGS) ALONG THE EAST
LINE OF SAID SECTION 20, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET; THENCE RUN S 89045'49"W, A
DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET; THENCE RUN S 45°00'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 56.34 FEET TO
A POINT BEING 65.00 FEET WEST OF THE AFORESAID EAST LINE OF SECTION 20;
THENCE RUN S 00°13'24'W, A DISTANCE OF 2454.63 FEET ALONG A LINE BEING 65.00
FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SAID EAST LINE OF SECTION 20 TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN S 45°04'08"W, A DISTANCE OF 56.81 FEET TO A
POINT BEING 90.00 FEET NORTH OF THE QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION
20; THENCE RUN S 89°48'42'W ALONG A LINE 90.00 FEET NORTH OF AND PARALLEL
WITH SAID QUARTER SECTION LINE, A DISTANCE OF 3272.71 FEET TO THE WEST
LINE OF TRACT 6, SECTION 20-32-39; THENCE RUN S 00009'28"W ALONG SAID WEST
LINE OF TRACT 6, A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET TO A POINT BEING 30.00 FEET NORTH
OF THE QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 20; THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST
LINE OF TRACT 6, RUN N 89048'42"E ALONG A LINE BEING 30.00 FEET NORTH OF AND
PARALLEL WITH THE QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 20, A DISTANCE OF
1328.20 FEET; THENCE RUN N 00°10'48"E, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO A POINT
BEING 80.00 FEET NORTH OF SAID QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SECTION 20; THENCE
RUN N 89°48'42"E ALONG A LINE BEING 80.00 FEET NORTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH
SAID QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SECTION 20, A DISTANCE OF 2591.40 FEET;
THENCE RUN N 00°13'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 2.44 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
Legend & Abbreviations: (symbols not
PLS
PSM
LB
(P�
— PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
— PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER
— LAND SURVEYING BUSINESS
— CENTERLINE
— MEASURED VALUE
— PLAT VALUE
SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION
PLAT OF SURVEY FOR: INDIAN RIVER
MERIDIAN
LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BLVD, SUITE 201
VERO BEACH, FL. 32960 LB#6905
PHONE: 772-794-1213, FAX: 772-794-1096
E-MAIL: LB6905QBELLSOUTH.NET
scaleable for size)
CR — COUNTY ROAD
R/W — RIGHT OF WAY
O.R.B. — OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK
P.O.C. — POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
P.0.B — POINT OF BEGINNING
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCR/P770N
COUNTY NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY
THIS SURVEY IS NOT VAUD WITHOUT THE
SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF
THE FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER
N BELOW.
CHARLES H. BLANCHARD, P.S.M. 85755
J
PAGE 2 OF 2
70
EXHIBIT "C" TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT (Page 1 of 2)
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(NOT A SURVEY)
P1 89'954
SOON Lw( TRACT 16
SWAN UNE SECTION 17
NORTH L011' XN 70
ATRIN um' MCI
S69'45'49'W 105.00'
POINT OF
BEGINNING
589'45'49"W 65.00'
S45'00'24% 56.34'
40' STATE OF RNR/OA
DEPARTMENTfF
TRtNSPa4TADLN
STATE ROAD S -505-A
=AN RIVER CORY
SECTION 88550-2601
WEST 10' OF THE EAST 50'
EASEMENT TO F:P.Ar L.
OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 508,
PC. 147, INDIAN R/VER
COUNTY, FL.
TRACT 1
_AWN LAW MCI
NOON LIVE IRACI 8
TRACT 8
NORTH 50.00'
OF THE SOUTH 80.00'
"ADDITIONAL ROW" ` NB9'48'42"E 25.00
42R.B/L. 770, PC. 2371
I.R.CQ, FL.
I,
00.
10' STATE Or fZOR10A
DEPARTMENT OF
LIIRAN.SPOPTAIKW
` STATE ROAD S -505-A INDIAN
„ INWEW color?'
SECTION 88550-2607
ci
POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
NORTHEAST CORNER
SEC -20-32-J9
S00'13'24'W 30.00'
u
EAST UNE SWOON 20—}}
65' "MURPHY ACT ROAD
RCSCRVATIOY- LYL0 BOOK 64
PACT J77, PARTIAL RELEASE
0Et0 BOOK 176.1 PACE 1717
/AVIAN RIMY CWN11 FLORIDA
/ 65 MU RIFF ACT ROAD
RESERVATION- OECD 80x4 64
PAC( J2. PARDAL RELEASE OCO7
800K 1761 PAC( 2242 INDIAN
RAVER Cc'.W1r; FLORIDA
SUBJECT PARCEL
1.47ACRES
50 HIDE ORIGINAL
ROAD RESERVATION
ORIGINAL CAS J ROAD
RESERVATION LINE
(/.R.F.D.D. MAPS)
SKETCH OF
DESCRIPTION
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY
atlllplilp1I' "lulg4lplllll.
North
5g >N
GRAPHIC SCALE
300 0 I50 300
I I I I
( IN FEET
1 inch = 300 ft.
PLAT OF SURVEY FOR: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
PROJ. NO. 12-029-58TH—ROW DATE: 08-27-14
OWN. BY: C.H.B.
CKD. BY: S.P.T.
TMS PLAT ANO REPORT ARE NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND IRE ORIGINAL
RAISED SEAL OF THE FLORIDA REGISTERED SURVEYOR ANO MAPPER NAMED HEREON
WHICH SIGNATURE AND SEAL MAY 8E FOUND AT THE END OF THE ATTACHED REPORT.
\THE PLAT AND REPORT ARE NOT FULL AND COMPLETE VOTHOUT ONE ANOTHER.
MERIDIAN
LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BLVD, SUITE 201
VERO BEACH, FL. 32960 L3N0905
P01001E: 772494-1213, FAX: 772.794.1096
EMAIL: L1369056BELL OUTISKET
1
PAGE 1 OF 2
71
EXHIBIT "C" TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT (Page 2 of 2)
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION •
(NOT A SURVEY)
Report of Survey: (Project # 12-029-58TH—ROW
• TYPE OF SURVEY: SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION — NOT A FIELD BOUNDARY SURVEY
• THIS SURVEY PERFORMED BY:
HOUSTON, SCHULKE, BITTLE & STODDARD, INC. L.B.f6905
d.b.a. MERIDIAN LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, SUITE 201
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
• PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE:
CHARLES H. BLANCHARD, P.S.M. #5755
Legal Description:
A PORTION OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, ACCORDING TO
THE LAST GENERAL PLAT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY
SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST.
LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH,
RANGE 39 EAST; THENCE RUN S 00°13'24"W (BASIS OF BEARINGS) ALONG THE EAST
LINE OF SAID SECTION 20, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET; THENCE RUN S 89°45'49"W, A
DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN S 45°00'24"E,
A DISTANCE OF 56.34 FEET TO A POINT BEING 65.00 FEET WEST OF THE AFORESAID
EAST LINE OF SECTION 20; THENCE RUN S 00°13'24"W, A DISTANCE OF 2504.62 FEET
ALONG A LINE BEING 65.00 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SAID EAST LINE
OF SECTION 20; THENCE RUN N89°48'42"E, A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO A POINT
BEING 40.00 FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 20; THENCE RUN N
00°1324"E ALONG A LINE BEING 40.00 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH SAID
EAST LINE OF SECTION 20, A DISTANCE OF 2544.64 FEET TO A POINT BEING 30.00
FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 20; THENCE RUN S 89°45'49"W
ALONG A LINE BEING 30.00 FEET SOUTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE
OF SAID SECTION 20, A DISTANCE OF 65.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 1.48 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
Legend & Abbreviations: (symbols not
PLS
PSM
LB
(P)
— PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
— PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER
— LAND SURVEYING BUSINESS
— CENTERLINE
— MEASURED VALUE
— PLAT VALUE
SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION
PLAT OF SURVEY FOR: INDIAN RIVER
MERIDIAN
LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BLVD, SUITE 201
VERO BEACH, FL. 32960 LB#6905
PHONE: 772-794-1213, FAX: 772-794-1096
E-MAIL: LB690SMBELLSOUTH.NET
scaleable for size)
CR — COUNTY ROAD
R/W — RIGHT OF WAY
O.R.8. — OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK
P.O.C. — POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
P.0.8 — POINT OF BEGINNING
SKETCH OF. LEGAL DESCRIP A0N
COUNTY NOT A. BOUNDARY SURVEY
`TH14 SURVEY IS AOT VAUG WITHOUT THE
SIGNATURE AhG 7146. ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF
- .THEF(ORTDAittEHSE0 St1RSEYOR AND MAPPER
CHARLES •H,•BLANCHARO: P.SM. /575S
PAGE 2 OF 2
72
•
AGREEMENT FOR THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 2014, by
and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida, 1801 27`h Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960 ("County") and PROVIDENCE POINTE
VERO BEACH LLC, a .Florida limited liability company, 660 Reef Road, Vero Beach, FL
32963 ("Developer").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer proposes to develop a "Planned Development/Traditional "
Neighborhood Design" (PD/TND) Community located between 49th Street and 53`d Street, along
and West of 58th Avenue in Indian River County, Florida, to be known as Providence Pointe, to
include a mix of residential, commercial, hotel, recreational, and other uses on real property
which is adjacent to and south of 53`d Street, west of 58`h Avenue, more particularly described as
follows:
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF.
WHEREAS, Developer has acquired a second parcel of property, adjacent to and north of
53rd Street, and west of 58th Avenue, more particularly described as follows:
SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF.
WHEREAS, the County and the Developer share mutual goals and have determined that
they can assist each other with respect to right-of-way acquisition and the construction and
expansion of 53`d Street west of 58th Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Developer desires to dedicate to the County a portion of the property
which is described on Exhibit "B" hereto for right-of-way purposes, and the County desires to
accept this dedication, according to the terms and conditions stated in this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms, conditions, promises, and
covenants stated herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the County and the Developer hereby agree as follows:
1. Recitals: The foregoing recitals are incorporated as if fully restated herein.
2. In conjunction with the Developer's development of Providence Pointe, and in
time to coincide with the Developer's construction of the four lane extension of 53`d Street west
of 58th Avenue, for which construction the County has agreed to share expenses pursuant to a
separate Developer's Agreement, the Developer shall dedicate by right-of-way deed free and
clear of all liens and encumbrances, to the County, that property which is adjacent to the
proposed 53`d Street extension, and which is described on Exhibit "C", which is attached to and
made a part hereof.
73
•
3. Developer and County acknowledge that County currently possesses right-of-way"
which is approximately thirty (30) feet wide along the 53rd Street extension described herein.
Developer and - County further acknowledge that, in accordance with the Indian River County
Code of Ordinances, the Developer is not entitled to compensation for dedication of right-of-way
necessary to provide the County with a total of sixty (60) feet of right-of-way along 53rd Street.
However, the Developer and County also acknowledge that the Developer is entitled to
compensation for any right-of-way dedicated to the County in excess of that which is necessary
to provide the County with a sixty (60) foot wide right-of-way. The dedication described on
Exhibit "C" hereto consists of 3.57 acres. County agrees and acknowledges that Developer is
entitled to compensation for 2.68 acres of the total dedication, and that the Developer may elect
as compensation either traffic impact fee credits, or residential density credits, but not both.
4. The County hereby acknowledges and agrees that at the time the Developer elects
to develop the property described on Exhibit "B" hereto, the Developer shall have the option of
accepting the compensation described herein by electing one of the following two options:
a. Density Credit: If the Developer elects to develop the subject property as a
Planned Development, residential density shall be computed using the size
of the property (acreage) prior to the dedication of right-of-way (except
for the required thirty (30) feet described above). To clarify the foregoing,
the Developer shall receive density credit for 3.57 acres at thee units per
acre, notwithstanding the fact that the property will have already been
dedicated, pursuant to this Agreement.
b. Transportation Impact Fee Credits: In lieu of the density credits described
above, Developer may elect to receive impact fee credits in the amount of
Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) per acre, for 3.57 acres,
whether the property is developed as a Planned Development or not.
County and Developer agree that this price represents the price which
Developer paid for the property, and which is the fair market value of the
property prior to the dedication.
5. At the time Developer elects to develop the property described on Exhibit "B"
hereto, Developer agrees to incorporate sufficient capacity in its project to provide stormwater
storage for the impervious area of 53rd Street lying west of 58th Avenue along the project's 53rd
Street frontage, and shall dedicate an appropriate utility tract for such purpose and for the
conveyance of 53r1 Street stormwater runoff to the receiving waters. The capacity shall be
sufficient to accommodate six lanes. The Developer shall have no responsibility to design,
install, or to pay any costs toward any drainage improvements required to direct the drainage
from 53rd Street into the stormwater management system provided by the Developer, except for
the following construction: A drainage structure for future connection by the County, and the
required drainage pipe to a receiving pond or lake. Prior to Developer's development of the
Exhibit "B" property, drainage for 53rd Street will be accommodated by roadside swales within
the right-of-way.
J:\Bruce\clients\Providence Pointe-Barile\Agreement for Dedication of Right -of -Way clean 10.28.14.docx
2
74
•
6. Miscellaneous:
A. In the event of any litigation arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing
party shall recover attorneys' fees and costs for the non -prevailing party.
B. No amendment, modification, change, or alteration of this Agreement
shall be valid or binding unless accomplished in writing and executed by
all of the parties hereto.
C. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the
parties hereto and their successors, and assigns.
D. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between
the parties. No representation, statement, recital, undertaking, or promise
not specifically set forth herein shall be binding on any parties hereto. This
Agreement shall not be effective unless signed by the Developer and the
County.
E. The obligations of the Developer to this Agreement are expressly
conditioned upon the Developer's decision, at the Developer's sole
discretion, to proceed with the Providence Pointe project.
F. This Agreement and all matters arising hereunder shall be governed by
and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. Venue
hereunder shall lie in Indian River County, Florida. Time shall be of the
essence.
G. This Agreement shall be deemed prepared jointly by each of the parties
hereto and shall be construed on parity as between the parties. There shall
be no canon of construction for or against any party by reason of the
physical preparation of this Agreement.
H. Whenever the singular number is used in this Agreement and when
required by the context, the same shall include the plural; and the
masculine, feminine, and neuter genders shall each include the others.
The County and the Developer shall grant such further assurances and
provide such additional documents as may be reasonably required by one
another from time to time, and cooperate fully with one another in order to
carry out the terms and conditions hereof and comply with the express
intention of this Agreement.
J:\Bruce\clients\Providence Pointe-Barile\Agreement for Dedication of Right -of -Way clean 10.28.14.docx
3
75
•
•
J. Failure to insist upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants,
or conditions herein shall not be deemed a waiver . of such terms,
covenants, or conditions, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any
right or power hereunder at any one time or times be deemed a waiver or
relinquishment of such right or power at any other time or times.
K. All words, terms, and conditions contained herein are to be read in concert
each with the other, and a provision contained under one paragraph may
be considered to be equally applicable under another in the interpOretation
of this Agreement.
L. The words herein and hereof and words of similar import, without
referenced to any particular section or subdivision of this Agreement, refer
to this Agreement as a whole rather than to any particular section or
subdivision hereof.
M. In the event any term, conditions, or clause of this Agreement is declared
to be illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
declaration of illegality or unenforceability shall not affect or alter the
legality or enforceability of any remaining term, condition, or clause
hereof, provided of the parties, as set forth in this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and
year first above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of :
Print Name:
Print Name:
proved by:
eph A. Baird, County Administrator
pproved as to Form an egal Sufficiency
Attest:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
By:
Chairman
BCC Approved:
County Att&ney
Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of
the Circuit Court & Comptroller
By:
Deputy Clerk
J:\Bruce\clients\Providence Pointe.BarilcWgreement for Dedication of Right -of -Way clean 10.28.14.docx
4
76
•
•
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
1
L. � 1
PrintName: ' i Mi;, j SI{ (>v1Tl(AL
Print Manic:
0 .
Y..� �� LLQ
:610•
1r t e.
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF ES -S•e )4
PROVIDENCE POINTE VERO BEACH, LLC
By: THF ; :+'!! y LIMITED
V. •�wi_ a• ember er
General Partner
sT
The fppregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ( day of OG
2014, by -'.la 5r/� �. / ;�-►CO- , the General Partner of The Barile Family Limited
Partnership, the Managing Member of Providence Pointe Vero Beach LLC, a Florida limited
Liability company, who is personally known to me or who has produced -IC ,,sz . as
identification.
(Notary Seal)
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
BRENDA M. GOtJLETTE
Notary Public • State of New York
No. 01G061 68928
Qualified in Essex County
My Comm. Expires June 18, 2015
J:\Brucc\clicntsWrovidcncc Point Berilc\Agrccmcnt for Dedication ofRight-of-Way cicnn 10.28.14.docx
5
77
EXHIBIT "A" TO AGREEMENT FOR THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
z
N
0
c
r
m
r
X-
0)
00
0
0
E
n
SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 113.27 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
D V 0-im 0D 00 -iD wD00w-(a D00m-Iv toDO(7c4•1 V ( 000w-iD fnOritl-Im
>ZmAD >ZOOZX> >2O0 (nxD >Z00>=> DZ0O xD >>00 °X> >m<fOXD
{v ZDV 000gm tror� ovcgmmm 500Zmm QOC mz azcmmm
.mOm00 DX2m0m0 D ---z-042 Vri� Zv0 0 f(nn -z-{ m,$ 0 DZi-0)r 0 p0p=„m(i�n
2pr mm {wia O{K i An Zw r n [Z -'mi V) Tr'-.1>W
D Z1 r Zvm r
OXT1.47'.' m-or[nmom m Vr-cn0 !' Omr-aim conA m�rf% n(iii •`•' mpr-mcaiu r9 m OO(N.
z- a r-lOC mvN r-ioco> r 0CDa r-iOCC)D r�OCC�a r mZ,D
ET. -f6 o>00 m ODZOO 0 0>c,o > oDOOmm Ugli'A p zamm
Fm - D>•• 0ni • >rD(nNZm -I>--OM -Zl t<i�Zy Zi�yJDI<-J)ZO) -Zf 2-Izit(mA
mPzrA z»D000 z D00m ZDDOpm ZD�000 D0p0nO D m0
O ZO2m�1 ZoZ-91 ZpZAO Zvc) m Zx ZIT 2 Opr-i
mmmz clm Pozcn6m Aoz'-r'2m Nozmz-Ti ,00.ozm=m aoSmxm A ;Till
...Ix Otn.�x 00m cc> zmm m-nZxmm 000 •vippm-{ �p0mm AOOm-1(n cop m D lc 41m D Cm -1 0zoO�i6130000-4 neezOp4D>73o-aim-( 0{zpv�ila020$ zo*zx- zo*z-1N zv*zxi zo*z-IN z. pm-18,Tmw •(mnx-1rpmy mZi<mm° m-xi{Tmo fl1Xr-m ma m m0T0mOmzx K002mm n0�Zmm �pOzs� 3pG)2Zm 2Zzo(n m 0 z-mzm 0
om<w m6m mT m>0 mTDv�D �TDm�m iD OvDm m...Io
y (r)N DvmO mDo�r 0 mDzv�m� mDzz r O m Zr�O m ,,o •
-
r -{Am >0 m0
OA-(m1 p{m-I2m O{ -1 0 2� O pmm0
mr no mm -i mm�� Moo z• wco l z 0m>- z 13pzZ
00 ci m0 ox Zor> m zo00 m DOrm m 2000 m Z000 m pop
D m 3 z- 0 2 o 0 y . X -n -i m oxm„ m 7 m -1 m : x m -1 ,vl O z=
mmm
my O3OZ 2y-3• j ZvzC1 ET -10 2.0zm mvztn m0<4, r.j
Z b m p 0 m m pogo g o v tiFriim N O m n n N n D m m m
-4 -ztm ju'zo P3P z mNzIg zNo°z zN-i �z mczx
>oDoc mc(pnN memo mc(pil� rrii cmo - -crxno nciNA
DOOD (IC -n-1 0P mzo Ommz OWZO rmr ZO MOoz
0 00412 00-'6” 005 030 -10mC
DDyn Czi2Z Cm Cimm- -c o5 2 'm AD OC
Zmw
pAL'XO-125M O- = 40mm Mg
{0:x >00mi > .{m
D Z°0om-i OU7ZN O Vl "" N rOcn O VJZ �� �i1N m mo
Z0C_
r.
G7Znp mw
pO<cO Omar OmCw omp� pmp0 ODOo
06-6 >omc Dm�-i DmmN D(n3-1 moK9 > m0
m 1- _ 1-:-'0x r--iAUf r. 10? 71w7 Oz-
O<rn mrD MP oc>c1 mr 5 0r m�ZO
0_0 (nn 7J (1) Z mom—, (n (cj z V0 z 0 DZ
OE my m 0 my m 0 '"{m 0 (n0
• m m m m
OVERALL PARCEL CONTAINS 186.32 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
Dmm:-� PDr• <NvD
m
DZyrT-{m�_I m
mm c>=r-nZ0
z
mm m(3i1>y00 -
00 00Z Mm
Z -i Cp-mmaz
DO Zit.,
z0 71{"-imz
G) 0 oc-ix-,o
• x • 0 0 0 >M 2
N D R - n m= m
D
• 002M20
• oz2mzOz
3< Zcnn•02{o
00 Z:Ommi
*2724730S
m•rtrli0 m=
m 2v_-IDvv
(n 0-4102
o c o m 2 c D •>
m m �°
� z � y $ yzy ::0 0
.TD1p,Z 1(„j0 r
{
mmr"-m0-Lrr--z Q7
rX000o00
zmODMRIO
-iD<9-maz
z ZOZ-lmor
HOHH
-9
morv0.3 o
Pm-<omTzz
0m0Zmm•to
im
73 ."D -I M 0004-0M0Z
5')
2 N D W m N
zm..
Zrmm..0 gOSO
v!0 C Dm
Mgr --241
= 0040
O�-i �� Z
rr<�xN
2,-10 Z mmm-1
ZODmm m 0000
m 00
DmZm 0 ZmZu
<mpmn-i (X!) 0<v
ri1mOz r0pnj
mw -i8 0 ?_20).0ODO
O r _ x -
7220 Z D-1MX
v z
oZi r5 •0 •
z
0n m 0
OUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER
moo -10DM
otcKzmc0�
�KZ w0 -1071
or{�'(i�nl'_ Z
rOCD 00D
ommEtsmm
ZD<DmDz
ayc�v
2000 Or
DrD2Om2
c<mZx'90
L,zz0M55z
>DCmiOy2m
m0A2"_iC�
-mo48zoz
gzzmm•to
02-12-n0
<-
33> (A
CNZO
yZ •
CZ 2
{ fpnt
m
00_,0
Am2Z
DOZZII
oD-
(nznj
11<o
-4z-
c
()3
mm
213AIli NVIONI '1SV3 6£ 39NV21 'H1f10
:NOIldIJOS301VO31
78
ZNIOd'3D Nia 1
UMAR u ► CA
I 'L-111111111111111 0111111114i1'
I, . !\
1111111.:
79
EXHIBIT "B" TO AGREEMENT FOR THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
„aJVTIIA AIDIMSSDNIIN„
ICI, IIIIIHXI
n /A
m- S n
r-4 R 2
T
--4- -4
Nz c
�
D 0 r-
9 z
m
o7 p
Nm A rn
x _W
_, 0 z "�
=
o r
v'
c
.111:T10 z "'
A p z O go
�c 03 a 0)
mO
H
g° z 0
� o
c3.0 8og 0
go, A
(2.0 0
D
0
a; ° r
80 t r^'
n .-
II r
m
i m N
mcn
0 -n
m0
o i,--11 >X
n
i 0 rm
03
1
P 33 33
im 0m
m
0y ZO
O
.i_ 33 A
0
O. -,1N Z00m9
tx DN x, 8 *mzw
_ ___._-_ .____ < K-T-_� -< Z -o -
m0 *m a-oxlc
74
mi DZ0m=
m m-oy)Oal m71 0O
?>
I'2 ooz()o0m� oto
m
z
I �, >N��
xm Z�Z>
c�0 33C<0
y0
.q M1 T 51
IN6)
S 00'07'21" W 1199.62'
0 0 —wasmommon O
i o�
o23 14 mm-
00m
mccnn0
-nmm
Zmni
> > Z
> m v
p0-40
O z!',4 T
1
IN
1
,OSZ
,SZ
com no:
S 00'15'57" W 1197.05loo
L�
2m 2V--90 p rangy
213 gm q
��2y>0 =Z
a,- rt
i5�a Arcl
v E U Z
r,- ND z �
[gg�- v- S w O
ZFO �p p sic
0
ga c D p.
cg'i z A Pao$1 m=
a 3 0 q
o
E n�f)
z , Ni
ut
O
80
•
•
v-
EIL'HIDIT "C" TO AGR .M_ N 1' Pt7It THF DEDTCATiON Off' RIGHT-OF-WAY
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(NOT A SURVEY)
I JO'
JO' NOOTT7'21 f
EAST IBK- IR ACT /5 S007)721'W 1169.62'
120.00'
'o
N�
100
09
PrasZT-K33:37-6CITS
rK/NGSB£RRY ROAD / 53RD STREET
NEST UNE TRACT 16
EXHIBIT "C"
-ti
WEST
7) t D EAST 50'
L.
6EASEMENT0039537.
ornaAL RECORDS BOOK 504 PG.
160.00"
o FAST UNE ,SfCROV 17 -J1 -J9 1J21.97'
NEST UV£ SECRON 16 -J2 -J9 SODD5'57'v
SKETCH OF
DESCRIPTION
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIP7I0N
NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY
GRAPHIC SCALE -
Iso O 5 lso
I � I I
( IN FEET
North 1 inch =150 ft.
PLAT OF SURVEY FOR: PROVIDENCE POINT
PROJ. NO. 12 -029 -KB -ROW DATE: 0B-27-14
DWN. BY: C.H.B.
CKD. BY: S.P.T.
MIS PLAT AND REPORT ARE NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL
RAISED SEAL OF THE FLORIDA REGISTERED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER NAMED HEREON
WHICH SIGNATURE AND SEAL MAY BE FOUND AT THE END OF THE ATTACHED REPORT.
\ZHE PLAT AND REPORT ARE NOT FULL AND COMPLETE Y TROUT ONE ANOMER.
MERIDIAN
LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BLVD, Sl7TE 201
VERO BEACH. VL. 32960 LB06905
PHONE: 712494.1217, F4X: 772-791.1090
E.AIAIL: L8690540BELLSOUTH-NET
PAGE OF 81
•
•
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(NOT A SURVEY)
Report of Survey, (Project # 12-029—KB—ROW
• TYPE OF SURVEY: SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION — NOT A FIELD BOUNDARY SURVEY
• THIS SURVEY PERFORMED BY:
HOUSTON, SCHULKE, BITTLE & STODDARD, INC. LB.#6905
d.b.o. MERIDIAN LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, SUITE 201
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
• PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE:
CHARLES H. BLANCHARD, P.S.M. 115755
EXHIBIT "C"
Legal Description:
A PORTION OF TRACT 16, SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST,
ACCORDING TO THE LAST GENERAL PLAT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS
COMPANY SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS OF
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGIN ATA POINT BEING 30.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 17
AND 40.00 FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 17, THENCE RUN SOUTH
89°45'49"W ON A LINE BEING 30.00 FEET NORTH OF AND PARALLEL TO THE SAID SOUTH
LINE OF SECTION 17,A DISTANCE OF 1289.18 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT 16,
SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST; THENCE RUN NORTH 00°0721"WEST
ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 16, A DISTANCE OF 120.00 FEET; THENCE LEAVING
SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 16, RUN NORTH 89°45'49"E ALONG A LINE BEING 150.00 FEET
NORTH OF AND PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 17, A DISTANCE OF
1248.92 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN NORTH 45°04'51°E, A DISTANCE OF 56.88 FEET TO
A POINT BEING 40.00 FEET WEST OF THE AFORESAID EAST LINE OF SECTION 17; THENCE
RUN SOUTH 00°05'57"WEST ALONG A LINE BEING 40.00 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL TO
THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 17, A DISTANCE OF 160.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 3.57 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
Legend & Abbreviations: (symbols
PLS — PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
PSM — PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER
LB — LAND SURVEYING BUSINESS
C. — CENTERUNE
— MEASURED VALUE
— PLAT VALUE
(P�
not scaleable for size)
CR — COUNTY ROAD
R/W — RIGHT OF WAY
O.R.B. — OFFICIAL RECORD 800K
P.O.C. — POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
P.0.8 — POINT OF BEGINNING
SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION
PLAT OF SURVEY FOR: PROVIDENCE POINT
MERIDIAN
LAND SURVEYORS
1717 INDIAN RIVER BLVD, SUITE 201
VERO BEACH, FL. 32960 LB#6905
PHONE: 772-794-1213, FAX: 772-794-1096
E-MAIL: LB6905( 1BELLSOUTH.NET
SKETCH OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY
THIS SURVEY I5 NOT.VAUO.R41HOUT THE
SIGNATURE .NRJHE.ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF
THE FLORIDA.UCENSEU SURVEYOR AND MAPPER
\\EQ ELEL,OYl.__ ^ _
I'L , \ 0'
CHARLES'H:•6LANCHARO. P.S.Y. /5755
I\W,4n9 M..0012 v.LpMCNI.:S S/1101N]-029-ENCS[6UT.aOM..M9 V2VA711°7W 1W
PAGE 2 OF 2
82
•
•
CONSENT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
THROUGH: Christopher R. Mora, P.E., Public Works Director
FROM: Christopher J. Kafer, Jr., P.E., County Engine
SUBJECT:
Ge.^ -
Aviation Boulevard/20th Avenue Intersection Improvements
Final Payment -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Work Order No. 8 IRC No. 1422
DATE: November 5, 2014
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On June 3, 2014, the Board of County Commissioners approved Work Order No. 8 with Kimley-
Horn & Associates, Inc. to design a westbound left turn lane and traffic signal at Aviation
Boulevard/20th Avenue intersection for a lump sum amount of $38,675.00. Construction of the
Aviation Boulevard/20th Avenue intersection improvements is estimated to cost $586,000.00.
Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. has completed design of the project and has been paid
$34,807.50 to date. Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. has submitted Invoice No. 5997023, dated
July 31, 2014, in the amount of $3,867.50 for final payment
Originally, 50% funding for Work Order No. 8 was to come from a Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) grant for intermodal funding for
widening and access improvements to Aviation Boulevard (26th Street). It was determined by
FDOT that the intersection improvements do not meet the requirements for intermodal
funding. FDOT is processing a Small County Outreach Program (SCOP) grant for the Aviation
Boulevard/20th Avenue Intersection Improvements project that will pay approximately 50% of
construction costs.
FUNDING
Funding will come from Traffic Impact Fees, District 2 Account No. 10215241-066510-05031
26th Street/Aviation Boulevard (US1 to 43rd Avenue) in the amount of $3,867.50.
83
Page Two
BCC Agenda Item for November 18, 2014
From Christopher Jr. Kafer, Jr., P.E., County Engineer
Final Payment — KHA — WO No. 8
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends final payment to.Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. for the completed design
services and payment of Invoice No. 5997023, dated July 31, 2014, in the amount of $3,867.50.
ATTACHMENTS
Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. Invoice No. 5997023
DISTRIBUTION
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM
FOR. November 18. 2014
Indian River County
Ap . .ved
Date
Administration
e''
11 J3JJ
Budget
11 1214
Legal
w4gre:
,I - Io (L(
Public Works
///6/•Zeit'
Engineering
�
/1-1-/`'
F:\Public Works\ENGINEERING DIVISION PROJECTS\1422 Aviation Blvd -20th Avenue Intersection Improvements\Admim\agenda
items\1422 BCC Agenda Memo WO 8 Final Payment KHA 1 I-18-2014.doc
.Ki m I ev>>> H o r n Invoice for Professional Services
®
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTN: CHRIS MORA
1801 27TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FL 32960
RECEOdE.
AUG 2 9 2C.:1
INDIAN RIVER, COUNTY
ENGINEERI ire
Please send payments to:
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
P.O. BOX 932520
ATLANTA, GA 31193-2520
Federal Tax Id: 56-0885615
LUMP SUM
Invoice No:
Invoice Date:
Invoice Amount:
Project No:
Project Name:
Project Manager:
Client Reference:
5997023
Jul 31, 2014
$3,867.50
047035081.1
20TH AVENUE INT
GOOD, BRIAN
IRC CO. # 1422
WORK ORDER #8
For Services Rendered through Jul 31, 2014
Description
Contract Value
%
Complete
Amount Eamed
to Date
Previous Amount
Billed
Current Amount
Due
ROADWAY PLANS
29,325.00
100.00%
29,325.00
26,392.50
. 2,932.50
DRAINAGE DESIGN AND PERMITTING
4,090.00
100.00%
4,090.00
3,681.00
409.00
SIGNALIZATION PLANS
5,260.00
100.00%
5,260.00
4,734.00
526.00
Subtotal
38,675.00
100.00%
38,675.00
34,80730
3,867.50
Total LUMP SUM 3,86730
Total Invoice: $3,867.50
If you have any questions or concerns, please call Martha Doyle at 561-840-0290.
32MGD
•
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Joseph A. Baird; County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Stan Boling, AICP;
John W. McCoy, AI °', Chief, Curre t evelopment
November 5, 2014
unity Development Director
RM -Trion Shoppes of Vero Beach LLC's Request for Extension of Site Plan
Approval for a Shopping Center to be Known as The Shoppes at Vero Beach (SP-
MA -08-10-37 / 2004050025)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of November 18, 2014.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
On November 13, 2008, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted major site plan and
preliminary plat approval to construct a 156,711 square foot shopping center and out parcel
development (a bank and restaurant/bank building), located on the north side of SR 60, east of 90th
Avenue, south and west of Paradise Park subdivision. Currently, the site plan approval expiration
date is November 13, 2014.
On October 16, 2014, Attorney Bruce Barkett on behalf of RM -Trion Shoppes of Vero Beach, LLC,
the project applicant, filed a request to extend the site plan approval expiration date. The developer
has requested an extension due to the economic downturn which has delayed construction activities
(see attachment #1).
Previously, under legislation passed by the State, the developer received state -mandated development
approval extensions totaling four years. Because the request was submitted prior to the November
13th expiration date, under county site plan regulations, the subject request for a County extension
approval may be considered by the Board of County Commissioners.
ANALYSIS
Although minor amendments have been made to the LDRs since the development was initially
reviewed and approved, the Technical Review Committee (TRC) members agree that the
amendments are not significant enough to require revisions or redesign of the project. Accordingly,
all TRC members have reviewed and approved the subject extension request.
F:\Community Development\CurDev\BCC\2014 BCC\TheShoppesatVBExtensionrpt.rtf
1
86
•
As allowed under provisions of the LDRs, the developer is requesting a one-year extension of the site
plan and related preliminary plat approval expiration date. Pursuant to Chapter 914 of the LDRs, the
Board of County Commissioners may deny, approve, or approve with conditions the requested
extension. Staff has no objections to the Board granting the request since the site plan conforms to
existing LDR requirements. Granting the request will set a new site plan and preliminary plat
approval expiration date of November 13, 2015.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve Tm-Trion Shoppes of Vero
Beach, LLC's request for a one-year extension of the site plan and related preliminary plat approval
for The Shoppes at Vero Beach development with all original approval conditions to remain in
effect. The new site plan and preliminary plat approval expiration date will be November 13, 2015.
Attachments:
1. Request Letter
2. Location Map
3. Site Plan/Preliminary Plat Plan
4. List of Approval Conditions
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM:
FOR: November 18, 20
BY:
cacld
Indian River Co,
App - ed
Date
Admin.
ill.
/ / %) 3p q
Legal
. '�
1104—/c/
Budget
`� `
tits
Dept.
uh //y
Risk Mgr.
F:\Community Development\CurDev\BCC\2014 BCC\TheShoppesatVBExtensionrpt.rtf 2
87
•
BRUCE O. LiARmTT'+
LISA THOMPSON BARNES L+
CALVIN B. BROWN
GEORGE 6. COLLINS, JR.
MKHAEL. J. GARA'. GLIA i
RONALD mom LAWN L+
NICHOLAS L. RRUCE LT
AARON V. JOHNSON
C. Douai -As VTiUNAC
WTLIAM %6L CALDWEOL. OF COUNSEL.
SLLVF79 L. HE DERSON, OF COUNSEL I
Collins, Brown, Caldwell,
Barlett, Garavaglia & Lawn
CHARTERED
AI TORNEVS AT LAW
756 BEACHLAND BOULEVARD, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32963
POST OFFICE BOX 3686, VERO BEACH, FL 32964-3688
TELEPHONE: 772.231-4343
FACSIMILE: 772-234.5319
MARL: ®Cc VEROLAW.COM • WEB,ATE: WWW.VEROLANLCDM
October 15, 2014
Stan Boling, AICP
Community Development Director
Indian River County
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
1 BOARD CERrlpipo REAL ESTATE
2 MASTER OF LAWS TAXAT,r
3 MASTER OF LAWS REAL FROTERRTY OEVC.OP? 0R
4 MASTER OF LAWS MATE FLAN:O NO AND ELDER LAW
$ CERTIFIED ClRCUrr MrolArcR
6 ALSO ADI.QiTFD IN DC AND SC
T ALSO AdA roto N GIA
8 ALSO Addf1m w THE COMD.i0NWEALTN OF
THE BAHAMAS
RE: RM-Trion/The Shoppes at Vero Beach 8900 2e, St [SP -MA -08-10-37/`10040500251
Dear Mr. Boling:
Pursuant to Section 914.08(2), Indian River County Code, RM-Trion/The Shoppes at
Vero Beach hereby requests an extension of its site plan approval for a period of twelve months.
In support of this request, the developer submits the following:
I. Currently, this major site plan approval expires November 13, 2014, having been
extended previously under Senate Bill 360 and House Bill 7207. (See your letter
dated June 21, 2011, attached hereto as Exhibit "A").
2. This major site plan has not been previously extended pursuant to Section
914.08(2), Indian River County Code.
3. The project has. concurrency, pursuant to its Initial Certificate of Concurrency
Determination, which is valid until May 11, 2015. (See Concurrency Certificate
attached hereto as Exhibit "B").
4. The developer has maintained the property in good condition, has continued to
pay ad valorem property taxes, and has suffered through the economic downturn,
as has the rest of the community. Now that the economy seems to be on the
upswing, there is a great likelihood that the site plan will be implemented during
the extension period.
ATTACHMENT 1
REAL. PROPERTY LAW 6 REAL MEM CLOSINGS • PLANNRHG. ZONING, LAP) USE LAW • WELLS. TR14T5 6 ESTATES FLAHNNO • QVLL. 6 BUSS TRIAL PRALT = . coppoRaE & LRS casuazmw
CONSTRUCT= LAW • BOAR:sm • MORAN= L. • HEALTH LAW • PERSONAL. INJURY AT) WRONGFUL DERR • CRAMER.. MOWER & TAT ROSIN SiRR10N . AL►T i.v LAw
88
•
•
Stan Boling, AICP
October 15, 2014
Page 2
Please copy me with all memos and correspondence generated with respect to this
request, and keep me advised of any meetings to discuss this request. If I can provide you with
any additional information, please let me know and I will get it to you as soon as possible.
Very 'truly yours,
C
Bruce Barkett
For the Firm
BB:bb
cc: Adam J. Reiss, Esq.
John W. McCoy, AICP
Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
ATTACHMENT 1
89
June 21, 2011
EXHIBIT "A"
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1801 27th Street, Vero Beach FL 32960
772-226-1237 / 772-978-1806 fax
www.ircgov.com
Bruce Barkett
Collins, Brown, Caldwell, Barkett & Garavaglia
P. O. Box 64-3686
Vero Beach FL 32963
RE: RM-Trion/The Shoppes at Vero Beach 8900 20th St [SP -MA -08-10-37 / 2004050025]
Dear Mr. Barkett:
Staff is in receipt of your June 20, 2011 letter requesting a two year extension pursuant to the provisions
of HB 7207, Section 73 for the above referenced major site plan and associated initial concurrency
certificate. In accordance with the provisions of HB 7207, the County hereby acknowledges and grants a
two year extension for the major site plan approval and initial concurrency certificate.
Based on the above referenced extension, the major site plan approval is extended from November 13,
2012 to November 13, 2014 and the associated initial concurrency certificate is extended from May 11,
2011 to May 11, 2013. Under the provisions of SB 360 and HB 7207, the major site plan approval and
associated initial concurrency certificate have been extended a total of 4 years.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (772) 226-1235.
Sincerely,
Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
Attachments:
1. SB 360 Extension Letter
2. New Initial Concurrency Certificate
cc: Robert M. Keating, AICP
John W. McCoy, AICP (via e-mail)
Sasan Rohani, MCP (via e-mail)
Chris Mora, P.E. (via e-mail)
Chris Kafer, P.E. (via e-mail)
David A. Hays, P.E. (via e-mail)
Kathy Charest TM2011.0100 (via e-mail)
F:\Community Devclopment1Users\CorDev\TMs and correspondence\20111TM2011.0100 Barkctt (nn -mon ahoppea ofvero).rtf
ATTACHMENT 1
90
•
•
EXHIBIT "B"
CERTIFICATE OF CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION - INITIAL — 5
PROJECT NUMBER: 2004050025
EXPIRATION DATE: 5/11/2015 (2 yr. extension)
ISSUED TO:
COLLINS (TR), GEORGE G JR
8900 20TH ST
VERO BEACH, FL 32960
APPLICANT:
GARY SMIGIEL
SMIGIEL PARTNERS XXI
PO BOX 540623
LAKE WORTH, FL 33454
FOLIO NUMBER: 33-38-02-00001-0050-00001.0
SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS: 8900 20TH
This is to certify that adequate Transportation, Solid Waste, Drainage, Parks, Water and Sewer facilities
have been determined to be available pursuant to the Indian River County Concurrency Management
System and capacities are hereby allocated for the following use(s).
USE DESCRIPTION UNITS QUANTITY
845 COMM OVER 200,000 GSF GSF
250000
This certificate of adequate facilities "runs with the land" as described herein. This certificate is
therefore transferable with the property, but may not be I :nsferred to any other property.
ommunity Develop
cert.ccdi5
ATTACHMENT 1
91
11
-;"
" 3
!).
j,„
,......
_ i .. ...I
nu,
Sig=trWt
coati
:40-1
ty.:,301
.57.4-rs t..io
-1- R12
1 1 I (YI
'
9 1)
4
1.01 I
I .!:
STA'TE 421E)
CG
ATTACHMENT 2
TR 11
92
•
•
laws
!Al
•4
LM eE IFF,MT GROUP
Shopves at c`Vero Beach
ATTAC��ital r
®I1
IGmley-Hom 93
and Associates, Inc.
wa lY..:Q:) IYRhh Nf) Ola, cttl0.fl%IXmlM.MIO Si.)NIfWV)I OM n v•03.6) Qty)1N{.4•10Ryypyy
NlWM
HOY3ti Od3A ® S3ddOHS
"SOd NYld 31IS
1g
i;
ig
C"
:111111ioi��1
11-m4
�_ .i. Cil
ATTACHMENT 3
94
•
11
n.c
f
.wtt I.CASsAN
TYrons. en ...Ares toy Q
m,a
9911
Maws
OANAOXA. (*WO
V1.300 VASSI
OSCM
,s MANS
3]L
03100 sr,
>o
1th1212V Nt/ld 311S
.00X1,f 1.190107 tlNM WO%
O2I2A lt/ S3ddOHS
F 51
In,M...., •. ...Gy c00t ,0 .w s.q(r tl.,. 11.5 ?Y5 v+ O.0T'4T' one. ,�,.�3 nl�CMA0o001G<,:�a�» o', 0,06,
ArnummKNT
95
al
aro
01040
w
SOS
6110M= ]10 Id1
�vloa W^4laM Ou�a
V
U9's9 OWN LA® ❑
MVO
ISScr
10
Y (00)0
70 va4 eM T mad
1101..,
e0
011)4+ Svc
lb'ld AUVWIWI131id
0010014 AMWpO 030)4 /1010e0
O2i2A IV S3ddOHS
8
0
..• . •_._.rImmo ...,_,_ _....•••• 41.••••••.mos. PP. m• • _ ono__ _
�-
...v.. r. ....or nor To .eM 14.4 L..woad Owroo )auairou-•+A1g1 LovwNni+m\mn\oo retest\ a aue. W...0
141)
oa
z
2,
Y
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
a$g�o11
a 8 Ys a €1
4 � f p ' I€
OW
srH� E ! ill
.x08- .* 3 . 3g
op
els! 14 cidhiF. "b I it;
I±1gill pf q �n
J6 €� 11 €!e ill 1� E 111
I... , . J -1J
1....1 J. J.1_1__i _1_- J
urur.rcvrxrerasn) '-- - ---
AA.tdAV ULU
CROW
P.
mu. coo pa
li
aa�
d
6
A
T
mllyZir
i� I,uukrSrL Y �---�lYlYlYlri;,
Iu
1l!1 1)
.11F;lC D eBt{!
o
1"I
ATTACHMENT 3
96
•
•
Major site plan and preliminary plat approval conditions:
1 That prior to site plan release, the applicant shall obtain:
a. Approval from Traffic Engineering for the design of all off-site improvements;
b. Approval of a developer's agreement for paving 90th Avenue,
c. Partial release of the Murphy Act easement,
d. Staff approval of final building elevations that satisfy all SR60 corridor requirements, and
e. Environmental Planning approval of the upland mitigation, wetland mitigation, and tree
mitigation plans.
2. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall:
a. Provide driveway stub outs to the adjacent properties as depicted on the approved plan,
b. Complete all required buffers as depicted on the approved plan,
c. Construct all required sidewalks,
d. Complete all off-site traffic improvements as specified in section 8 of this report, and
e. Grant the required conservation easements and a construction easement for the driveway
interconnections.
3. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or as established in the developer's agreement, 90th
Avenue shall be paved to 22nd Street.
4. Building elevations for the out -parcel development shall be reviewed for compliance with SR60 corridor
requirements through the administrative approval process.
F:\Community Development\CurDev\BCC\2014 BCC\TheShoppesatVBconditions.rtf
ATTACHMENT 4
97
•
•
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Joseph A Baird; County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Stan Boling, AICP. munity Development Director
L
John W. McCoy, AICP; Chief, Curren114
ve opment
November 6, 2014
Lexington Place New LLC's Request for Final Plat Approval for a Subdivision to be
Known as Lexington Place Phase III [2002020162-73089 / SD -04-04-06]
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of November 18, 2014.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
The Lexington Place Phase III subdivision represents the third phase of the Lexington Place
Subdivision. Phase III consists of 61 lots on 19.28 acres resulting in a density of 3.16 units/acre for
Phase II. The overall Lexington Place Subdivision consists of 4 phases containing 259 lots on 81.51
acres which results in an overall project density of 3.18 units/acre. The property is located on the north
side of 5th Street SW, northeast of Oslo Middle School, is zoned RS -6 (Residential Single -Family — up
to 6 units per acre), and has an L-2 (Low Density 1 up to 6 units per acre) land use designation.
On July 13, 2004, the County granted preliminary plat approval for the Lexington Place Subdivision.
Subsequently, construction of the subdivision commenced and has proceeded in accordance with the
overall project's phased approval. With respect to Phase III, the developer obtained a land
development permit, constructed the required subdivision improvements, and obtained a certificate of
completion. Recently, the applicant submitted a Phase III final plat in conformance with the approved
preliminary plat, and now requests that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval
for Lexington Place Phase III.
ANALYSIS:
All of the required improvements for Lexington Place Phase III have been completed and inspected,
and a certificate of completion was issued on May 26, 2010. As part of the certificate of completion
process, the developer posted a maintenance bond to guarantee required road and drainage
improvements. In this case, all subdivision improvements (stormwater tracts, landscape easements,
roadways) will be private, with the exception of certain utility facilities, which have been dedicated
and guaranteed to Indian River County as required by the Utility Services Department. All
requirements of final plat approval for Lexington Place Phase III have been satisfied.
F:\Community Development\CurDev\Final Plats\BCC staff reports\2014\LexingonPlacePhlllFPrpt(73089).doc
98
•
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final
plat approval for Lexington Place Phase III.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application
2. Location Map
3. Plat Layout
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM:
FOR:
BY:
November 18, 2014
?I h
Indian River County
A.:.ved
Date
Administrator
!
1)0)
Legal
/
% +_.
1 � .. 1 _
BudgetI
III 14
Risk Management
Department
.41S
(1/7//y
F:\Community Development\CurDev\Final Plats\BCC staff reports \2014\LexingonPlacePhlllFPrpt(73089).doc
2
99
® FINAL PLAT (PLTF) APPLICATION
PROJECT NAME PRINT): Lexington Place Subdivision Phase III
NOTE: THIS IS THE NAME THAT WILL BE USED FOR ALL REFERENCE TO THIS PROJECT
(SUCH AS "WOODY BIC} TREE SUBDIVISION").
CORRESPONDING PRELIMINARY PLAT PROJECT NAME AND PLAN NUMBER:
Lexington Place Phase III ! ,i' Q 2 O, ) /Q -'?30,-??
,_.'?30,? SD- 04 _ 04 _ 16
PROPERTY OWNER: (PLEASE PRINT) AGENT (PLEASE PRINT)
Lexington Place New, LLC
NAME
1410 20th Street, Suite 214
ADDRESS
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
CITY, STATE, ZIP
(786) 271-9039
PHONE NUMBER
stefan@hoyerinvest.com
EMAIL ADDRESS
Stefan Hoyer
CONTACT PERSON
Mastelier, Moler, Reed & Taylor,
Inc.
NAME
1655 27th Street, Suite #2
ADDRESS
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
CITY, STATE, ZIP
(772) 564-8050
PHONE NUMBER
dt5243@bellsouth.net
EMAIL ADDRESS
David M. Taylor
PROJECT ENGINEER: (PLEASE PRINT)
Mastelier & Moler, Inc.
NAME
1655 27th Street, Suite #2
ADDRESS
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
CITY, STATE, ZIP
(772) 567-5300
PHONE NUMBER(s)
mastmolr@bellsouth.net
EMAIL ADDRESS
0 Stephen E. Moler, P.E.
PROJECT SURVEYOR: (PLEASE PRINT)
Masteller, Moler, Reed & Taylor, Inc.
NAME
1655 27th Street, Suite #2
ADDRESS
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
CITY, STATE, ZIP
(722) 564-8050
PHONE NUMBER(s)
dt5243@bellsouth.net
EMAIL ADDRESS
David M. Taylor, PSM
CONTACT PERSON CONTACT PERSON
1801 27th Street, Vero Beach FL 32960
F:1Cornmunity Development\Users\C rDcv\Applications\FinalPlatApplioatlon.doc j Revised January 2011 1 of 3
i
ATTACHMENT
100
•
3,3.3; . 03 eYr°-C36.')o —C%000 D. 0
SITE PARCEL TAX IDifS: a esu seer : t�
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (LDP) #: 2002020162-42549
DATE LDP ISSUED: 2 / s / 04
ZONING: Rs -6 FLUE: L-2
TOTAL (GROSS) ACRES: 81.51 TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS: 61
AREA OF DEVELOPMENT (NET) ACREAGE: 19.28
DENSITY (UNITS PER ACRE): 3.16
**PLEASE COMPLETE SUBMISSION CHECKLIST**
NOTE: "N/A" should be marked in the "YES" column if "Not Applicable"
MATERIAL YES NO
1. Fee - $1400.00 (checks payable to Indian River County) x
2. Completed Final Plat Application Form x
3. Ten (10) Copies of the Final Plat (Must be signed and sealed by surveyor) x
4. Letter of Authorization (if applicant is not owner) x
5. Letter from developer providing timeline for achieving the
75% completion threshold for the overall subdivision improvement N A
6. ONE OF THE FOLLOWING SETS OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENT DOCUMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION COMPLETE - BUILD OUT:
(a) Certificate of Completion from Public Works or copy of letter to
Public Works and Utilities requiring inspection of improvements.
IF IMPROVEMENTS ARE DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC:
(b) Original Engineer's Certified Cost for Improvements(signed and sealed) N/A
Failure to provide information on which option is being selected may result in a delay in
processing the application.
OR
1801 27th Street, Vero Beach FL 32960
F:1Community DevelopmentlUaers\CurflevUpplicadonaTinalPlatApptication.doc Revised January 2011
ATTACHMENT 1
2 of 3
101
•
CONSTRUCTION INCOMPLETE - BOND OUT:
(a) Original Engineer's Certified Cost Estimate for Improvements
(signed and sealed; note items to be completed or percent completed
at 75% threshold for overall subdivision).
(b) Statement that improvements are nearing completion and a
certificate of completion will be obtain prior to final plat approval
7. Copies of Documents to be recorded with the final plat:
a. Covenants, Deed Restrictions, Bylaws, etc.
or Statement There Are None x
N/A
N/A
b. Property Owner's Association Articles of Incorporation
or statement indicating why recording of POA is NOT
required.
x
1801 27th Street, Vero Beach FL 32960
P:\Community Developmcnr\Users\CtiupevWpplicationa\FinalPiatAppiicaAon.doc Revised January 2011 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT
1
102
MJ
C3
$103
ve
0
c
i?u
wmF
�tiJ¢
_ 0
s'�ie co -Si iet iF¢a�
cau
§jEdW
mZ�
�`5
JQ
0220'E YS y"j�OU�
¢cnnnn° b
aoW4w ,�4=oaa¢aa¢aa�a�a
w
59290159 3
S02119911 N
2199/ 3170
.211705 ,01'11.1 1661 500 SZ Od 'Z S'886
97 3X890 0361991.5 270 3119,1003 5792113 NW& NYIOM
0020071 ,f 071003 331805 68-88-1.0 NO6035 '9 101,81
10838 0834 30 31/0
S<C2�u�
226cWi2VCU
_�36f-Sff-fL N00I3S 327 1593 ,092081 M .1991.00 S
11139d1 30 317 1f93 .
I
I t I I 1 I I I
' l
_I 1 I_.)_.I_ 1 1 . _I
'M'S 318933A1N010MX37
tli
`<z. h WQ
UU a4.! �_
4ti WI I_---
o �.
C W
I-7 350 01.297
9-S8 .02332
W
fQ
U
2
V
QI
P
3
paw
0
3
n
2
•
m
ti
0
Q
es
/6
8
a
a
N
V
U
v
SZ 3d 2 S'9'd
3286103 50813 63118 2810711
61-88-90 7101335 'S 108111
,969091 M 1991.00 S
11 1 4
._.113/1 -. I
1 �a z
L
'M'S 2_ 3071339 NOl 0711X37 2
—._ I I I 1 h 4
Llil 931 'J I 1 Uh
as QI�\ I ..:7, I
Av,WW:
Q a;eg.. 'M'S OIJYA37QQ6 ._
?mi6: N010MX3_1 W
N
4
4.3.-'5-I11 3a
yy�
Z tl! I O 03
7--
147 5o U
WU24
3 j "2
¢ ¢ z6Q
7: QyG U�
Z175!\'
SZ 3d 'I S'9'd
3212003 50013 834/6 NI/OIII to
5f -88-8Z 7100335
'1 13161 30 1.011 b0d
8
OR W 67
9.4'26r\
00
26r,a �at�
n I' hh �
$ I I I+��iSuYm'�iW�m
w III 1
U
17
1_B 13161 3M'13341
'
11 1016 .73
1 327 1513
11
II u_:\
Vb
II •a
n N
I C \fro
11 A
13
21316"
1-Q�.:,,,'�\,CJi Y
- C
o"t•.
16111
c.N\. 45, \ /• ▪ /---t, 2 �� `d N W a
I I I am'd \ C\ 3 CgA.izW5.. J>d a;ta
. la a s g � b \ 0501 Od '0201 000 / \ ( .00
13 a z W \ 1nmM3� pi 1 1 1\‘',\'‘',,,:::.:\:\A.
3109391 11100 3O 3M7 2/61593 - � \ _
,905501 M �ff,9300 S 8 13981 30132713341 ,00'809 9.88.93005 o M'S 31771339 2100_
n — — — — — — — — — - — — 822881 M .88,9300 0 3217 13181 ON8 321 7.011335 97T V.7 13910 JO 327 15.
�TI—
'ATTACHMENT a
104
111111111111
INE Ti
ILENCTH]
011111011110
1111111010111
I-7 350 01.297
9-S8 .02332
W
fQ
U
2
V
QI
P
3
paw
0
3
n
2
•
m
ti
0
Q
es
/6
8
a
a
N
V
U
v
SZ 3d 2 S'9'd
3286103 50813 63118 2810711
61-88-90 7101335 'S 108111
,969091 M 1991.00 S
11 1 4
._.113/1 -. I
1 �a z
L
'M'S 2_ 3071339 NOl 0711X37 2
—._ I I I 1 h 4
Llil 931 'J I 1 Uh
as QI�\ I ..:7, I
Av,WW:
Q a;eg.. 'M'S OIJYA37QQ6 ._
?mi6: N010MX3_1 W
N
4
4.3.-'5-I11 3a
yy�
Z tl! I O 03
7--
147 5o U
WU24
3 j "2
¢ ¢ z6Q
7: QyG U�
Z175!\'
SZ 3d 'I S'9'd
3212003 50013 834/6 NI/OIII to
5f -88-8Z 7100335
'1 13161 30 1.011 b0d
8
OR W 67
9.4'26r\
00
26r,a �at�
n I' hh �
$ I I I+��iSuYm'�iW�m
w III 1
U
17
1_B 13161 3M'13341
'
11 1016 .73
1 327 1513
11
II u_:\
Vb
II •a
n N
I C \fro
11 A
13
21316"
1-Q�.:,,,'�\,CJi Y
- C
o"t•.
16111
c.N\. 45, \ /• ▪ /---t, 2 �� `d N W a
I I I am'd \ C\ 3 CgA.izW5.. J>d a;ta
. la a s g � b \ 0501 Od '0201 000 / \ ( .00
13 a z W \ 1nmM3� pi 1 1 1\‘',\'‘',,,:::.:\:\A.
3109391 11100 3O 3M7 2/61593 - � \ _
,905501 M �ff,9300 S 8 13981 30132713341 ,00'809 9.88.93005 o M'S 31771339 2100_
n — — — — — — — — — - — — 822881 M .88,9300 0 3217 13181 ON8 321 7.011335 97T V.7 13910 JO 327 15.
�TI—
'ATTACHMENT a
104
PLAT BOOK
LI
0
a
DOCKET NO.
0
u ,60'5!1
,1121
'3'0 .0'1.
3'0 ,S'1
73509099
VlsA
tU
lJ
J
u
2
m
2
3
n
;i
i
00
(3
(3
CH.6EARING
3
O
qn
V
0
I°
H
a
Off.
O
0.
8
8
8
8
N
8
0
J
ti
h
SOL 107
pl3 I
�I
N)
bOZ 101 z ,
IE¢JY • "3'n ,01 OLI 107
LLI 107
se: 101
i
N°
tWe
U§4
I W2i
if a 1 u 1
e f 0Z 101 a5 20i 41 a4
C ICES 5 1 ,005113.11,171.001.\•117\
OI Nay\ 'Q °
2 4 ;000.5
h U
h
0 N
z �
ask'
rt '
y N
.10.91.00 N G�v)
.91.1.0
.0051! M .[0,91.00 5 1 26' h'
N ryI .SZ .SC 1NI
N Int Q b
0 ,00'011 M.10,9L00SI f
" N
g. u iNl J'^
NI 3 1I i3'n
yo 7 n ,O! vF 0I, 1
.0051! 0.10.91.00' Ir T W 1.
'Ill Ci \ INI
NI z Q 1
r' I~n
N 1 v 0-t.
'3'n ,Ol ! k- Z .
4 k I'1
ry1- W nth
ITJ
3 0 ,01
Nlh W 4 1 ,19591
j41j' .:1:7
�H' i.t
N
Z., h U0 • `
NI I ,09591 Y0055_
L00,\''\
1) W i.\. h
.16591 1".19,9L00 v\ \\
d
,10'991 M.Lt,91.00 `.\
.
B 17091 3N17 155\0 '. 1
1170X! 30171$03. '�
.115'91 1.1,11,91.003
0.
N
0051! M .10,01.00
8 ° 8�fh
h N n
W 3
12
01 b b h n.
01
N C 2 b
t'ZC j _1-00-oi!
'LIZ --�- - I M .LP,
^' ,1''161 M/?1 31VAIXd IL OS 0 .10.9400 5
005110 _10.91.005
03
00'511 M _11.91.00 5
.91'591
.00591 9.109I.00S `
pmt....\.
3'5'59/ 0•[1,8[005 \\ \
yy� h
r pmt\`\\'•„
s .0055\1
N1 'S 1HfOO NO.4;7NIX37
.99'60_J--�_- 0_10,9& 0 $
00« 1�9. tam ,.9600
.1.'L 8
14
5.
_
h
1�
la
I♦
AJ
ThI
.10'991 0.10,171005 \
.09'99! M.10.91.0%. 40059 ;
e I 3 n ,01
.. .. . �i\.
v
MATCH WITH SHEET 4
Ca U 2 O
O 1040
o O O
GENERAL NOTES
SEE SHEET 5 OF 5 FOR GENERAL NOTES.
ABBREVIATIONa
SEE SHEET 2 OF 5 FOR ARRRENA SONS.
ti =w02
LL'y i �♦nr�
pU ZZNQO . o3I 0'p^
2UiW
�20 00o �mO O_Ij h
jU
E< '61!-g m~�lZZn�
iOi p y O
01242 'J'��i <W hIQ<,t40
V�QN 00<2 3��`3hy
WWaW oa.�� 2hN I
h%1 }. io JO�U�NC6�
oW8 mSWy1 2= u 2
i nhaa, c�a
'ATTACHMENT 3
105
Z
0
Z
w
J
PLAT BCOK
DOCKET NO.
2
P.
ti
Er;
8
(5
•
\ \ N
1 \\ \
INy �• 5 0 `+
PRO
p05'
G1011 4 b350d0Nd
E�pi-00.'"J
\ pPwC.tNEo 110103
:\ N .S �Byp E
3 /
\
N
(6
\
\
\
2
N
\
\
O?J�'+�it2
UW¢�
t.iOLGt(00WU=t�<UUzaz
O¢C6
22
MATCH WITH SHEET 3
N
N
,00'19 ,69'09 .11
1-2
IL
\
Na
,69'601 311,0.00 N
\
o • ;
0.
¢
ID
N m
,1109
.00901
h
N'3I� n
Iq
91'
. W
.91'199
.11.91.00 S
"1
NIm
IT
In .00011 M .19.91.00 s
I
t
U_!
U2 00011 M •(_._yLOQ S
1}
e N
�.�JI -11
3'A ,Of
- I .00011 M •19,91.00 5 '1 ^ I �
N n .v_9i
N I0 m IhI
3'n ,01
00011 M. 11.9100$
n .01. .00 try.
'''-!.1,' N IrI 1"
;3.3.% N 1
11
.00'991 .9.11,91.
O
,11'991 9.19.91.
.11'991 9.11,94•,-\ \\
,09991 M•19.9L00 .0096
•19,9(00
19.9400 S T
NII
;I
19,91.00 5
Iryl
hl
.11.9400 S
59
IN3YSSSY3
37NYN31 N/YIY
3297 .91
1
S700911 M •19.91.00 S Ir
Eh
n N II.yJI�
.00911 M •11,9400 5 :,�7
N
•s:9,
SL
11
s
.11'991 M.10191.
,19'991 9.19,91.00
1191 M•11,91.
.11291 M 19,91.00
0.
10'291 M •19,9400
.09191 M .19.91.00
O
,10191 M •19,91.000y
O N
,19'L91 M .19,91.00
1• 4
3'n .01
.09091 M •19.94000y
Qom)\IV �0
s• 9\" "
>�
-3
G J
W
ZO
¢',73
W
u.
o
In W
S
mZ
InecQ
OU
Q
Q m
V)0
" O
OCC
ATTACHMENT
F Q
.16091 M 19,9400 S
0090
.10991 M •19,9400
,06991 M 199400 0\a
� IOW!
.00991 M •19.9400 \
• bi�W
06'/1.1 M \
60 608)
MATCH WITH SHEET 5
IS
ATTACHMENT 3
106
PLAT GOOK
0
DOCKET NO.
0)
1
0
Z
0
C)
m
W
0
J
0–
Z
0
Z
W
J
m
iZ
1
C4
CURVE TABLE
CURVE 1 LENGTH I RADIUS 1 DELTA • 1 CHORD ICKBEAR/NG+ CURVE CENG rH1 RADIUS 1 DELTA 1 CHORD PH.BEARIN
:W l,lyt.,W
,...,!..2,;;;w:,7,
V3
W4WWp�Di.,
LW L4
N N
cM
2
N N
N 2
N 2
N N N
N.
y n
R 2.
4 h
z:
b b 0
b
n ::
A N
h y
`1 N
m
N: N
w7n2^,bN
nQaanpn.n,rin
hv~10:
bNA
88888888888888
m m
mN o
o h
N
''d
n nH
h
M1 h
h h NOM
, NH.�b0.
b R
n<
A N
:2'h
h 0
ti vv.
TbR0
b Q
N 1 h
hnhnnEwl7hilh.Aj
uumuuuuuuuuuuuu
k!,:7.1.41.4.1.1..
W
3 t.f
4i l.iV
•.,,2hh2m
N`•_hh�
�'''
fZg
tiN
APA
NNiN
VinNNW
2HnNHNN
21a.22:m2:
B: -'r:
ry
ry
h g
h n”
b
V °:b
H
�ppm
r-OPPNI
N�
m
v
h
Q.^^ml
On
op
p N
'moi
tppbY
b
b
h .<p
ppcmi
g p
ppb
p
ppN
O O
ppb
b O
pp
O
pp
O O
ppN
O O O
N m
h H
N n'
M1
N
A h h
bi]
•- Nh-
bh
P.hn;
.—,;8
_ mp�m-N'l
uUU
V
UUUC
<hbA
UUUUI'�UU
ma
ONh
O
li
oi
MATCH KITH SHEET
4
0
LULU 7-
o254 kAN
Q= lfoHi H<�
,Z0'Z0, M ,LY,110.00 5
O
1.2V211 JO 307 15341 fit9 30Vd '9[t 1330 213d AVM 10 1001E ]IIEfld ,Ofi Oa
3N17 10YN1 ONV 3Nn NO0J35 rT'S 3fN3AV H10d
O
L 10V711 30 3511153M
6
1"
En
C �_
u
1
iiTTACHM.ENT 3
107
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
Assistant County Administrator /
Department of General Services
CONSENT AGENDA
To: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Thru: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
Thru: Michael C. Zito, Assistant County Administrator
From: Mary D. Snyder, Library Services Director
Date: November 5, 2014
Subject: Library System Long Range Plan Update
BACKGROUND:
The Indian River County Library System is required to have a Board approved long range plan on
file with the State Library of Florida to comply with State Aid law. This plan must be updated
every 3 years. The County received $92,962.00 in State Aid for Fiscal Year 2013/2014. There is
no guarantee of the amount to be awarded on an annual basis. Without the plan, however, the
County would be ineligible for any library State Aid.
ANALYSIS:
The original long-range plan was approved in fiscal year 1995/96. The first update to this plan was
approved in 2002, the second update was approved in 2005, the third update was approved in 2008,
and the fourth update was approved in 2011. This is the latest update to that document. The only
changes are demographic and library statistical information, and the relocation of the Law Library
to the Main Library.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully requests that the Board approve this update to the long range plan. Upon
approval, the Library Services Director will forwarded to the appropriate State Library staff
ATTACHMENTS:
Indian River County Library System — Long Range Plan 2014 - 2017
Approved Agenda Item
BY:
Joseph A. Baird
County Administrator
• FOR: November 18, 2014
Indian River Co.
A I proved
Date
Administration
CCP
j )11.3//
County Attorney
(} (Z.pUI
Budget1)
Ill.
tq
Department
l/�� , 4
Risk Management
J
F: Assistant County Administrator\AGENDA ITEMS \2014\BCC 11 NOV 2014\BCC Memo - Library System Long Range Plan Update.doc
108
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM
LONG RANGE PLAN 2014 - 2017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Board of County Commissioners & Management 2
Mission Statement 2
Library System General Principles 3
General Information 4
History 5
Government 7
Library Descriptions 8
Community Profile 11
Regional Profile 12
Library Roles 14
Goals, Objectives, & Activities 17
Technology & Facilities 25
109
•
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County
Wesley S. Davis
Joseph Flescher
Peter O'Brien
Robert Solari
Timothy Zorc
County Administrator
Joseph A. Baird
Assistant County Administrator/General Services Director
Michael C. Zito
Library Services Director
Mary D. Snyder
Friends Presidents
Jane Dawe, Main Library, Gifford, Law, & Brackett Library
Lynn Walsh, North Library
Mission Statement
The mission of the Indian River County Library System is to provide the
means by which people of all ages, interests, and circumstances may avail
themselves of the recorded wisdom, experiences, and ideas of others. In
support of this mission, library materials are assembled, organized, and
made accessible to all. Opportunities for personal, educational, cultural, and
recreational enrichment are offered. Collections of library materials,
services, and programs are planned and developed to respond to individual
and community needs. A trained and skilled staff and the latest technologies
are employed to facilitate and enhance the use of resources of the library
2
110
•
•
system. By committing themselves to excellence in all facets of the library
system's services and operations, the library administration and staff
reaffirm the democratic ideals upon which the American public library was
founded.
General Principles of the Library System
Purpose:
Public libraries, through their services and facilities, contribute to the
quality of life in the communities they serve. A public library system
committed to excellence will assist in enhancing the quality of life for all of
the residents of Indian River County.
Service Principle:
The users of the Indian River County Library System deserve the highest
quality service possible to fulfill their educational, informational, cultural,
and recreational needs. High quality library service is dependent upon the
following factors: well -selected and well-maintained collections of library
materials in adequate numbers to respond to user needs, the availability of
qualified and enthusiastic personnel, convenient hours of service, inviting
physical facilities accessible to all segments of the county, implementation
of the latest technology, and the financial resources to meet library needs of
the county residents.
The Indian River County Library System subscribes to the principles and
statements included in the Library Bill of Rights and its interpretations and
the Freedom to Read Statement, in the latest versions, as adopted by the
American Library Association.
Standards:
The Indian River County Library System recognizes the importance of
standards appropriate to public library service. Standards are developed by
the American Library Association, the Florida Library Association, the State
3
111
•
•
Library of Florida, and other similar organizations responsible for the
development of standards. Unless otherwise excepted, such standards are
used as guidelines for the library system.
General Information
The Indian River County Library System includes the Main Library, located
in downtown Vero Beach; the Brackett Library, a joint -use facility with
Indian River State College, located on the Mueller Center campus in Vero
Beach; the North Indian River County Library, located in Sebastian; the
Law Library, located in the Main Library, and the Gifford Youth Activities
Center Library, located in the Gifford community. The system employs 41.5
staff (FTE). The FY 2014/2015 proposed budget for the library system is
$3,327,264.00. The facilities total 106,347 square feet. The Main Library is
49,389 square feet; the Brackett Library is 30,000 square feet; the North
County Library is 25,445 square feet, and the Gifford Library is 1,513
square feet.
The System offers access to 543,730 items, including audio visual and
electronic materials. There is also an extensive Florida history, genealogy,
and Civil War collection which include online databases, historic maps, and
microforms.
The library system has been automated since 1991, and upgraded
periodically and as recently as 2008. Polaris is the automation vendor. All
library applications are automated. Upgrades are done as available.
The Friends of the Library organizations offer support for all the system
libraries. Volunteers provided 27,038 hours of service to the System in FY
2013/2014.
Library Hours of Operation:
Main Library
Mondays & Thursdays 10:00 - 8:00
Tuesdays, Wednesdays, & Fridays 10:00 - 5:00
Saturdays 10:00 - 4:00
Sundays 1:00 - 5:00
4
112
4It Brackett Library
Mondays, Thursdays, & Fridays 9:00 — 5:00
Tuesdays & Wednesdays 12:00 — 8:00
North Indian River County Library
Mondays - Wednesdays 10:00 - 8:00
Thursdays & Fridays 10:00 - 5:00
Saturdays 10:00 - 4:00
Gifford Library
Mondays — Fridays 1:00 — 5:00
Fiscal Year 2013/2014 Library System Statistics
Circulation: 1,321,705
Library Visits: 590,056
Reference: 672,307
Program Attd.: 42,000
History
The Fellsmere Library Association formed in 1914 and dedicated the
Marian Fell Library in 1915. This library is not part of the IRC library
system, but is still in operation today. The library is operated solely by
volunteers and serves as an after school center.
Library service for Indian River County was the main objective of the Vero
Beach Woman's Club in 1915. There was community support and in 1916
the building opened serving as a library and a club house. As the population
and usage increased, the need for a larger space became evident. Several of
the community and the Woman's Club formed the Indian River County
Library Association.
A fund drive ensued and a 7,000 square foot facility was built across from
City Hall. The library opened in 1962. An addition was built in 1974. LSCA
funds were awarded in 1983 to build a meeting room and a reading room
($25,000.00). The building was then 9,500 square feet.
5
113
•
In 1981, the Sebastian River Library Association was organized by the
Sebastian Junior Woman's Club. The North Indian River County Library
began as the Sebastian Area County Library and was first opened in May,
1983, in a small building which formerly served as Sebastian City Hall. The
library was governed by the Sebastian River Library Association, but
received most of its funding from Indian River County. In October, 1986,
the library became a division of county government and plans were soon
underway for a new facility as usage and the collection had outgrown the
2,400 square foot building.
A new facility was opened and named the North Indian River County
Library, reflecting its service commitment to more than Sebastian residents,
in November, 1990. As the end of the decade came nearer, it became
necessary to once again plan for more space. In 2002 the Library was
expanded and remodeled to its current size of 25,445 sq.ft.
In 1985, LSCA funds provided for a system development plan ($6,000.00).
Cecil P. Beach and Darro C. Wiley prepared the report entitled "The Indian
River County Library Organizational Analysis and Needs Assessment."
This report was approved by the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners in January, 1986.
In June, 1986, LSCA funds provided for an automation planning grant
($7,000.00). RMG Consultants, Inc. prepared the "Plans and
Recommendations for Automated Systems and Services for Indian River
County Library System." Pat McClintock prepared the report, and he
updated the report in 1989.
In September, 1986, a 5.9 million bond issue passed 3-1 by the citizens of
Indian River County to build 2 new facilities, fully automated. In July,
1987, Richard L. Waters was selected to prepare library building programs
for the North Indian River County Library and the Indian River County
Main Library.
In November, 1990, the new 17,470 square foot North Indian River County
Library facility opened. In February, 1991, the new 39,666 square foot
Indian River County Main Library opened.
6
114
Both facilities were expanded in 2002. The North Indian River County
Library is now 25,445 square feet and the Indian River County Main
Library is 49,286 square feet.
The Indian River County Law Library was established in 1957. Indian
River County took over the complete responsibility of operating and
maintaining the Law Library in October, 1989. In January of 1995, the new
Law Library opened in the new Court house with 3,993 square feet. Due to
space needs of the Courthouse, the Law Library was relocated to the Main
Library.
In 2003, a small library outlet was opened in the Gifford Youth Activity
Center building.
For several years, discussions had taken place with Indian River State
College to build a branch on the Mueller Campus in Vero Beach. In 2002,
the Board of County Commissioners approved this location for the next
branch library. The Board also approved the expenditure from sales tax
revenues.
In March, 2004, the Board of County Commissioners approved a contract
with Harvard Jolly Cleese Toppe Architects and Ruth O'Donnell, library
consultant, to prepare the "Indian River County Library Master Facilities
Plan, 2005 — 2025." This report was approved by the Board of County
Commissioners on March 15, 2005.
In January, 2005, the Board of County Commissioners agreed to deposit
$4.3 million dollars in the Indian River State College Foundation account to
be eligible for a state dollar for dollar match from the Legislature.
The Legislature approved this match and plans proceeded with this facility.
The 30,000 square foot Brackett Joint -Use Library opened on October 28,
2009.
Government
The Indian River County Library System is a division of the General
Services Department. The Library Services Director reports to the Assistant
County Administrator, who reports to the County Administrator, who
7
115
•
reports to the Board. The library system's budget is funded from the general
fund.
Library Descriptions
Indian River County Law Library
The Law Library provides legal resources and information for the
community. Resources are provided for patrons, students from junior high
school through graduate school, paralegals, judges, attorneys, law
enforcement personnel, and the general public.
The Law Library offers Lois Law and basic law references in print form.
There is no charge for any of the Law Library services.
North Indian River County Library
The collection includes 130,040 items in many formats, including electronic
resources and E -books. Wireless Internet access is available.
Library users have access to the collection through the Polaris system's
online catalog. Equipment is available for public use, and public computers
are also available.
A meeting room, seating 200, a conference room seating 10 and three
study/typing rooms are available for groups or individuals to reserve and
use. All are heavily booked by community groups, boards, literacy tutors,
etc. A Storytime Room in the Children's Department provides a special
area for children's programming.
The library sponsors and/or cosponsors many programs for all age groups,
often with support from the Friends of the North Indian River County
Library.
Programs for preschoolers and toddlers are offered by the Children's
Department. Staff visits Headstart Centers monthly, as well as offering
programs in the library to local preschools. During the summer a full
schedule of programs for children of all ages is offered. The Friends offer
8
116
•
•
film programs each Thursday from January through April. Several
reading/discussion groups, poetry and writing workshops have been offered.
A Library Coffee House, offered once a month on Friday evenings from
October through April, is a popular program.
Exhibits are displayed monthly in the library covering a variety of subjects
and types of objects. Some belong to local collectors or craftsmen; others
are traveling exhibits offered by a variety of sources. Fees are paid by the
Friends organization. Through the programming, meetings and displays
offered, the library has become a cultural center for the north county area.
More information about the resources, programs and materials of the North
Indian River County Library can be found on the website:
www.irclibrary.org
Indian River County Main Library
The collection has 311,919 cataloged items in addition to the paperback,
microfiche, microfilm, vertical file, and map collections. The collection
includes materials in all formats, including electronic resources and E -
books. There is also a collection for the visually impaired. The emphasis of
the collection is general reference and Florida history and genealogy. Main
Library staff is shared with the Brackett Library.
Equipment is available for public use, as well as public computers. Wireless
Internet access is available.
There are six study/typing rooms, 1 classroom, 1 conference room, 1
meeting room with capacity of 25 - 30, and a 200 -seat capacity multimedia
meeting room. The children's department has a large story time pit.
The Adult Literacy Service of Indian River County maintains its office in
the lobby area of the library. The Friends of the Library Gift Shop and office
are also located in the lobby area of the library, and the Friends' Used Book
Depot is in another location.
The Vero Beach Art Club exhibits local artists' works throughout the year.
There are three display cases for special displays, and the lobby has two
9
117
® large bulletin boards. The Friends purchased display boards for specific
subject displays and displays from the Florida Humanities Council.
•
The library serves as an early voting site.
The Friends sponsor the lease plan program that provides patrons with
additional copies of popular books and DVD's (System -wide).
Programming is on-going for adults, young adults, and children. For
children, the library offers Books and Babies; Daddytime; pre -toddler,
toddler, and 3-5 year old storytimes; after school programs; art; music; sign
language; summer programs; field trips and tours; and special programs
throughout the year.
Programs for adults and young adults include poetry, genealogy,
babysitting, calligraphy, belly dancing, zumba, yoga, breathing, sign
language, art, music, monthly concert (on the lawn), talent shows, writing,
modeling, career, creative writing, drama, illustration, photography, public
relations, crafts, cultures, summer programs, and special programs
throughout the year. The Friends sponsor author presentations.
Brackett Library (Indian River County/Indian River State College
Joint -Use)
The Brackett Library is located on the Mueller Center campus of Indian
River State College in Vero Beach, Florida. This two-story, 30,000 square
feet facility is a full service public library branch of the Indian River County
Library System. The Brackett library offers services to patrons of all ages,
students, and faculty.
There is a computer Instruction Lab that can be used both by the College
and the public with 37 workstations. Equipment and public computers are
available for the public.
Brackett has 91,711 cataloged items. Programs for all ages are also offered
throughout the year (including concerts on the lawn). There are 4 study
rooms, a reserve room, a small classroom, a 20 — 25 seat conference room,
and a 50 — 75 seat meeting room.
10
118
Close proximity to the Charter High School lends to numerous cooperative
ID projects.
•
Gifford Library
The collection has 10,160 cataloged items. The collection's focus is K-12 in
numerous formats. Public computers are also available and wi-fi access.
The library is located within the Gifford Youth Activity Center building.
The Center provides varied and numerous programs for all ages in the
Gifford Community. The facility is located next to the Gifford Aquatic
Center and a park. There is a gymnasium within the facility.
The Center serves as a voting precinct. Indian River State College offers a
computer lab and classes, along with Project Hope, Upward Bound, and
Adult Basic Education.
Community Profile
Indian River has a humid, sub -tropical climate with an average coastal
temperature of 72.6 degrees. The county is 502.872 square miles and is
located on the east coast between Brevard and St. Lucie Counties.
The following information is from the "Profiles of Florida 2014."
Population of the county is 141,994 (2013 estimate).
The average age is 48.9.
Per capita income --$31,630
Median Household --$45,274
Average Household --$72,710
Woods & Poole 2014 State Profile
Ages 0- 17: 18.7%
Ages 18 — 34: 15.6%
Ages 35 — 54: 23.9%
Ages 55 — 64: 14.5%
Ages65 — 79: 18.6%
Ages 80 & Older: 8.7%
White: 87.4%
11
119
• Black: 9.3%
Asian: 1.4%
Hispanic: 11.7%
Native American: 0.4%
•
Percentage of population over 25 with 12 or more years of school
completed: 86.7%
Percentage of population over 25 with 16 or more years of school
completed: 26.8%
Percentage of population over 25 with a master's degree or higher: 10.2%
There are 2 high schools, 1 freshmen learning center, 4 middle schools, 1
exceptional school, 1 Alternative Education school, 13 elementary schools,
5 Charter schools, Adult and Community Education School, Gifford Youth
Activities Center, and the Indian River State College Mueller Center.
The Vero Beach Art Museum, Riverside Theatre, Riverside Children's
Theatre, and the Vero Beach Theatre Guild provide cultural, recreational,
and classroom programs for the community year round. There are numerous
golf courses, beach parks, and parks within the county. In addition, there is
the aquatic center, North County pool, and the gun range. Indian River
County residents can enjoy the Environmental Learning Center, McLarty
Museum, Mel Fisher Museum, McKee Botanical Gardens, Laura Riding
Jackson Home Preservation Foundation, Windsor Polo Club, and the Disney
Resort.
The Vero Beach Sports Village offers sports -related activities throughout
the year.
Regional Profile
The North Indian River County Library has traditionally been considered to
serve the communities of Sebastian, Roseland, Fellsmere, Wabasso, Orchid
Island and unincorporated areas of Indian River County north of Hobart
Park. There are no actual boundaries for service within the County,
however, as the library is a branch of the Indian River County Library
system, and together with the Main Library and other branches, serves all of
Indian River County. For the purpose of pointing out the distinguishing
12
120
•
features of this branch, however, we will look at the characteristics of the
communities listed above.
The estimated population of Sebastian, Fellsmere and Orchid
Island, Wabasso, and Roseland is 31,475.
The north county area has five elementary schools, a middle school, a high
school and an exceptional school, as well as a charter elementary and a
charter junior high school. There are three preschools in the area and three
Headstart centers. Along with a growing home school population, many
students use the library extensively. Students in this area often continue
their education at Indian River State College or Brevard Community
College.
Recreational opportunities are offered by Adult Education, the Indian River
County Recreation Department, the City of Sebastian Recreation
Department, the Sebastian Panthers football and cheerleading league, the
Sebastian Soccer Association and Sebastian Little League. Golf courses are
available in Sebastian and Winter Beach. The North County Aquatic Center
offers a variety of water activities, and a new softball park is located nearby.
The Sebastian Inlet State Park and Recreation area, as well as county parks
and beaches provide many opportunities for outdoor activities.
The Environmental Learning Center at Wabasso causeway, the McLarty
Museum on AIA, and Mel Fisher's Treasure Museum in Sebastian provide
other interesting experiences for residents and visitors. The Sebastian River
Medical Center provides a series of health-related programs each year.
Many organizations thrive in the north county area, reflecting the diverse
interests of the community. Many of these organizations hold their
meetings in the library meeting room each month, such as the Airmaster's
Club, the Fishing Club, the Computer Club, the Sebastian River Area
Historical Society, the Treasure Coast Archeological Society, the Pelican
Island Preservation Society, various property owners associations, and the
Pelican Island Garden Club, AARP. Service groups, such as the Exchange
Club, Rotary Club, Chamber of Commerce, Sebastian Junior Woman's Club
and Sebastian Woman's Club meet elsewhere.
13
121
•
•
•
Library Roles
Indian River County Law Library
The primary role of the Law Library is "reference center." The library
actively provides timely, accurate, and useful information for the legal
profession and for residents in their pursuit of job-related and personal
interests. The library promotes on-site and telephone reference &
information services, interlibrary loan services, Internet and online
resources access.
North Indian River County Library
The primary role is "popular materials library." The library features current,
high demand, high interest materials in a variety of formats for persons of
all ages. The library actively promotes and encourages the use of its
collections. Multiple copies of best sellers, new titles in all formats are
required. The staff is knowledgeable about current, popular interests and
anticipates "hot" titles.
The secondary roles are the "independent learning center" and the
"preschooler's door to learning." The library supports individuals of all ages
pursuing a sustained program of learning independent of any educational
provider. The library is the only institution available to persons regardless
of age or the ability to pay. Reference materials and how-to manuals in all
formats are available for the independent learner. Staff must be available to
assist in the pursuit of interests and to guide to the appropriate materials.
The facility provides comfortable reading areas, and space is available for
quiet study.
The library also encourages young children to develop an interest in reading
and learning through services for children and for parents and children
together. The library promotes reading readiness from infancy, providing
services for self -enrichment and for discovering the pleasures of reading
and learning. The library provides a place designated for preschoolers to
satisfy their curiosity, stimulate new interests, and find information. The
library promotes early reading, contributing to successful performance in
formal schooling. The collection has a variety of materials and formats for
14
122
• prechoolers and adults working with young children. Staff is knowledgeable
about early childhood development and children's literature.
•
Indian River County Main Library
Primary goals are "reference center," "independent learning center," and the
"popular materials library." Secondary roles are the "preschooler's door to
learning," the "formal education support center," and. the "community
activities/information center."
The library actively provides timely, accurate, and useful information to
those in pursuit of job-related and personal interests. Staff provides on-site
and telephone reference/information services, interlibrary loan services,
research classes, provide Internet, online reference resource services, and
assist with Florida history and genealogy research. The library supports
individuals of all ages who are pursuing a sustained program of learning
independent of any educational provider. Comprehensive collections are
available to support their varied interests, from career development and
basic skills to writing for publication and advanced historical research.
Information is available in many formats, including microfilm and fiche,
Internet, and online resources. The collection strengths are in literature,
business, medical, history, Florida history, county history, war information,
maps, and genealogy.
Staff is knowledgeable in general, as well as specialized reference.
Wireless Internet and public computers are available.
Over 70% of the materials budget is expended on reference, Florida History
& Genealogy, online services, and nonfiction materials, supporting the
primary roles of "reference center" and "independent learning center."
The primary role of "popular materials library" is supplemented by the
Friends of the Library book lease plan. The Friends donate annually for the
purchase of multiple copies of popular materials. The library features and
promotes the use of current, high demand, high interest materials in a
variety of formats for persons of all ages. The "new book" area is located
15
123
•
just inside the entrance to the library. New media items are displayed in the
media department.
One of the secondary roles is the "preschoolers' door to learning." The
library encourages preschoolers to develop an interest in reading and
learning by providing services for children and for parents and children. The
library promotes reading readiness from infancy. Programs are offered
weekly for these age groups and their parents: babies, toddlers,
preschoolers, day cares, and grade school children. Knowledgeable staff is
available to assist with patron's needs. We also offer the "Born To Read"
program of service.
The children's collection includes materials for the home schoolers,
curriculum enrichment, adult basic education, recreational, educational,
magazines, audio visual, online resources and Internet. Board books, picture
books, easy books, paperbacks, read -a -longs, computer games, puppets,
fiction and nonfiction books are available.
The "formal education center" is another secondary role. The library assists
students of all ages in meeting educational objectives established during
their formal course of study. Assistance and materials are available for
elementary and secondary students, college and technical school students,
adult basic education and adult literacy students. Research and computer
classes are taught for each type of student and for every level. The library
has informal agreements with Indian River Community College, Webster
Business College, and Flight Safety.
The library is also considered a "community activities and information
center." The library provides both meeting room space and equipment for
community, governmental, and library related and library sponsored
programs. Meeting rooms available for public use are: 1 large multimedia
room, 2 conference rooms, a 40 seat meeting room, 1 classroom, and 6
study/typing rooms.
The library maintains a high profile as a clearinghouse for current
community information. The Information & Referral database is available
for downloading. The Genealogical Society has indexed the local newspaper
and obituaries. Two large bulletin boards are available for the public in the
16
124
•
lobby and 3 more are available on the second floor. Public information from
numerous community organizations is made available on the first floor.
Indian River County/Indian River State College Brackett Library
The primary roles of the Brackett Library are "formal education support
center," "reference center," and "independent learning center." These roles
are based on the type of branch the Brackett Library is and may be further
supported by usage statistics.
The secondary roles are "popular materials library" and "preschooler's door
to learning."
Instructional classes are held in the computer lab and group study is held in
the larger study room. Programs based on the Main Library programs are
held for all ages throughout the year, including the outdoor concerts.
Goals, Objectives, & Activities
Indian River County Law Library
Goal:
Provide timely, accurate, and useful information for the general public,
students, and legal profession to support the primary goal of "reference
center."
Objectives & Activities:
Link the general public, students, and legal profession to information they
seek in pursuit of their job-related and personal interests.
By providing:
• Public access to the Internet
• Public access to online resources
• In-house, Internet, and telephone reference
• Additional online services
17
125
•
100% of the materials budget is expended on reference materials.
Indian River County Main Library
Goal:
Provide patrons with timely, accurate, and useful information in a variety of
formats, which supports the primary roles of "reference center" and
"independent learning center."
Objectives & Activities:
Make available materials to answer patrons' needs for information on any
subject in which they have an interest or a need to learn.
By continuing to:
• Combine traditional & technological reference services to best
meet individual needs
• Provide in-house, Internet, telephone, online, and interlibrary
loan reference/information services
• Build and maintain a comprehensive reference, Florida History
& Genealogy, and nonfiction collection to assist patrons with
their pursuit of job-related, scholarly, or personal interests
•. Provide training and access to the Internet and online resources
for patrons and for staff
• Evaluate and determine which format for which resource is the
most effective and cost efficient
• Continue to digitize historical information & photographs
70% of the materials budget is expended on reference, online resources,
Florida History & Genealogy, and nonfiction.
Goal:
Provide current, high demand, and high interest materials in a variety of
formats to meet patron demand, which supports the primary role of "popular
materials library."
18
126
•
Objectives & Activities:
Make available popular materials in all formats in sufficient quantities to
meet public demand in a timely manner.
By continuing to:
• Offer the Friends of the Library's book & DVD lease plans for
multiple copies of popular, best selling, and well reviewed
titles
• Develop the audio visual collection—DVDs, music CDs, and
audio books
• Build the E -book collection
• Build the downloadable audio collection
15% of the materials budget is expended in this area.
Goal:
Encourage preschool children to develop an interest in reading and learning,
which supports the secondary role of "preschoolers' door to learning."
Objectives & Activities:
Promote reading readiness from infancy to develop self -enrichment and a
love of reading and learning.
By continuing to:
• Provide weekly story time programs for babies, toddlers,
preschoolers, day cares, and grade school children
• Provide a weekly after school program for elementary age
children
• Provide the weekly "Daddytime" storytime program
• Develop selected reading lists for all ages and levels for
children, parents, and teachers
• Provide "special" programming throughout the year and the
summer program sessions
19
127
•
• Develop the collection in all formats for curriculum
enrichment, adult basic education, home schoolers, education,
recreation, & information
• Assist parents and care givers in the encouragement of a love
of reading and learning
• Assist parents and children in achieving their educational goals
• Assist children with appropriate Internet use
• Continue the Born To Read program of service
15% of the materials budget is expended in this area.
Goal:
Provide assistance & resources for students of all ages to meet their
educational objectives established during their formal courses of study,
which supports the secondary role of "formal education support center."
Objectives & Activities:
Make available resources and knowledgeable staff relevant to the students'
needs.
By continuing to:
• Provide resources that supplement each level of study
• Provide research methods, computer, online resources, and
Internet classes
• Reserve materials for specific classroom assignments
• Participate with the cooperative agreement with Indian River
State College, Webster Business College, and Flight Safety
Goal:
Maintain the library as the information clearinghouse and community
activities center, which supports that secondary role.
Objectives & Activities:
20
128
Better acquaint the public with the library's programs, services, and
collections.
By continuing to:
• Publicize library programs and services
• Offer meeting room space for community groups and
organizations
• Index the local newspaper with the Genealogical Society
• Keep the web page current
• Offer classes on research methods
North Indian River County
Goal:
Provide current, high demand, and high interest materials in a variety
of formats to meet patron demand, which supports the primary role of
"popular materials library."
Objectives & Activities
Make available popular materials in all formats in sufficient
quantities to meet public demand in a timely manner.
By continuing to:
• Purchase multiple copies of popular, bestselling, and well -
reviewed adult fiction books.
• Develop the audiovisual collection.
• Build the E -books and downloadable audio collections
50 % of the materials budget is expended in this area.
Goal:
•
Encourage children of all ages to develop an interest in reading and
learning, which supports the secondary role of "children's door to
learning."
21
129
•
Objectives & Activities
Promote reading readiness from infancy to develop self -enrichment
and a love of reading and learning.
By continuing to:
• Provide weekly storytime programs for babies, toddlers,
preschoolers, day care centers, Headstart programs and grade
school children.
• Provide weekly afterschool programs for elementary age
children.
• Provide "special"programming throughout the year, including
summer library sessions.
• Develop the children's collection for curriculum enrichment,
home schoolers, education, recreation and information.
• Assist parents and caregivers in encouraging a love of reading
and learning.
20 % of the materials budget is expended in this area.
Goal:
Provide patrons with timely, accurate, and useful information in a
variety of formats, which supports the secondary role of "independent
learning center."
Objectives & Activities:
Make available materials to answer patrons' needs for information on
any subject in which they have an interest or a need to learn.
By continuing to:
• Combine traditional print & online reference services to best
meet individual needs.
• Provide inhouse, internet, telephone, and interlibrary loan
reference/information services.
22
130
•
• Build and maintain comprehensive reference, Florida and
nonfiction collections to assist patrons with their pursuit of job-
related, scholarly, or personal interests.
• Provide training and access to the internet and online databases
for patrons and for staff.
• Offer programming which supports patrons' interests or
informational needs.
30 % of the materials budget is expended on reference, Florida and
nonfiction collections.
Goal:
Establish the Library within the community as the place to go for
popular materials, independent learning, and children's door to
learning, which supports the primary and two secondary roles of the
Library.
Objectives & Activities
Better acquaint the public with the Library's programs, services and
resources.
By continuing to:
• Keep the webpage current.
• Encourage staff to participate in community
organizations.
• Speak to local groups about the resources, programs and
services offered by the Library.
• Offer meeting room space within the Library for
community groups and organizations.
• Offer cultural and recreational programming for the
public.
Gifford Library
23
131
The GYAC Library has a target group of pre-school - 12 at present. The
space is limited at this time. The roles of this library are the "pre-schooler's
door to learning" and the "formal education center."
Goal:
Encourage preschool children to develop an interest in reading and learning,
which supports the primary role of "preschoolers' door to learning."
Objectives & Activities:
Promote reading readiness from infancy to develop self -enrichment and a
love of reading and learning.
By continuing to:
• Develop selected reading lists for all ages and levels for
children, parents, and teachers and develop collections
• Provide "special" programming throughout the year and
the summer program sessions
•
• Assist parents and care givers in the encouragement of a
love of reading and learning
• Assist parents and children in achieving their educational
goals
Goal:
Provide assistance & resources for students of all ages to meet their
educational objectives established during their formal courses of study,
which supports the primary role of "formal education support center."
Objectives & Activities:
Make available resources and knowledgeable staff relevant to the students'
needs.
By continuing to:
24
132
•
• Provide resources that supplement each level of study
• Provide research methods, computer, online resources, and
Internet classes
Technology
A technology plan is on file with the State Library. Certification of approval
of this plan has been received.
Facilities
In March, 2004, the Board of County Commissioners approved a contract
with Harvard Jolly Cleese Toppe Architects and Ruth O'Donnell, library
consultant, to prepare the "Indian River County Library Master Facilities
Plan, 2005 — 2025." This report was approved by the Board of County
Commissioners on March 15, 2005.
41 This revision prepared by Mary D. Snyder, Indian River County Library
Services Director, November, 2014.
25
133
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
Consent
TO:
THROUGH:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
•
Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
John King, Director
Department of Emerg
ices
Etta LoPresti, Emergency Management Coordinator„ �J-�
Department of Emergency Services �"'
October 30, 2014
Approval of 2014/2015 State Funded Subgrant Agreement
To Update Indian River County's Hazards Analysis
The State of Florida provides funding for each county to conduct a hazards analysis as part of the overall Emergency Management
preparedness mission. The hazards analysis identifies sites that may contain hazardous materials and the vulnerable areas near these
facilities. This is part of the overall Emergency Management Hazardous Materials Plan.
eayear, the State of Florida is has provided an agreement that covers the scope of work for this project. The funding allocated by this
greement to Indian River County is $3,029.00. Completion of this analysis will allow accurate data when planning for response and
recovery in Indian River County.
FUNDING:
This is a fixed fee, performance based Agreement and there is no requirement to match the allocation with county funds. Additionally, all
work will be performed by county staff and there are no other associated costs.
Budget
Amount
00120825-035290-06807
$3,029.00
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of this agreement and acceptance of the funding provided in the agreement.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Four (4) original contracts for Chairman's signature.
2. Budget office grant form.
APPROVED FOR AGENDA
FOR: November 18, 2014
1Y: 41_* i!
Josep A. Baird,
County Administrator
Indian River County
Approved
Date
Administrator
r
„J/y
Legal
t 04
)t . 174
Budget
II i f2_iti
4
Risk Management
A. i,., •
t
i0-3/-iy
Department
116-A'
to If*
134
•
Contract Number: 15 -CP -11 -10 -40 -01 -XXX
STATE -FUNDED SUBGRANT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by the State of Florida, Division of Emergency Management,
with headquarters in Tallahassee, Florida (hereinafter referred to as the "Division"), and Indian River
County, (hereinafter referred to as the "Recipient").
THIS AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO BASED ON THE FOLLOWING REPRESENTATIONS:
A. The Recipient represents that it is fully qualified and eligible to receive these funds to provide
the services identified herein; and
B. The Division has received these funds from the State of Florida, and has the authority to
subgrant these funds to the Recipient upon the terms and conditions below; and
C. The Division has statutory authority to disburse the funds under this Agreement.
THEREFORE, the Division and the Recipient agree to the following:
(1) SCOPE OF WORK.
The Recipient shall perform the work in accordance with the Budget and Scope of Work,
Attachment A of this Agreement.
(2) INCORPORATION OF LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES
The Recipient and the Division shall be governed by applicable State and Federal laws,
rules and regulations, including those identified in Attachment B.
(3) PERIOD OF AGREEMENT.
This Agreement shall begin July 1, 2014, and shall end June 30, 2015, unless terminated
earlier in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph (12) of this Agreement.
(4) MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT
Either party may request modification of the provisions of this Agreement. Changes
which are agreed upon shall be valid only when in writing, signed by each of the parties, and attached to
the original of this Agreement.
(5) RECORDKEEPING
(a) As applicable, Recipient's performance under this Agreement shall be subject to the
federal OMB Circular No. A-102, "Common Rule: Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments" (53 Federal Register 8034) or OMB Circular
No. A-110, 'Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher
Education, Hospitals, and Other Nonprofit Organizations," and either OMB Circular No. A-87, "Cost
Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments," OMB Circular No. A-21, "Cost Principles for
Educational Institutions," or OMB Circular No. A-122, "Cost Principles for Non-profit Organizations."
(b) The Recipient shall retain sufficient records to show its compliance with the terms of
this Agreement, and the compliance of all subcontractors or consultants paid from funds under this
135
•
Agreement, for a period of five years from the date the audit report is issued, and shall allow the Division
or its designee, the State Chief Financial Officer or the State Auditor General access to the records upon
request. The Recipient shall ensure that audit working papers are available to them upon request for a
period of five years from the date the audit report is issued, unless extended in writing by the Division.
The five year period may be extended for the following exceptions:
1. If any litigation, claim or audit is started before the five year period expires,
and extends beyond the five year period, the records shall be retained until all litigation, claims or audit
findings involving the records have been resolved.
2. Records for the disposition of non -expendable personal property valued at
$5,000 or more at the time it is acquired shall be retained for five years after final disposition.
3. Records relating to real property acquired shall be retained for five years after
the closing on the transfer of title.
f (c) The Recipient shall maintain all records for the Recipient and for all subcontractors or
consultants to be paid from funds provided under this Agreement, including documentation of all program
costs, in a form sufficient to determine compliance with the requirements and objectives of the Budget
and Scope of Work - Attachment A - and all other applicable laws and regulations.
(d) The Recipient, its employees or agents, including all subcontractors or consultants to
be paid from funds provided under this Agreement, shall allow access to its records at reasonable times
to the Division, its employees, and agents. "Reasonable" shall ordinarily mean during normal business
hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., local time, on Monday through Friday. "Agents" shall include, but not be
limited to, auditors retained by the Division.
(6) AUDIT REQUIREMENTS
(a) The Recipient agrees to maintain financial procedures and support documents, in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, to account for the receipt and expenditure of
funds under this Agreement.
(b) These records shall be available at reasonable times for inspection, review, or audit
by state personnel and other personnel authorized by the Division. "Reasonable" shall ordinarily mean
normal business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., local time, Monday through Friday.
(c) The Recipient shall provide the Division with the records, reports or financial
statements upon request for the purposes of auditing and monitoring the funds awarded under this
Agreement.
(d) If the Recipient is a nonstate entity as defined by Section 215.97, Fla. Stat., it shall
comply with the following:
If the Recipient expends a total amount of State financial assistance equal to or more than
$500,000 in any fiscal year of such Recipient, the Recipient must have a State single or project -specific
audit for such fiscal year in accordance with Section 215.97, Fla. Stat.; applicable rules of the Executive
Office of the Governor and the Chief Financial Officer; and Chapters 10.550 (local government entities) or
10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General. EXHIBIT 1 to this
2
136
•
Agreement shows the State financial assistance awarded by this Agreement. In determining the State
financial assistance expended in its fiscal year, the Recipient shall include all sources of State financial
assistance, including State funds received from the Division, other state agencies, and other nonstate
entities. State financial assistance does not include Federal direct or pass-through awards and resources
received by a nonstate entity for Federal program matching requirements.
In connection with the audit requirements addressed in this Paragraph 6(d) above, the Recipient
shall ensure that the audit complies with the requirements of Section 215.97(8), Fla. Stat. This includes
submission of a reporting package as defined by Section 215.97(2)(e), Fla. Stat. and Chapters 10.550
(local governmental entities) or 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor
General.
If the Recipient expends less than $500,000 in State financial assistance in its fiscal year, an
audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of Section 215.97, Fla. Stat, is not required. In the •
event that the Recipient expends less than $500,000 in state financial assistance in its fiscal year and
elects to have an audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of Section 215.97, Fla. Stat, the cost
of the audit must be paid from the nonstate entity's resources (i.e., the cost of such an audit must be paid
from the Recipient's resources obtained from other than State entities). Additional information on the
Florida Single Audit Act may be found at the following website:
https://apps.fldfs.com/fsaa/sinqleauditact.aspx.
(e) Report Submission
1. The annual financial audit report shall include all management letters and the
Recipient's response to all findings, including corrective actions to be taken.
2. The annual financial audit report shall include a schedule of financial
assistance specifically identifying all Agreement and other revenue by sponsoring agency and Agreement
number.
3. Copies of financial reporting packages required under this Paragraph 6 shall
be submitted by or on behalf of the Recipient directly to each of the following:
The Division of Emergency Management at the following addresses:
Division of Emergency Management
Office of Inspector General
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
The Auditor General's Office at the following address:
Auditor General's Office
Room 401, Claude Pepper Building
111 West Madison Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1450
4. Any reports, management letter, or other information required to be submitted
to the Division of Emergency Management pursuant to this Agreement shall be submitted on time as
3
137
•
required under OMB Circular A-133, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 10.550 (local governmental entities)
or 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General, as applicable.
5. Recipients, when submitting financial reporting packages to the Division of
Emergency Management for audits done in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 or Chapters 10.550
(local governmental entities) or 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor
General, should indicate the date that the reporting package was delivered to the Recipient in
correspondence accompanying the reporting package.
(f) If the audit shows that all or any portion of the funds disbursed hereunder were not
spent in accordance with the conditions of this Agreement, the Recipient shall be held liable for payment
to the Division of all funds not spent in accordance with these applicable regulations and Agreement
provisions within thirty days after the Division has notified the Recipient of such non-compliance.
(g) The Recipient shall have all audits completed in accordance with Section 215.97, Fla.
Stat. by an independent certified public accountant (IPA) who shall either be a certified public accountant
or a public accountant licensed under Chapter 473, Fla. Stat. The IPA shall state that the audit complied
with the applicable provisions noted above. The audit must be submitted to the Division no later than
nine (9) months from the end of the Recipient's fiscal year.
(7) REPORTS
X- NOTE: THIS AREA INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
X- NOTE: THIS AREA INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
(8) MONITORING.
4
138
•
•
The Recipient shall monitor its performance under this Agreement, as well as that of its
subcontractors and/or consultants who are paid from funds provided under this Agreement, to ensure that
time schedules are being met, the Schedule of Deliverables and Scope of Work are being accomplished
within the specified time periods, and other performance goals are being achieved. A review shall be
done for each function or activity in Attachment A to this Agreement, and reported.
In addition to reviews of audits conducted in accordance with paragraph (6) above, monitoring
procedures may include, but not be limited to, on-site visits by Division staff, limited scope audits, and/or
other procedures. The Recipient agrees to comply and cooperate with any monitoring
procedures/processes deemed appropriate by the Division. In the event that the Division determines that
a limited scope audit of the Recipient is appropriate, the Recipient agrees to comply with any additional
instructions provided by the Division to the Recipient regarding such,audit. The Recipient further agrees
to comply and cooperate with any inspections, reviews, investigations or audits deemed necessary by the
Florida Chief Financial Officer or Auditor General. In addition, the Division will monitor the performance
and financial management by the Recipient throughout the contract term to ensure timely completion of
all tasks.
(9) LIABILITY
(a) Unless Recipient is a State agency or subdivision, as defined in Section 768.28, Fla.
Stat., the Recipient is solely responsible to parties it deals with in carrying out the terms of this
Agreement, and shall hold the Division harmless against all claims of whatever nature by third parties
arising from the work performance under this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Recipient
agrees that it is not an employee or agent of the Division, but is an independent contractor.
(b) Any Recipient which is a state agency or subdivision, as defined in Section 768.28,
Fla. Stat., agrees to be.fully responsible for its negligent or tortious acts or omissions which result in
claims or suits against the Division, and agrees to be liable for any damages proximately caused by the
acts or omissions to the extent set forth in Section 768.28, Fla. Stat. Nothing herein is intended to serve
as a waiver of sovereign immunity by any Recipient to which sovereign immunity applies. Nothing herein
shall be construed as consent by a state agency or subdivision of the State of Florida to be sued by third
parties in any matter arising out of any contract.
(10) DEFAULT.
If any of the following events occur ("Events of Default"), all obligations on the part of the
Division to make further payment of funds shall, if the Division elects, terminate and the Division has the
option to exercise any of its remedies set forth in Paragraph (11). However, the Division may make
payments or partial payments after any Events of Default without waiving the right to exercise such
remedies, and without becoming liable to make any further payment:
(a) If any warranty or representation made by the Recipient in this Agreement or any
previous agreement with the Division is or becomes false or misleading in any respect, or if the Recipient
fails to keep or perform any of the obligations, terms or covenants in this Agreement or any previous
5
139
•
•
agreement with the Division and has not cured them in timely fashion, or is unable or unwilling to meet its
obligations under this Agreement;
(b) If material adverse changes occur in the financial condition of the Recipient at any
time during the term of this Agreement, and the Recipient fails to cure this adverse change within thirty
days from the date written notice is sent by the Division.
(c) If any reports required by this Agreement have not been submitted to the Division or
have been submitted with incorrect, incomplete or insufficient information;
(d) If the Recipient has failed to perform and complete on time any of its obligations
under this Agreement.
(11) REMEDIES.
If an Event of Default occurs, then the Division shall, after thirty calendar days written
notice to the Recipient and upon the Recipient's failure to cure within those thirty days, exercise any one
or more of the following remedies, either concurrently or consecutively:
(a) Terminate this Agreement, provided that the Recipient is given at least thirty days
prior written notice of the termination. The notice shall be effective when placed in the United States, first
class mail, postage prepaid, by registered or certified mail -return receipt requested, to the address in
paragraph (13) herein;
(b) Begin an appropriate legal or equitable action to enforce performance of this
Agreement;
(c) Withhold or suspend payment of all or any part of a request for payment;
(d) Require that the Recipient refund to the Division any monies used for ineligible
purposes under the laws, rules and regulations governing the use of these funds.
(e) Exercise any corrective or remedial actions, to include but not be limited to:
1. request additional information from the Recipient to determine the reasons for
or the extent of non-compliance or lack of performance,
2. issue a written warning to advise that more serious measures may be taken if
the situation is not corrected,
3. advise the Recipient to suspend, discontinue or refrain from incurring costs for
any activities in question or
4. require the Recipient to reimburse the Division for the amount of costs incurred
for any items determined to be ineligible;
(f) Exercise any other rights or remedies which may be available under law.
(g) Pursuing any of the above remedies will not stop the Division from pursuing any other
remedies in this Agreement or provided at law or in equity. If the Division waives any right or remedy in
this Agreement or fails to insist on strict performance by the Recipient, it will not affect, extend or waive
any other right or remedy of the Division, or affect the later exercise of the same right or remedy by the
Division for any other default by the Recipient.
(12) TERMINATION.
6
140
(a) The Division may terminate this Agreement for cause after thirty days written notice.
Cause can include misuse of funds, fraud, lack of compliance with applicable rules, laws and regulations,
failure to perform on time, and refusal by the Recipient to permit public access to any document, paper,
letter, or other material subject to disclosure under Chapter 119, Fla. Stat., as amended.
(b) The Division may terminate this Agreement for convenience or when it determines, in
its sole discretion, that continuing the Agreement would not produce beneficial results in line with the
further expenditure of funds, by providing the Recipient with thirty calendar days prior written notice.
(c) The parties may agree to terminate this Agreement for their mutual convenience
through a written amendment of this Agreement. The amendment will state the effective date of the
termination and the procedures for proper closeout of the Agreement.
(d) In the event that this Agreement is terminated, the Recipient will not incur new
obligations for the terminated portion of the Agreement after the Recipient has received the notification of
termination. The Recipient will cancel as many outstanding obligations as possible. Costs incurred after
receipt of the termination notice will be disallowed. The Recipient shall not be relieved of liability to the
Division because of any breach of Agreement by the Recipient. The Division may, to the extent
authorized by law, withhold payments to the Recipient for the purpose of set-off until the exact amount of
damages due the Division from the Recipient is determined.
(13) NOTICE AND CONTACT.
(a) All notices provided under or pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing, either by
hand delivery, or first class, certified mail, return receipt requested, to the representative named below, at
the address below, and this notification attached to the original of this Agreement.
(b) The name and address of the Division contract manager for this Agreement is:
Paul Wotherspoon
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
Telephone: 850-413-9913, Cell 850-528-8975
Fax: 850-488-6250
Email:paul.wotherspoon@em.myflorida.com
(c) The name and address of the Representative of the Recipient responsible for the
administration of this Agreement is: John King
4225 43rd Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32967
Telephone: (772) 567-2154
Fax: (772) 567-9323
Email: jking@ircgov.com
(d) In the event that different representatives or addresses are designated by either party
after execution of this Agreement, notice of the name, title and address of the new representative will be
provided as outlined in (13)(a) above.
(14) SUBCONTRACTS
7
141
If the Recipient subcontracts any of the work required under this Agreement, a copy of the
unsigned subcontract must be forwarded to the Division for review and approval before it is executed by
the Recipient. The Recipient agrees to include in the subcontract that (i) the subcontractor is bound by
the terms of this Agreement, (ii) the subcontractor is bound by all applicable state and federal laws and
regulations, and (iii) the subcontractor shall hold the Division and Recipient harmless against all claims of
whatever nature arising out of the subcontractor's performance of work under this Agreement, to the
extent allowed and required by law. The Recipient shall document in the quarterly report the
subcontractor's progress in performing its work under this Agreement.
For each subcontract, the Recipient shall provide a written statement to the Division as to
whether that subcontractor is a minority business enterprise, as defined in Section 288.703, Fla. Stat.
(15) TERMS AND CONDITIONS
This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties.
(16) ATTACHMENTS
(a) All attachments to this Agreement are incorporated as if set out fully.
(b) In the event of any inconsistencies or conflict between the language of this
Agreement and the attachments, the language of the attachments shall control, but only to the extent of
the conflict or inconsistency.
(c) This Agreement has the following attachments:
Exhibit 1 - Funding Sources
Attachment A — Scope of Work and Deliverables
Attachment B — Program Statutes and Regulations
Attachment C — 302 Facility List
Attachment D — Invoice
Attachment E — Justification of Advance Payment
Attachment F — Warranties and Representations
Attachment G — Certification Regarding Debarment
Attachment H -- Statement of Assurances
Attachment I — Facility Checklist and CAMEO Guide
Attachment J — Site Visit Certification Form
Attachment K — Statement of Determination
(17) FUNDING/CONSIDERATION
(a) This is a fixed fee Agreement, in an amount not to exceed $3029.00, subject to the
availability of funds.
(b) Any advance payment under this Agreement is subject to Section 216.181(16),
Fla.Stat., and is contingent upon the Recipient's acceptance of the rights of the Division under Paragraph
(12)(b) of this Agreement. The amount which may be advanced may not exceed the expected cash
8
142
•
•
needs of the Recipient within the first three (3) months of the contract term. For a federally funded
contract, any advance payment is also subject to federal OMB Circulars A-87, A-110, A-122 and the Cash
Management Improvement Act of 1990. All advances are required to be held in an interest-bearing
account. If an advance payment is requested, the budget data on which the request is based and a
justification statement shall be included in this Agreement as Attachment E. Attachment E will specify the
amount of advance payment needed and provide an explanation of the necessity for and proposed use of
these funds. No advance shall be accepted for processing if a payment has been paid prior to the
submittal of a request for advanced payment.
(c) After the initial advance, if any, payment shall be made on a cost reimbursement
basis as needed. The Recipient agrees to expend funds in accordance with the Budget and Scope of
Work, Attachment A of this Agreement.
(d) Invoices shall be submitted and shall include the supporting documentation for all
costs of the project or services. Invoices shall be accompanied by a statement signed and dated by an
authorized representative of the Recipient certifying that "all disbursements made in accordance with
conditions of the Division agreement and payment is due and has not been previously requested for
these amounts." The supporting documentation must comply with the documentation requirements of
applicable OMB Circular Cost Principles. The final invoice shall be submitted within sixty (60) days after
the expiration date of the agreement.
If the necessary funds are not available to fund this Agreement as a result of action by the United
States Congress, the federal Office of Management and Budgeting, the State Chief Financial Officer or
under subparagraph (19)(h) of this Agreement, all obligations on the part of the Division to make any
further payment of funds shall terminate, and the Recipient shall submit its closeout report within thirty
days of receiving notice from the Division.
(18) REPAYMENTS
All refunds or repayments due to the Division under this Agreement are to be made payable to
the order of "Division of Emergency Management" and mailed directly to the following address:
Division of Emergency Management
Cashier
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee FL 32399-2100
In accordance with Section 215.34(2) Fla. Stat., if a check or other draft is returned to the Division for
collection, Recipient shall pay the Division a service fee of $15.00 or 5% of the face amount of the
returned check or draft, whichever is greater.
(19) MANDATED CONDITIONS
.(a) The validity of this Agreement is subject to the truth and accuracy of all the
information, representations, and materials submitted or provided by the Recipient in this Agreement, in
any later submission or response to a Division request, or in any submission or response to fulfill the
requirements of this Agreement. All of said information, representations, and materials is incorporated by
reference. The inaccuracy of the submissions or any material changes shall, at the option of the Division
9
143
•
and with thirty days written notice to the Recipient, cause the termination of this Agreement and the
release of the Division from all its obligations to the Recipient.
(b) This Agreement shall be construed under the laws of the State of Florida, and venue
for any actions arising out of this Agreement shall be in the Circuit Court of Leon County. If any provision
of this Agreement is in conflict with any applicable statute or rule, or is unenforceable, then the provision
shall be null and void to the extent of the conflict, and shall be severable, but shall not invalidate any other
provision of this Agreement.
(c) Any power of approval or disapproval granted to the Division under the terms of this
Agreement shall survive the term of this Agreement.
(d) This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, any one of which
may be taken as an original.
(e) The Recipient agrees to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act (Public Law
101-336, 42 U.S.C. Section 12101 et seq.), which prohibits discrimination by public and private entities on
the basis of disability in employment, public accommodations, transportation, State and local government
services, and telecommunications.
(f) Those who have been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a
public entity crime or on the discriminatory vendor list may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any
goods or services to a public entity, may not submit a bid on a contract with a public entity for the
construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property to
a public entity, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or
consultant under a contract with a public entity, and may not transact business with any public entity in
excess of $25,000.00 for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list
or on the discriminatory vendor list. -
(g) Any Recipient which is not a local government or state agency, and which receives
funds under this Agreement from the federal government, certifies, to the best of its knowledge and belief,
that it and its principals:
1. are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared
ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by a federal department or agency;
2. have not, within a five-year period preceding this proposal been convicted of
or had a civil judgment rendered against them for fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining,
attempting to obtain, or performing a public (federal, state or local) transaction or contract under public
transaction; violation of federal or state antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery,
bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property;
3. are not presently indicted or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a
governmental entity (federal, state or local) with commission of any offenses enumerated in paragraph
19(g)2. of this certification; and
4. have not within a five-year period preceding this Agreement had one or more
public transactions (federal, state or local) terminated for cause or default.
10
144
•
•
If the Recipient is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, then the Recipient
shall attach an explanation to this Agreement.
In addition, the Recipient shall send to the Division (by email or by facsimile transmission)
the completed "Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility And Voluntary
Exclusion" (Attachment G) for each intended subcontractor which Recipient plans to fund under
this Agreement. The form must be received by the Division before the Recipient enters into a
contract with any subcontractor.
(h) The State of Florida's performance and obligation to pay under this Agreement is
contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Legislature, and subject to any modification in
accordance with Chapter 216, Fla. Stat. or the Florida Constitution.
(i) All bills for fees or other compensation for services or expenses shall be submitted in
detail sufficient for a proper preaudit and postaudit thereof.
(j) Any bills for travel expenses shall be submitted in accordance with Section 112.061,
Fla. Stat.
(k) The Division reserves the right to unilaterally cancel this Agreement if the Recipient
refuses to allow public access to all documents, papers, letters or other material subject to the provisions
of Chapter 119, Fla. Stat., which the Recipient created or received under this Agreement.
(I) If the Recipient is allowed to temporarily invest any advances of funds under this
Agreement, any interest income shall either be returned to the Division or be applied against the
Division's obligation to pay the contract amount.
(m) The State of Florida will not intentionally award publicly -funded contracts to any
contractor who knowingly employs unauthorized alien workers, constituting a violation of the employment
provisions contained in 8 U.S.C. Section 1324a(e) [Section 274A(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
("INA")]. The Division shall consider the employment by any contractor of unauthorized aliens a violation
of Section 274A(e) of the INA. Such violation by the Recipient of the employment provisions contained in
Section 274A(e) of the INA shall be grounds for unilateral cancellation of this Agreement by the Division.
(n) The Recipient is subject to Florida's Government in the Sunshine Law (Section
286.011, Fla. Stat.) with respect to the meetings of the Recipient's governing board or the meetings of
any subcommittee making recommendations to the governing board. All of these meetings shall be
publicly noticed, open to the public, and the minutes of all the meetings shall be public records, available
to the public in accordance with Chapter 119, Fla. Stat.
(o) All expenditures of state financial assistance shall be in compliance with the laws,
rules and regulations applicable to expenditures of State funds, including but not limited to, the Reference
Guide for State Expenditures.
(p) The Agreement may be charged only with allowable costs resulting from obligations
incurred during the term of the Agreement.
(q) Any balances of unobligated cash that have been advanced or paid that are not
authorized to be retained for direct program costs in a subsequent period must be refunded to the State.
11
145
(20) LOBBYING PROHIBITION
(a) No funds or other resources received from the Division under this Agreement may be
used directly or indirectly to influence legislation or any other official action by the Florida Legislature or
any state agency.
(b) The Recipient certifies, by its signature to this Agreement, that to the best of his or
her knowledge and belief:
1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf
of the Recipient, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any
agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of
Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the
making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension,
continuation, renewal, amendment or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative
agreement.
2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be
paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a
Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in
connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative agreement, the Recipient shall complete
and submit Standard Form -LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities."
3. The Recipient shall require that this certification be included in the award
documents for all subawards (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and
cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose.
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed
when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for
making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who
fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not
more than $100,000 for each such failure.
(21) COPYRIGHT, PATENT AND TRADEMARK
ANY AND ALL PATENT RIGHTS ACCRUING UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE
PERFORMANCE OF THIS AGREEMENT ARE HEREBY RESERVED TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA.
ANY AND ALL COPYRIGHTS ACCRUING UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE
OF THIS AGREEMENT ARE HEREBY TRANSFERRED BY THE RECIPIENT TO THE STATE OF
FLORIDA.
(a) If the Recipient has a pre-existing patent or copyright, the Recipient shall retain all
rights and entitlements to that pre-existing patent or copyright unless the Agreement provides otherwise.
(b) If any discovery or invention is developed in the course of or as a result of work or
services performed under this Agreement, or in any way connected with it, the Recipient shall refer the
discovery or invention to the Division for a determination whether the State of Florida will seek patent
protection in its name. Any patent rights accruing under or in connection with the performance of this
12
146
•
Agreement are reserved to the State of Florida. If any books, manuals, films, or other copyrightable
material are produced, the Recipient shall notify the Division. Any copyrights accruing under or in
connection with the performance under this Agreement are transferred by the Recipient to the State of
Florida.
(c) Within thirty days of execution of this Agreement, the Recipient shall disclose all
intellectual properties relating to the performance of this Agreement which he or she knows or should
know could give rise to a patent or copyright. The Recipient shall retain all rights and entitlements to any
pre-existing intellectual property which is disclosed. Failure to disclose will indicate that no such property
exists. The Division shall then, under Paragraph (b), have the right to all patents and copyrights which
accrue during performance of the Agreement.
(22) LEGAL AUTHORIZATION.
The Recipient certifies that it has the legal authority to receive the funds under this
Agreement and that its governing body has authorized the execution and acceptance of this Agreement.
The Recipient also certifies that the undersigned person has the authority to legally execute and bind
Recipient to the terms of this Agreement.
(23) ASSURANCES.
The Recipient shall comply with any Statement of Assurances incorporated as
Attachment H.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement.
RECIPIENT:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By:
Name and title:
Date:
FID# 59-6000674
STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANGEMENT
By:
Name and Title: Bryan W. Koon, Director, Florida Division of Emergency Management
Date:
APPROVED
dministrator
13
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of
Court and Comptroller
By:
Deputy Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORTY'
AND L.. t S f ICI
WILLIAM K. DECRAAI.
DFf'+!Tv (("tiNTY 47-1,-10.Nt
147
•
EXHIBIT —1
STATE RESOURCES AWARDED TO THE RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT CONSIST
OF THE FOLLOWING:
MATCHING RESOURCES FOR FEDERAL PROGRAMS:
NOTE: If the resources awarded to the recipient for matching represent more than one Federal program,
provide the same information shown below for each Federal program and show total State resources
awarded for matching.
Federal Program (list Federal agency, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance title and number) -
$ (N/A)
SUBJECT TO SECTION 215.97, FLORIDA STATUTES:
NOTE: If the resources awarded to the recipient represent more than one State project, provide the same
information shown below for each State project and show total state financial assistance awarded that is
subject to Section 215.97, Florida Statutes.
State Project -
State awarding agency: Florida Division of Emergency Management
Catalog of State Financial Assistance title: Florida Hazardous Materials Planning and Prevention
Program
Catalog of State Financial Assistance number 31.067
$ 3,029.00.
COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO STATE RESOURCES AWARDED PURSUANT TO
THIS AGREEMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), Title III of the Superfund
Amendments Reauthorization Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. s. 1101, et seq. (SARA).
2. Florida Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act, Chapter 252, Part II, Florida
Statutes.
NOTE: Section .400(d) of OMB Circular A-133, as revised, and Section 215.97(5) (a), Florida Statutes,
require that the information about Federal Programs and State Projects included in Exhibit 1 be provided
to the recipient.
14
148
•
•
Attachment A
SCOPE OF WORK
Purpose
On October 17, 1986, Congress enacted the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act
(EPCRA), also known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). EPCRA
requires hazardous chemical emergency planning by Federal, State and local governments, Indian
Tribes, and industry. Additionally, EPCRA required industry to report on the storage, use and releases of
certain hazardous materials.
At the Federal level, the U.S. Department of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers EPCRA.
At the state level, the Florida Division of Emergency Management (DEM) serves as the lead agency
responsible for oversight and coordination of the local planning efforts required by EPCRA. Chaired by
the Director of DEM, the State Emergency Response Commission on Hazardous Materials (SERC)
serves as a technical advisor and information clearinghouse for state and federal hazardous materials
programs. Additionally, the SERC conducts quarterly public meetings in varying locations throughout the
state. Currently, SERC membership consists of 23 Governor -appointed individuals who represent the
interests of state and local government, emergency services, industry and the environment.
At the district level, Regional Planning Councils (RPCs) each oversee a Local Planning Committee
(LEPC) that: (1) performs outreach functions to increase hazardous materials awareness; (2) collects
data on hazardous materials stored within the geographical boundaries of the RPC; (3) develops
hazardous materials emergency plans for use in responding to and recovering from a release or spill of
hazardous or toxic substances; (4) submits hazardous materials emergency plans to the SERC for
review; (5) provides the public with hazardous materials information upon request. LEPC membership
consists of local professionals representing occupational categories such as firefighting, law enforcement,
emergency management, health, environment, and/or transportation.
At the local level, each of Florida's 67 counties performs a hazards analysis (county may elect to contract
to the RPC or qualified vendor). The county hazards analysis is used as input to the LEPC Emergency
Response Plan for Hazardous Substances required under EPCRA and encompasses; identification of
facilities and transportation routes of extremely hazards substances (EHS); description of emergency
response procedures; designation of a community coordinator and facility emergency coordinator(s) to
implement the plan; outline of emergency notification procedures; description of how to determine the
probableeffectedarea and population by releases; description of local emergency equipment and
facilities and the persons responsible for them; outline of evacuation plans; a training program for
emergency responders; and, methods and schedules for exercising emergency response plans. This
Agreement provides funding so that the Recipient, can assist in maintaining the capability necessary to
perform the duties and responsibilities required by EPCRA. The recipient shall update the hazards
analysis for all facilities listed in Attachment C, which have reported to the State Emergency Response
Commission the presence of those specific Extremely Hazardous Substances designated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency in quantities above the Threshold Planning Quantity. The data collected
under this Agreement will be used to comply with the planning requirements of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, Title III, "Emergency Planning and Community Right -To -
Know Act of 1986" and the Florida Emergency Planning and Community Right -To -Know Act, Florida
Statutes, Chapter 252, Part 11.
Requirements
A. The Recipient shall submit a list of facilities within the geographical boundaries of the County
listed on Attachment C that are suspected of not reporting to the State Emergency Response
Commission the presence of Extremely Hazardous Substances in quantities above the Threshold
Planning Quantity, as designated by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
15
149
•
B. The completed hazards analysis shall comply with the site-specific hazards analysis criteria
outlined below for each facility listed in Attachment C. The primary guidance documents are
Attachment I (Hazards Analysis Contract Checklist and CAMEOfm Guide) to this Agreement and
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's "Technical Guidance for Hazards Analysis" at;
http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/docs/chem/tech.pdf. All hazards analyses shall be
consistent with the provisions of these documents. Any variation from the procedures outlined in
these documents must be requested in writing, submitted in advance and approved by the
Division.
C. Conduct an on-site visit at each Attachment C facility to ensure accuracy of the hazards analysis.
Each applicable facility's hazards analysis information shall be entered into the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's latest CAMEOfm version 3.0.1 (download from):
http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/cameo/index.htm. Each facility hazards analysis
shall include, but is not limited to, the following items:
1. Facility Information (CAMEOfm Facility Page)
(a) Enter the facility name (per Attachment C) in the Facility Name field.
(b) Enter the facility physical address (no Post Office Box) in the Street Address fields of
the Address tab.
(c) Enter the geographic coordinates (in decimal degrees) in the latitude/longitude fields
of the Map Data tab.
(d) Enter the maximum number of employees present at the facility at any given time in
the Number of Employees on Site field of the ID Codes tab. (a minimum of one is
required for unmanned facilities)
(e) Enter the Facility phone number in the Facility Phones tab field.
(f) Enter the name, title and 24-hour phone number of the designated facility emergency
coordinator in the Contacts tab field.
(g)
Enter the main route(s) used to transport chemicals to the facility (from the County
line to the facility) in the notes tab of the Facility Page.
(h) Enter the route(s) used to exit the Vulnerable Zone(s) in the notes tab of the Facility
Page.
(i)
Enter any past releases that have occurred in the last five years at the facility in the
notes tab of the Facility Page. Include date, time, chemical name/quantity and
number of persons injured or deaths (this information is available from the facility). If
it is determined that a facility does not have a historical accident record, that shall be
noted.
2. Hazard Identification (CAMEOfm Chemical in Inventory Page)
(a) For each Extremely Hazardous Substance present over the Threshold Planning
Quantity (TPQ), create a Chemical in Inventory page (if a Chemical in Inventory page
hasn't been created already) and enter the proper chemical name and Chemical
Abstract Service (CAS) number.
(b) On each Chemical in Inventory page created for each Extremely Hazardous
Substance present over the TPQ, enter in pounds (not range codes) the maximum
quantity of each Extremely Hazardous Substance in the Max Daily Amount field of
the Physical State and Quantity tab.
16
150
•
•
(c) Enter the amount (in pounds) of each Extremely Hazardous Substance stored in the
largest container or interconnected containers in the Max amount in largest container
field of the Physical State and Quantity tab (this is the release amount used to
determine the Vulnerable Zone).
(d) Choose the appropriate code from the drop down list for the Type of storage
container (drum, cylinder, tank etc.), storage pressure (ambient, greater than ambient
etc.) and storage temperature (ambient, greater than ambient etc.) of each Extremely
Hazardous Substance in those fields on the Location tab.
(e) For each Extremely Hazardous Substance over TPQ, On the Physical State &
Quantity tab check the appropriate boxes in the Physical State, Hazards and Health
Effects fields (information on the above may be found by clicking on the Datasheet
button which opens the CAMEOfm Chemicals database.)
3. Vulnerability Analysis (CAMEOfm Scenario Page)
(a)
For each Extremely Hazardous Substance present over the Threshold Planning
Quantity (TPQ), create a New Scenario page (if a Scenario page hasn't been created
already) and enter the maximum amount in the largest container or interconnected
containers in the Amount Released field of the Scenario Description tab.
(b) On the Scenario page(s) Scenario Description tab, enter the concentration
percentage in the Concentration field.
(c) On the Scenario page(s) Scenario Description tab, enter the release duration in the
Release Duration field as follows:
(1) Gases — 10 minutes
(2) Powders or solids in solution — 10 minutes
(3) Liquids — No value shall be entered
(d) Enter the proper natural physical state of the chemical at room temperature in the
physical state field. (as specified in CAMEOfm Chemicals)
(e) On the Scenario page(s) Scenario Description tab, use the weather default settings
or, enter average wind speed (don't enter a value in the Wind From field) and
Urban or Forest is recommended in the Ground Roughness field.
(f) On the Scenario page(s) Scenario Description tab, rate the Risk, Consequences and
Overall Risk of a release occurring at the facility on the bottom of the Scenario Page
(the Risk Assessment should be based upon the Extremely Hazardous Substance,
previous release history, maintenance conditions etc.).
(g)
After entering the information noted above on the Scenario Description tab and
clicking on the Estimate Threat Zone Radius button, CAMEOfm will automatically
estimate the extent of the vulnerable zone that may cause injury or death to human
populations following an accidental release.
(h) On the Scenario page(s) notes tab, enter an estimate of the total exposed population
within the vulnerable zone(s).
(i) On the Scenario page(s) notes tab, identify each critical facility by name and
maximum expected occupancy within the vulnerable zone(s) (schools, day cares,
public safety facilities, hospitals, etc.). If there are no critical facilities within the
vulnerable zone(s), that shall be noted.
17
151
D. Supporting documentation in the form of Site Visit Certification Form, Statement of Determination
or dated letter from the facility identifying the reason the EHS is no longer present shall be.
submitted to the Division which lists the facilities for which a hazards analysis was not completed.
E. On -Site Visits
1. Conduct a detailed on-site visit, within the period of this Agreement, of all the facilities
listed in Attachment C, to confirm the accuracy and completeness of information in the
hazards analysis.
2. Submit a completed Hazards Analysis Site Visit Certification Form (Attachment J) for
each facility to the Division. (file name must contain at minimum the SERC number if
applicable and SV — if SERC number is not available facility name and SV — additional
info allowed but not required). Add the site visit certification form to the Site Plan
Tab of the CAMEOfm Facilities Page for each facility visited or contacted.
(a) On -Site visit exception for sulfuric acid (batteries), this exception does NOT
apply to bulk storage of sulfuric acid.
(1) For facilities listed on Attachment C that report the presence of only sulfuric
acid in batteries, an initial on-site visit is required and an on-site visit form
(Attachment J) signed and dated by the facility representative and the
Recipient shall be submitted to the Division.
(2) In Agreements subsequent to the initial on-site visit, the Recipient shall
contact the facility representative by email or telephone to verify the
presence of all extremely hazardous substances. The on-site visit form shall
be signed by the Recipient and identify the date and facility contact
information. Another on-site visit is not required in subsequent Agreements,
unless, the facility reports the presence of another extremely hazardous
substance above TPQ.
(3)
If a facility representative reports the presence of an extremely hazardous
substance other than sulfuric acid in batteries, subsequent to the period of
Agreement in which the initial site visit was conducted, the Recipient shall
conduct an on-site visit and submit a completed on-site visit form
(Attachment J) to the Division.
3. For each facility for which a hazard analysis is conducted, a site plan must be
added to the site plan tab of the CAMEOfm Facilities Page. (file name must contain at
minimum the SERC number if applicable and SP — if SERC number is not available
facility name and SP - additional info allowed but not required) The site plan shall contain
sufficient information to provide situational awareness and at a minimum include:
(a) Location of major building(s)
(b) 'Name and location of extremely hazardous substance(s). If multiple extremely
hazardous substances are co -located, noting EHS is acceptable.
(c) Name and location of street(s)
(d) Identify pertinent access and egress point(s)
(e) Note any additional features pertinent to hazmat and medical response
F. Ensure that the Hazards Analysis information is reflected in the County Local Mitigation Strategy.
18
152
19
DELIVERABLES AND PERFORMANCE
V luawypelly
153
NJ
1-s
Deliverable #
G w$%/ c 7 e 4* G -{
\ r < m E - , 3 §
( : % } / \ / / \ - E E
,-,
/ƒ 0 in � / \ ^ ° 74-
. \ • Cl.) \ / \ o / / \ ] /
0 \ g \ } $ q \ fD \ / 14 - \
\ / n \ ƒ v \ / \ -,
# ° / •\ i N \ \ 0 / 3 /
,\\ 2 00 E E 0 E ®\ NJ
, C00
§ § \ / - .
{ / / 4 v % / 0
° ) \
•
Within 30 days of receipt of the
executed contract submit
electronically, 3 sample CAMEO
hazard analyses chosen from facilities
identified in Attachment C. Must be
in compliance with Section C of the
Scope of Work. DEM will review the
sample and provide constructive
feedback within 10 business days.
(
/
(111
0-
v,
1. Each CAMEO facility file must contain
complete, correct and accurate information
required in Section C of the Scope of Work.
2. A signed Site Visit Certification Form and Site
Plan in accordance with SOW Section D for each
facility. For sulfuric acid (batteries) facilities, the
site visit form must contain the date facility was
called and the person that responded to the
EPCRA inquiries.
1. Each CAMEO facility file must contain
complete, correct and accurate information
required in Section C of the Scope of Work.
Minimum Performance
$
\
/
iii
3
0
c . .
No payment
r_._
Price
/f -a/\ k -n
F,
� /
9 \ \
< 3 °
\ 0 \
v, § \
2-
} o
,
\ \
0)o
_ e
Financial Consequences
DELIVERABLES AND PERFORMANCE
V luawypelly
153
20
' °1 D o
S j <
-' n
07, m0 r'
1" On T 0
0 3
m
•Sall; paPa.JOD
a — 0_
0 rrD ZO d
3.o• O n
3 n 0) 3 3 CD0
(o ro j o
o � n ro 3
co <n°0
-170-.(o �*. <
N 0 0 a
r-tO O 0 rn O
-
OXI
rD C O cn ((0
rt. 0. rY rt. 3
C 3 = 03 rD
m (D (D N
L
v+
w
ssawsnq Ii'. u!ul!m salgeianllap ayl
facilities visited. DEM staff will review
Jo is!I e apnpul •D luawtpelly
In n
g 3- 3
O 4n 'a
ro CD
^_ 0
r-'- ° n
• p
v,
n n ▪ 0
r00 -,
K (D CD
IliO
° -' 3'
0.
v
0
0
c
0
3
0
(D
(n
c
Cr
3
M
a
0
0
:3-
(0
0)
3
CU
3'
0
3
CU
O
3
a
3
0
3
0)
rD
7-
N
0
3
0
0
3
CD •
• Z
O 0
3
0 -
CU a
O D
rt N
3 n
CU
rD S
n<i
Mn
0
Cr. n
rr 001
'< n
O FD-
r+
rD d
S 3
� a
411
0- _
0
0
s
(D
7
3
v
(-13-
CD rD
0
3
3
m
co
m
v
n
d
3
a
0
a
rD
o-
ro rD
0
o'
3
s
d
O D
O r
O m
• O
O 0
. :.
rD
O O
r 3
O
n 0
d!
3 n
(D m
(D
3 7-
n N
N
-0 n
D1
3 O
7 3
3 n
DO
0
roD
411 N
a
TS v
00
0 a
0 m
s w
O 0
CL v
03
m
3 rr
D1 m
v1 O
N•
0^
n o
O 0
aO
rD
CL fD
0
D
ro'
•
v
(o
Q
CU
0.
S
(D
(D
0
3
S
0
0
3
0_
rD
a.
0
S
0
0
3
3
c
0
3
0
S
(D
0
CD
(D
0)
D1
00)
0
C
- h
CUcu
0_
0
CD
(D
( o
d
n.
(D
s
Plan in accordance with SOW Section D for each
0
3
0
0
0
n
0
rD
7
a
rn1
0
5'
0
3
0
10% of the contract amount
nfD
0 3
3 v m
-0 n.
(D = +
ro
n �
> r Q
S (D
m 3 rD
O n 0_
0 c
l rro
^ n a
rt
o S
1J-
5-'
5 --'
O
O
0
154
•
Attachment B
Program Statutes and Regulations
1. Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), Title III of the Superfund
Amendments Reauthorization Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. s. 1101, et seq. (SARA).
2. Florida Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act, Chapter 252, Part II, Florida
Statutes.
21
155
33834
29094
Ql
01
Oo
Io
22701
34821
F-,
F-,
0 O
F-,
N
15008
36487
N
UD
lf7
w
SERC #
The Home Depot Store -0213
1885 58 Avenue
Vero Beach, 32966
Sears Roebuck Auto Center -6371
6200 20 Street, Suite 300
Vero Beach, 32966
!Indian River County -South County Reverse Osmosis
1550 Southwest 9 Street
Vero Beach, 32962
Indian River County -Hobart Reverse Osmosis Plant
7751 58 Avenue
Vero Beach, 32967
CVS Distribution Center -8701
2575-77 98 Avenue
Vero Beach, 32966
City of Vero Beach-WWTP
17 17 Street
Vero Beach, 32960
City of Vero Beach -WTP
2515 Airport North Drive
Vero Beach, 32960
City of Vero Beach Municipal Power Plant
100 17 Street
Vero Beach, 32961
Bent Pine Golf Club
6001 Club House Drive
Vero Beach, 32966
Bellsouth-E8659
5 South Bay Street
Fellsmere, 32948
Facility Name / Address
Indian River
Indian River
Indian River
Indian River
Indian River
Indian River
Indian River
Indian River
Indian River
Indian River
County
Sulfuric Acid
Sulfuric Acid
Sulfuric Acid
Sulfuric Acid
Sulfuric Acid
Chlorine
Ammonia (anhydrous)
Sulfuric Acid
Sulfuric Acid
Sulfuric Acid
EHS Chemical
James Simmons
772-794-0566
Marc Bates
772-579-2117
Michael Vernon
772-231-7176
Harold Seeley
772-569-5964
James Akerman
772-774-2200
John Ten Eyck
772-978-5220
John Ten Eyck
772-978-5220
James Stevens
772-978-5051
Craig Waskow
772-567-6838
Donald Carroll
800-566-9347
Contact Number
ATTACHMENT C - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SECTION 302 FACILITY LIST
STOZ-tiTOZ
156
•
Attachment D
FINANCIAL INVOICE FORM
FOR
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAZARDS ANALYSIS UPDATE
RECIPIENT: Indian River County AGREEMENT# 15 -CP -11 -10 -40 -01 -XXX
FEID#: 59-6000674
DUNS#:.
AMOUNT AMOUNT APPROVED
REQUESTED BY THE
BY THE RECIPIENT DIVISION
1 First Payment (45% of contract amount) $ $
(50% Hazards Analyses completed/submitted)
2. Second Payment (45% of contract amount) $ $
(50% Hazards Analyses completed/submitted)
3. Final Payment (10% of contract amount) $ $
(Approval, distribution & notification)
TOTAL AMOUNT $ $
(To be completed by
the Division)
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief the billed costs are in accordance with the
terms of the Agreement.
Signature of Authorized Official/Title
Date
TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE PAID AS OF
THIS INVOICE $
(To be completed by the Division)
23
157
•
Attachment E
JUSTIFICATION OF ADVANCE PAYMENT
RECIPIENT:
If you are requesting an advance, indicate same by checking the box below.
[ j ADVANCE REQUESTED
Advance payment of $ is requested. Balance of
payments will be made on a reimbursement basis. These funds are
needed to pay staff, award benefits to clients, duplicate forms and
purchase start-up supplies and equipment. We would not be able to
operate the program without this advance.
If you are requesting an advance, complete the following chart and line item justification below.
ESTIMATED EXPENSES
BUDGET CATEGORY/LINE ITEMS
(list applicable line items)
20-20
Anticipated Expenditures for First Three Months of
Contract
For example
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
(Include Secondary Administration.)
For example
PROGRAM EXPENSES
TOTAL EXPENSES
LINE ITEM JUSTIFICATION (For each line item, provide a detailed justification explaining the need for
the cash advance. The justification must include supporting documentation that clearly shows the advance
will be expended within the first ninety (90) days of the contract term. Support documentation should
include quotes for purchases, delivery timelines, salary and expense projections, etc. to provide the Division
reasonable and necessary support that the advance will be expended within the first ninety (90) days of the
contract term. Any advance funds not expended within the first ninety (90) days of the contract term shall be
returned to the Division Cashier, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399, within thirty
(30) days of receipt, along with any interest earned on the advance)
24
158
Attachment F
Warranties and Representations
Financial Management
Recipient's financial management system must include the following:
(1) Accurate, current and complete disclosure of the financial results of this project or program
(2) Records that identify the source and use of funds for all activities. These records shall
contain information pertaining to grant awards, authorizations, obligations, unobligated
balances, assets, outlays, income and interest.
(3) Effective control over and accountability for all funds, property and other assets. Recipient
shall safeguard all assets and assure that they are used solely for authorized purposes.
(4) Comparison of expenditures with budget amounts for each Request For Payment. Whenever
appropriate, financial information should be related to performance and unit cost data.
(5) Written procedures to determine whether costs are allowed and reasonable under the
provisions of the applicable OMB cost principles and the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
(6) Cost accounting records that are supported by backup documentation.
Competition
All procurement transactions shall be done in a manner to provide open and free competition. The
Recipient shall be alert to conflicts of interest as well as noncompetitive practices among contractors that
may restrict or eliminate competition or otherwise restrain trade. In order to ensure excellent contractor
performance and eliminate unfair competitive advantage, contractors that develop or draft specifications,
requirements, statements of work, invitations for bids and/or requests for proposals shall be excluded
from competing for such procurements. Awards shall be made to the bidder or offeror whose bid or offer
is responsive to the solicitation and is most advantageous to the Recipient, considering the price, quality
and other factors. Solicitations shall clearly set forth all requirements that the bidder or offeror must fulfill
in order for the bid or offer to be evaluated by the Recipient. Any and all bids or offers may be rejected
when it is in the Recipient's interest to do so.
Codes of Conduct.
•
25
159
•
The Recipient shall maintain written standards of conduct governing the performance of its employees
engaged in the award and administration of contracts. No employee, officer, or agent shall participate in
the selection, award, or administration of a contract supported by public grant funds if a real or apparent
conflict of interest would be involved. Such a conflict would arise when the employee, officer, or agent,
any member of his or her immediate family, his or her partner, or an organization which employs or is
about to employ any of the parties indicated, has a financial or other interest in the firm selected for an
award. The officers, employees, and agents of the Recipient shall neither solicit nor accept gratuities,
favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors or parties to subcontracts. The standards of
conduct shall provide for disciplinary actions to be applied for violations of the standards by officers,
employees, or agents of the Recipient.
Business Hours
The Recipient shall have its offices open for business, with the entrance door open to the public, and at
least one employee on site, from 8:00 AM — 5:00 PM Monday - Friday
Licensing and Permitting
All subcontractors or employees hired by the Recipient shall have all current licenses and permits
required for all of the particular work for which they are hired by the Recipient.
26
160
Attachment G
Certification Regarding
Debarment; Suspension, Ineligibility
And Voluntary Exclusion
Subcontractor Covered Transactions
(1) The prospective subcontractor of the Recipient, , certifies, by
submission of this document, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended,
proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this
transaction by any Federal department or agency.
(2) Where the Recipient's subcontractor is unable to certify to the above statement, the prospective
subcontractor shall attach an explanation to this form.
SUBCONTRACTOR:
By:
Signature
Indian River County
Recipient's Name
15-CP-11-10-40--01-XXX
Name and Title DEM Contract Number
Street Address Project Number
City, State, Zip
Date
27
161
•
•
Attachment H
Statement of Assurances
The Recipient hereby assures and certifies compliance with all Federal statutes, regulations, policies,
guidelines and requirements, including OMB Circulars No. A-21, A-110, A-122, A-128, A-87; E.O. 12372
and Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements 28 CFR, Part 66,
Common rule, that govern the application, acceptance and use of Federal funds for this federally -assisted
project. Also the Applicant assures and certifies that:
1. It will comply with provisions of Federal law which limit certain political activities of employees of a
State or local unit of government whose principal employment is in connection with an activity financed in
whole or in part by Federal grants. (5 USC 1501,et. seq.)
2. It will comply with the minimum wage and maximum hour's provisions of the Federal Fair Labor
Standards Act.
3. It will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that is or
gives the appearance of being motivated by a desire for private gain for themselves or others, particularly
those with whom they have family, business, or other ties.
4. It will give the sponsoring agency or the Comptroller General, through any authorized representative,
access to and the right to examine all records, books, papers, or documents related to the grant.
6. It will ensure that the facilities under its ownership, lease or supervision which shall be utilized in the
accomplishment of the project are not listed on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) list of
Violating Facilities and that it will notify the Federal grantor agency of the receipt of any communication
from the Director of the EPA Office of Federal Activities indicating that a facility to be used in the project is
under consideration for listing by the EPA.
7. In the event a Federal or State court or Federal or State administrative agency makes a finding of
discrimination after a due process hearing on the Grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or
disability against a recipient of funds, the recipient will forward a copy of the finding to the Office for Civil
Rights, Office of Justice Programs.
8. It will provide an Equal Employment Opportunity Program if required to maintain one, where the
application is for $500,000 or more.
9. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE (GRANTEES OTHER THAN INDIVIDUALS) As required by the Drug -Free
Workplace Act of 1988, and implemented at 28 CFR Part 67, Subpart F, for grantees, as defined at 28
CFR Part 67 Sections 67.615 and 67.620.
28
162
•
Attachment I
Hazard Analysis Contract Checklist and CAMEOfm Guide
Facility Information (CAMEOfm Facility Page)
Facility Name {per Attachment C} ( Facility Page)
Facility Physical Address (Facility Page)
Latitude and Longitude in Decimal Degrees {ex. 30.197, -84.3621} (Map Data Tab on Facility Page)
Facility Phone Number (Facility Phones Tab on Facility Page)
Facility Emergency Coordinator Name, Title and 24-hour Emergency Phone Number (Contact Tab on Facility Page)
Transportation Route(s) {From County Line to the Facility} (Notes Tab on Facility Page)
Evacuation Route(s) to exit the Vulnerable Zone (Notes Tab on Facility Page)
Historical Accident Record (If none, please note} (Notes Tab on Facility Page)
Facility Maximum Occupancy {a minimum of one is required for unmanned facilities} (ID Codes Tab on facility Page)
Hazard Identification (CAMEOfm Chemical in Inventory Page) (for each Extremely Hazardous Substance on site)
Proper Chemical Name(s) (Chemical in Inventory Page{s})
Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) Number (Chemical in Inventory Page{s})
Physical State in Storage {ex. mixture, pure, liquid, gas} (Chemical in Inventory Page{s}, Physical State and Quantity Tab)
Maximum Quantity On-site in Pounds (Chemical in Inventory Page(s), Physical State and Quantity Tab)
Amount in Largest Container or Interconnected Containers (Chemical in Inventory Page{s}, Physical State and Quantity Tab)
Type/Design, Pressure and Temperature of Container(s) (cylinder, battery, ambient etc.} (Chemical in Inventory Page{s}, Location Tab)
Nature of the Hazard {ex. acute, chronic, fire, pressure, etc.} Chemical in Inventory Page{s}, Physical State and Quantity Tab)
Vulnerability Analysis (CAMEOfm Scenario page) (for each Extremely Hazardous Substance on site)
Enter maximum amount in largest container or interconnected containers in the Amount Released field (Scenario Description tab)
Enter the concentration percentage in the Concentration field (Scenario Description tab)
Enter Release Duration (10 minutes for gases, solids in solution or powders; no entry for liquids is required) (Scenario Description tab)
Determine the natural Physical State (specified in CAMEO Chemicals) and enter into the Physical State field (Scenario Description tab)
Weather Information - Use the weather default settings or enter average wind speed (don't enter a value in the Wind From field) and
Urban or Forest is recommended in the Ground Roughness field. (Scenario Description tab)
Risk Assessment - Rate the Risk, Consequences and Overall Risk of a release occurring {based upon release history & maintenance etc.)
(Scenario Description tab)
Extent of Vulnerable Zone {CAMEO automatically calculates Threat Zone Radius when Edit button and Estimate Threat Zone Radius
buttons are used} (Scenario Description tab)
Enter estimate of Total Exposed Population (Notes Tab on Scenario Page{s))
Enter Critical Facilities {name of critical facility(s) and max occupancy for each; if none, state No Critical Facilities} (Notes Tab on Scenario Page{s})
On -Site Visits (for each Facility and within the Contract Period)
Site Visit Certification Form (Attached to Site Plan Tab on Facility Page) {file name must contain at minimum the SERC number if
applicable and SV — if SERC number is not available facility name and SV — additional info allowed but not required.}
Site Plan (Attached to Site Plan Tab on Facility Page) {file name must contain at minimum the SERC number if applicable and SP — if
SERC number is not available the facility name and SP — additional info allowed but not required.}
Sufficient Detail to Identify:
Location of Major Building(s)
Name and Location of Extremely Hazardous Substance(s) (if extremely hazardous materials are co -located, noting EHS is acceptable)
Name and Location of Street(s)
Identify Pertinent Access and Egress Points
Note Additional Features Pertinent to Hazardous Materials and Medical Response
All data shall be submitted electronically via CAMEOfm version 3.0.1 in a .zip file format.
29
163
Attachment J
FLORIDA STATE EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMISSION FOR HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
HAZARDS ANALYSIS SITE VISIT CERTIFICATION FORM
Facility Name (Please print)
Street Address, City & Zip Code (Please print)
County (Please print)
Name of Facility Representative (Please print)
Facility Representative Signature Site Visit Date
Site Visit Performed by (Please print)
Signature Site Visit Date
The individuals signing above certify that a hazards analysis site visit was conducted on the
above date.
Notes:
❑ Check if facility representative was informed about using E -Plan (https://erplan.net/eplan/login.htm) for EPCRA
on-line filing
30
164
•
•
Attachment K
STATEMENT OF DETERMINATION
Facility Name
Physical Address (Street only)
City
County
LEPC District
I have determined that this facility is / is not subject to the following section(s) of EPCRA, Title III, for the reporting year(s) indicated
(circle all applicable):
SECTION
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
302/303
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
311/312
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
313
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
If "No" was indicated on any of the above please check appropriate box(s) why•
Sections
•
Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHSs) are / were present only in amounts less than . established
302/303
Name of owner / operator's authorized representative (printed):
Threshold Planning Quantities (TPQs).
Official Title (printed):
No EHSs are Present.
Signature:
No EHSs were present on-site during the year.
Sections
311/ 312
Hazardous chemicals/EHSs are/were present only in amounts below established reporting thresholds.
No hazardous chemicals/EHSs are/were present.
No hazardous chemicals were present on-site during the year.
Section
Not within covered SIC Codes.
313
Within covered SIC Codes, but less than ten (10) employees.
Within covered SIC Codes, but no Section 313 chemicals were present or were below Section 313 reporting
thresholds.
Other
Closed facility
Chemicals removed
Chemicals reduced below
Date Effective:
YES 1 NO
YES / NO
threshold/TPQ YES / NO
New Facility. Date chemicals brought on site meeting / exceeding TPQ:
Further explanation if necessary:
31
165
CERTIFICATION:
I understand the requirements of the law(s) circled above. I also understand that ultimate compliance
responsibility lies with me and failure to comply, if required, can result in civil and criminal penalties under federal
and state laws.
Name of owner / operator's authorized representative (printed):
Official Title (printed):
Signature:
Date signed:
•
31
165
GRANT NAME: Hazardous Analysis Grant
AMOUNT OF GRANT: $ 3,029.00
DEPARTMENT RECEIVING GRANT:
411)CONTACT PERSON: John King
Emergency Services
GRANT # 15 -CP -11-10-40-01-000
PHONE NUMBER: 772-226-3859
1. How long is the grant for? 1 year Starting Date: July 1, 2014
2. Does the grant require you to fund this function after the grant is over? Yes X No
3. Does the grant require a match? Yes X No
If yes, does the grant allow the match to be In Kind Services? Yes X No
4. Percentage of match N/A 0%
5. Grant match amount required $ N/A
6. Where are the matching funds coming from (i.e. In Kind Services; Reserve for Contingency)? N/A
7. Does the grant cover capital costs or start-up costs? N/A Yes
If no, how much do you think will be needed in capital costs or start up costs
(Attach a detail listing of costs)
8. Are you adding any additional positions utilizin the grant funds?
If yes, please list. (If additional space is needed, please attach a schedule.)
$N/A
Yes
No
X No
Acct.
Description
Position
Position
Position
Position
Position
011.12
Regular Salaries
N/A
Second Year
$N/A
$
011.13
Other Salaries & Wages (PT)
N/A
$N/A
Third Year
$
012.11
Social Security
N/A
$
$
012.12
Retirement -Contributions
N/A
$
•
$
♦
012.13
Insurance -Life & Health
N/A
•
$
�
D012.14
Worker's Compensation
N/A
012.17
S/Sec. Medicare Matching
N/A
TOTAL
N/A
9. What is the total cost of each position including benefits, cap.tal, start-up, auto expense, travel and operating?
Salary and Benefits
Operating Costs
Capital
Total Costs
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
$ N/A
$3,029.00
Second Year
$N/A
$
$
$N/A
Third Year
$
$
$
$
Fourth Year
$
$
•
$
♦
$
V
Fifth Year
•
10. What is the estimated cost of the grant to the county over five years? $
Signature of Preparer:
Date: October 30, 2014
166
Grant
Amount
Other Match Costs
Not Covered
Match
Total
First Year
$3,029.00
$ N/A
$ N/A
$3,029.00
Second Year
$N/A
$
$
$N/A
Third Year
$
$
$
$
Fourth Year
$
$
$
$
Fifth Year
$
�
$
�
$
v
$
Signature of Preparer:
Date: October 30, 2014
166
S ilk
Oce of
Consent 11 / 18/ 14
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold., County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Chris Mora, Public Works Director/'
FROM: illiam K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
DATE: October 29, 2014
SUBJECT: Extension of the Agreement for Blue Cypress Lake Park Operation
Sadly, Joneal "Joe" Middleton passed away on October 11, 2014. His presence at Blue
Cypress will be sorely missed. Joe Middleton had managed and maintained Blue Cypress
Lake Park under an Agreement with the County since 1979. In 2008, his wife Jeanne was
added as an additional party to the Agreement since she has assisted in the maintenance
of the park since 1994 and is familiar with every phase of the operation of the park.
Prior to Mr. Middleton's passing, staff had received a request to extend the Agreement for
an additional ten years. The current Agreement between the County and the Middletons
expires in September 2015. Jeanne Middleton has asked to extend the Agreement term
an additional ten years or until September 1, 2025. Staff has no objection to this request.
The only other modification to the lease is removal of a tractor from the list of County
owned equipment to. be maintained by the Middletons. The tractor is no longer needed
since the dirt road has been paved with asphalt millings.
Funding. There is no direct funding impacted by this extension of the Agreement. Mrs.
Middleton will continue to clean the restrooms and mow the lawn in exchange for allowing
her to operate the small bait shop on site and provide boat rentals to interested parties.
Recommendation. Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached Fourth Amendment to the Agreement between Indian River County and H. Jean
Middleton to provide for the extension of the Agreement until September 1, 2025.
Please contact me should you have any questions concerning this matter.
11- p
:=;CVED FOR I b
R.C.0 MEETING - CONSENT
CTY ATTORNEY
(ri im nit: Ca 1-
Ac,cr:ived
Gs ie
Admin.
124
/te�l /3 )
Legal
'ILr�/l.
■l�l
Budg t411117)6141
Dept.
;,Aro
167
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
between
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND H. JEAN MIDDLETON
WHEREAS, Indian River County (County) is the owner and operator of Blue
Cypress Lake Park on Blue Cypress Lake; and
WHEREAS, on October . 10, 1979, the County entered into an agreement, with
Joneal Middleton, and on December 2, 2008 added his wife, Jeanne Middleton as a
party to the Agreement, to fulfill the obligations to manage and maintain Blue Cypress
Lake Park; and
WHEREAS, the Middletons have faithfully fulfilled the obligations under the
Agreement for 35 years; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was extended on January 2, 1985, November 12,
1999, October 19, 2004 and November 11, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the current Agreement is due to expire September 1, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the County was saddened to learn of Joneal's passing on October
18, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to extend the Agreement for an additional' 10
years.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the following mutual covenants and
agreements INDIAN RIVER COUNTY and H: JEAN MIDDLETON do agree as follows:
1. The above recitations are true and correct and incorporated by reference
herein.
1
168
2. The original Agreement dated October 10, 1979. and the amendments and
extension thereto, shall be extended for a term of ten (10) years and shall expire on
September 1, 202, wge
3. Except as amended above, the terms and conditions of the Agreement
and the amendments and extensions thereto shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and
seals this
day of , 2014.
H. JEAN MIDDLETON BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: (CM fYd(j:
H. Jea Middleton
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency.
By:
Chairman
Date approved BCC:
ATTEST:
JEFFREY R. SMITH, CLERK OF
COURT AND COMPTROLLER
William K. DeBraal Deputy Clerk
Deputy County Attorney
PROVED:
:..Dung) :dmrnistrator
2
169
CONSENT: 11/18/2014
j
Office of
Fig
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Dylan Reingold — County Attorney
DATE: November 10, 2014
SUBJECT: Annual Resolution re Signatories
In connection with the selection of a new Chairman and Vice Chairman, the
Board of County Commissioners must adopt a resolution directing
depositories of County funds to honor certain authorized signatures on
County checks, warrants, and other orders for payment. Based on input
from the Finance Office, the attached resolution has been prepared
designating both the Chairman and Clerk as the authorized signatories and
providing for facsimile signatures rather than manual signatures on all
checks.
Funding:
There are no costs associated with this agenda item.
Requested Action:
Adopt the attached resolution and authorize the newly selected Chairman
as well as the Clerk to sign the attached resolution and the respective
Certificate of Facsimile Signature; and to instruct the Clerk to the Board of
County Commissioners to transmit to the Department of State each original
Certificate of Facsimile Signature which bears the original manual
signatures of those Indian River County officers authorized to use facsimile
signatures in lieu of manual signatures.
/nhm
Attachments: Resolution
Certificate of Facsimile Signature (2)
ROVED FOR /
tv1EETING - CONSENT AGENDA
(\i rrV r._'rORN Y..
.. ..c .C4
.. pp4 Ac0%eo _
Da e
imlr,.
2
0./
III/E11111111112111
till
IMES
—
PUai
u C1 OFj
170
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DIRECTING
DEPOSITORIES OF COUNTY FUNDS TO HONOR CERTAIN
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES ON COUNTY CHECKS,
WARRANTS, AND OTHER ORDERS FOR PAYMENT; PROVIDING
FOR BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND CLERK OF
THE CIRCUIT COURT SIGNATORIES; RESCINDING
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-123 EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 18, 2014
WHICH SPEAKS TO AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES ON COUNTY
CHECKS, WARRANTS, AND OTHER ORDERS FOR PAYMENT;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Code section 101.02.1, on November 18, 2014, the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County ("Board") selected
as Chairman from November 18, 2014, and continuing through November 17, 2015; and
WHEREAS, Jeffrey R. Smith is the duly elected Clerk of the Circuit Court and
Comptroller for Indian River County ("Clerk"), and he serves as clerk and accountant to the
Board, pursuant to Section 28.12, Florida Statutes (2014); and
WHEREAS, the Board has previously designated certain institutions as depositories
of County funds; and
WHEREAS, the Board's selection of Chairman requires a re -designation of
signatories for County warrants, checks, and other orders for the payment of money drawn
on the County's depositories; and
WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the existing financial practices
concerning personnel policies and employee compensation eliminate the need to require
manual signatures on salary and other compensation warrants, checks, and other orders
payable to Board employees; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. Previous designations by the Board of certain institutions as official depositories of
County funds are hereby ratified and affirmed.
2. Manual signatures shall not be required on any checks, warrants, and other orders
for the payment of money drawn in the name of the Board for the purpose of salary
and other compensation to or for any Board employees.
1
171
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
3. Each designated depository of County funds is hereby authorized and directed to
honor checks, warrants, and other orders for payment of money drawn in the name
of the Board, including those payable to the individual orders of any person/entity or
persons/entities whose name or names appear thereon, when bearing both the
facsimile signature of the Clerk, and the facsimile signature of the Chairman of the
Board.
4. The manual and facsimile signatures of the herein designated officers appear on
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein in its entirety.
5. The signatories named on the attached Exhibit "A" are hereby authorized to execute
any and all signature cards and agreements as requested by the respective banking
institutions designated as official depositories by the Board.
6 The use of facsimile signatures is authorized by Florida Statutes Section 116.34
(2014), the "Uniform Facsimile Signature of Public Officials Act."
7 The Clerk to the Board shall immediately file with the Department of State each-
Certificate
achCertificate of Facsimile Signature bearing the original manual signatures, at which
point a facsimile signature of those officials signatory to Exhibit "A" of this
Resolution shall have the same legal effect as a manual signature on any
instrument of payment.
The Resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner , and the
motion was seconded by Commissioner , and upon being put to a vote,
the vote was as follows:
Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan
Commissioner Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher
Commissioner Tim Zorc
Commissioner Bob Solari
The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 18th
day of November, 2014 with an effective date of November 18, 2014.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of
Circuit Court and Comptroller
By By
Deputy Clerk , Chairman
APPROVES AS tO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
BY
DYLAN REINGOLD
COUNTY ATTORNEY
2
•
•
EXHIBIT "A"
Jeffrey R. Smith,
Clerk of Circuit Court and Comptroller
Actual
Facsimile
Indian River County Board of
County Commissioners Chairman:
Actual
Facsimile
173
•
•
•
cERTIFIPATEf.0R. FACSIMILF SleNATURE
ISeCtiOn11.6..4, Florida-SW*0) . •
State ,of Flodda
County of Tndian Rivtar
1, Jeffrey Rj. Smith
• triOnfriairie as to bo *amid bdom)
being
Duty appointed as Clerk of Circuit Court and Com troller o
W40401400:6tie*P0004)
Indian River County, Florida
Do hereby sfile With the Secretary of State My:official sigil*felofttle::PUTPOSet of
complying with Section 110.34, FlOrkla :atatutes, apo do!hereby,Cerlify tnarthe
signelmre. below Is true, :correct and manually StibtditbOd by me
oE.PE1 IOW)
Jeffrey. R. Smith
2000 15th ie
:,'M :10##14#010-
Vero Beach, FL. 32.960
0,Y • • • Sit% • • • '..:20trodi
174
•
:CERTIFICATE OR.: ACSIMIL.E:SIGNATURE
{S:ectton :1 :$.34, Florida Stat tes}
State of Florida
COut1ty at Indian River
1,
being
(plht rash. as to b.: sbrmtd Wm.)
Duly appointed as Chairman of the Board of . County Commissioners
{eaotr oarni*ditis.;cri
of Indian River County, Florida, :.
Do he aby:filerith:th Sep, :of S*10 my ieialsignature e::15UtpOitithe of
complying with Seddon n 1:1i6.,34...F1orida $taAgtes,ar d.0:hereby Oerlify thatlhe
signature. below is true,:coirect•and manually. bscr ied*stns.
1801 . 27th Street ,.
•. Vero Beach, FL . 32.960
175
CONSENT: 11/18/2014
Office of
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
, ATTORNEY
()Li
Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Dylan Reingold — County Attorney '0lv
DATE: November 10, 2014
SUBJECT: Annual Resolution Delegating the Authority to the County
Administrator or his designee, to execute Resolutions Calling
Letters of Credit as Necessary during a Declared State of Local
Emergency or Declared State of Florida Emergency Affecting
Indian River County
The attached resolution delegates to the County Administrator, or his
designee, the authority to execute resolutions calling letters of credit as
necessary during a declared state of local emergency or declared State of
Florida emergency affecting Indian River County from November 18, 2014
through December 31, 2015.
Funding:
There are no costs associated with this agenda item.
Requested Action:
Adopt the attached resolution delegating authority to the County
Administrator, or his designee, to execute resolutions calling letters of
credit as necessary during a declared state of local emergency or declared
State of Florida emergency affecting Indian River County from November
18, 2014 through December 31, 2015.
/nhm
Attachment: Resolution
1-:OvED FOR 1 I I b .6
MEETING - CONSENT AGENDA
�Q►.��T P,TTQRNEYJ
,r cn
Approved
Mr*
67-4_
g�i►4
Date
®113l11
I
MIMI
Ilona
'in.
'. gc'
+iiJ(:Dt
7 1
;i 1. ,-
176
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DELEGATING THE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE RESOLUTIONS CALLING
LETTERS OF CREDIT AS NECESSARY DURING A DECLARED STATE OF
LOCAL EMERGENCY OR DECLARED STATE OF FLORIDA EMERGENCY
AFFECTING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2013-121
EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 18, 2014; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Section 101.05.1.q of The Code of Indian River County allows the Board to
authorize the County Administrator, or his designee, to perform other duties on behalf of the Board
of County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, various letters of credit are posted with the County to, among other things,
guaranty performance or warranty of improvements as well as compliance and restoration of sand
mines, and many letters of credit have certain call language requiring a resolution of the Board of
County Commissioners declaring default or failure to post alternate security; and
WHEREAS, during a declared State of Local Emergency or declared State of Florida
Emergency affecting Indian River County, it is very unlikely that the Board of County Commissioners
would meet; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to delegate specific authority to execute resolutions on behalf of
the Board of County Commissioners to call letters of credit which might expire or otherwise require
action to be taken during the period of such declared emergency; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to delegate additional signing authority, not previously delegated
by Florida Statutes, The Code of Indian River County, and Indian River County resolutions, to the
County Administrator or his designee during the period of such declared emergency; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. Resolution No. 2013-121 of the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners which
speaks to delegation of authority to execute resolutions calling letters of credit as necessary
during a declared State of Local Emergency or declared State of Florida Emergency
affecting Indian River County is hereby rescinded in its entirety effective November 18, 2014.
2. The County Administrator, or his designee, is hereby delegated the authority to execute
resolutions on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners to call letters of credit which
might expire or otherwise require action to be taken during the period of a declared State of
Local Emergency or declared State of Florida Emergency affecting Indian River County.
Any resolutions executed by the County Administrator or his designee, to call letters of credit
during any declared State of Local Emergency or State of Florida Emergency affecting
Indian River County are to be accompanied by a copy of this Resolution.
177
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
3. The Effective Date of this Resolution is November 18, 2014, and this Resolution shall
continue in effect through calendar year 2015.
This Resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner , and the
motion was seconded by Commissioner , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote
was as follows:
Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan
Commissioner Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher
Commissioner Tim Zorc
Commissioner Bob Solari
The Chairman thereupon declared this Resolution duly passed and adopted this 18th day of
November, 2014.
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Circuit
Court and Comptroller
By
Deputy Clerk
ANDD
APPROVED SU FIICIIENG
BY
DYLAN REINGOLD
COUNTY ATTORNEY
2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
, Chairman
178
CONSENT: 11/18/2014 2 F
Office of
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant Counry Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Dylan Reingold — County Attorney OtV
DATE: November 10, 2014
SUBJECT: Annual Resolution re Delegation of Authority Concerning
Declarations of State of Local Emergencies and to Act in a
State Declared Emergency Affecting Indian River County
The attached resolution delegates to the County Administrator, or his
designee, the authority to declare states of local emergencies and to act in
a State of Florida declared emergency affecting Indian River County from
November 18, 2014 through December 31, 2015.
Funding:
There are no costsassociated with this agenda item.
Requested Action:
Adopt the attached resolution delegating authority to the County
Administrator, or his designee, to declare states of local emergencies and
to act in a state declared emergency affecting Indian River County effective
from November 18, 2014 through December 31, 2015.
lnhm
Attachment: Resolution
_ W
B.C.0 MEETING - CpLS€N-T-•AGENDA
COUNTY ATTORNEY;
• •
--i
,ar,{r zived
Date
179
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DELEGATING
AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO DECLARE
STATES OF LOCAL EMERGENCIES AND TO ACT IN A STATE OF
FLORIDA DECLARED EMERGENCY AFFECTING INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY; RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2013-122 EFFECTIVE
NOVEMBER 18, 2014; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is in the best interests of the County to
delegate the authority to declare that a state of local emergency exists in Indian River
County to the County Administrator acting as Indian River County Emergency Services
District Director for any local emergency that may arise from November 18, 2014 through
calendar year 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is in the best interests of the County to
delegate the authority to issue orders and rules, including Emergency Orders, during a
State of Florida declared emergency affecting Indian River County to the County
Administrator acting as Indian River County Emergency Services District Director for any
declared emergency that may arise from November 18, 2014 through calendar year 2015.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. Resolution 2013-122 of the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
which speaks to delegation of authority is hereby rescinded in its entirety effective
November 18, 2014.
2. Commencing November 18, 2014, and continuing through December 31, 2015, the
Indian River County Administrator acting as Indian River County Emergency
Services District Director, or his designee, is hereby delegated the authority: (i) to
declare a state of local emergency for Indian River County pursuant to Florida
Statutes section 252.38(3)(a)(5)(2014); and (ii) to issue orders and rules, including,
without limitation, the ability to issue Emergency Orders for Indian River County,
during a period of a declared emergency pursuant to any duly issued .Executive
Order concerning Emergency Management issued by the Governor of the State of
Florida declaring that a disaster and/or emergency [as such terms are defined in
Florida Statutes sections 252.34 (1) and (3) respectively] exists in Indian River
County.
1
180
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -
The Resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner , and the motion
was seconded by Commissioner , and upon being put to a vote, the vote was
as follows:
Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan
Commissioner Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher
Commissioner Tim Zorc
Commissioner Bob Solari
The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 18th
day of November, 2014 with an effective date of November 18, 2014.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of
Circuit Court and Comptroller
By By
Deputy Clerk , Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
BY
DYLAN REINGOLD
COUNTY ATTORNEY
2
181
Date:
To:
From:
Prepared By:
Subject:
Consent Agenda Item'
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
November 10, 2014
Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services
Terry Southard, Operations ManagerQ`M'f- `
Request to terminate participation in FPL's Voluntary Commercial/Industrial
Load Control (CILC-1) program
tIO
DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS:
The Indian River County Utility Department (IRCUD) maintains back-up generators at the
County's water and wastewater plants which operate automatically when normal power is
disrupted.
Through their Commercial/Industrial Load Control Program Schedule ("Schedule CICL-1"), or
Load Share Program, IRCUD has, through arrangements with FPL, agreed to have the main
power switch off at certain locations for specific short term durations in order to assist FPL in
reducing peak electrical demands on their system. IRCUD must then run the plants on
generator power during this brief, scheduled power interruption. The Toad share agreements
began on June 21, 1993, and November 13, 1995 for the county's various water/wastewater
plants.
In partnering with FPL, IRCUD has an opportunity to run generators under load, to assess the
emergency automation of the plants during normal working hours, and make any corrections if
problems are found before an emergency occurs. FPL rewards IRCUD for this arrangement of
approximately $100,000.00 per year.
The four (4) facilities benefiting from FPL's CICL-1 program are:
1. South County Wastewater
2. South County RO
3. West Regional Wastewater
4. North County RO (Hobart)
ANALYSIS:
Recent changes to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) rules on emission standards
require owners of diesel generators to comply with more stringent emission/hazardous air
quality guidelines. The new rules apply to engines based on horsepower, engine construction
date, and Carbon Monoxide (CO) emissions. The RICE NESHAP (Reciprocating Internal
Combustion Engine National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) rules, impacts
combustion engines such as those currently utilized by IRCU, and managed by FPL through the
Page l of 2
182
s
CICL-1 program.
In January, 2014 IRCUD teamed up with FPL and their sub -contractor for a site inspection of the
four generators. IRCUD staff proactively gathered data on each stand-by engine and submitted
the information to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for review.
FDEP's review concluded that only two of the four generators were able to meet the new
regulations. South County Wastewater plant and the South County RO facility were evaluated
by FPL's sub -contractor for possible emission retrofit upgrades but the job was found to be cost
prohibitive.
FPL recognizes that the new EPA rules may make it cost -prohibitive for customers to continue
with the load share plan. Therefore, FPL is offering affected customers an opportunity to
discontinue participation in this program without incurring early termination charges if done by
December 31, 2014.
RECOMMENDATION:
After reviewing all options, IRCUD staff recommends the Board terminate the CICL-1 program
at the South County Wastewater and the South County RO facilities on or before December 31,
2014 to avoid any FPL early termination charges. Staff further recommends that the CICL-1
program continue at the West Regional Wastewater plant, and the North Hobart RO plant.
FUNDING:
There is no cost to terminate the contract. However, by eliminating the CICL-1 program from
the South County Wastewater and the South County RO plants the annual electrical
consumption bills will increase our annual operating expenses by $52,923.00/year. The
Water/Wastewater Plant's Electric accounts will be affected by this increase.
ACCOUNT NO.:
Description
Account Number
Amount
Wastewater Plant Electric
471-21836-044330
$10,828.39
Water Plant Electric
471-21936-044310
$42,094.61
ATTACHMENT(s):
Letter from FPL -termination Opportunity
Agreements dated 6/1993 & 11/1995
Web/EPA information
APPROVED FOR AGENDA:
By: Q 4A%' '."'
Joseh A. Baird, County Administrator
For: 17B1kk,,thJJ
Date
C:\Users\aobertautsch\Desktop\Agenda-FPL-FI NAL.doc
Indian River Co.
Appr.r.�ed
Date
Administration
eh%
f3ii%
Legalit
Budget
7
I ./‘4.A
Utilities
6%J
kttiallY
Utilities -Finance
CSC,
1 42.-01
183
FPL.
March 26, 2014
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOCC
1801 27th St
VERO BEACH FL 32960
ATTN: Terry Southard
Attention: 2014 rate termination opportunity
As we've discussed, recent changes in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules
require owners of generators to comply with new, more stringent emission standards.
Customers who rely on these generators to participate in Florida Power & Light
Company's commercial load management programs must comply with the new rules.
Compliance may require that a generator be retrofitted with additional emission controls
or may require the purchase of a new generator.
Participants in FPL's commercial load management programs receive significant
financial benefits from these programs and we believe most participants will find that
these savings allow for a relatively quick payback for the costs associated with any
EPA -required equipment upgrades.
Normally, these rates require long termination notices — five years for Commercial /
Industrial Load Control (CILC) and Commercial Demand Reduction (CDR) and three
years for Curtailable Service (CS) — for a customer to end participation.
However, we recognize that the new EPA rules may make it cost -prohibitive for some
customers to continue voluntary participation in these programs. We want to reasonably
accommodate customer requests to exit the rate due to the impact of the EPA's new
rules. Therefore, we are offering affected customers an opportunity to discontinue
participation in these rates anytime in 2014 without incurring early termination charges.
Please evaluate your decision very carefully. As stated, your financial savings from
participating in these rates are significant. But, if you believe termination is necessary,
please complete the enclosed form and return it to me no later than December 31, 2014.
Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Tom Kunz
1
184
FPL.
Florida Power & Light
Commercial / Industrial Load Control
Commercial / industrial Demand Reduction
Curtailable Service
2014 EPA Change in Regulations
Rate
Termination Opportunity and Request Form
Summary
Recent federal regulations require owners of generators to comply with new emission
standards adopted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The standards are
known as (EPA) 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart 7777 and 40 CFR part 60, subparts 1111
and JJJJ. These new rules impact reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) of
all sizes, including generators participating in utility -sponsored demand side
management programs. It is the responsibility of generator owners to review EPA's
RICE rules and ensure that their generators comply with these new rules. If you use a
generator to participate in FPL's voluntary Commercial/Industrial Load Control (CILC),
Commercial Demand Reduction (CDR) or Curtailable Service (CS) rates, you may be
affected by these new rules.
We encourage customers to carefully evaluate their specific circumstances with respect
to the new EPA regulations. Many customers are likely to find that continuing
participation in the CILC/CDR/CS rate will be cost-effective taking into account the
significant annual savings that these rates offer along with the costs of complying with
the new EPA regulations. But, for some customers, the costs of complying with the new
rules may not make continued participation cost-effective. The rates typically require
termination notice of five years for CILC or CDR and three years for CS. In light of the
significant compliance challenges the new rules may present to some customers, FPL is
providing customers an opportunity to exit the rate due to the impact of the new EPA
rules.
1
185
•
Customers who wish to exit the CILC/CDR/CS rates due to EPA rule compliance issues
may do so in 2014 without incurring early termination charges. If you determine that
termination is necessary, please submit this completed form to your FPL account
manager no later than December 31St, 2014.
If you do not elect the termination option, then:
1. Your service will continue on the currently applicable rate
2. Your generator must comply with all local, state and federal regulations; and
3. All other rights and obligations under FPL's CILC/CDR/CS rates, as specified in
the applicable agreement, remain in effect
Termination Request
The termination option allows you to discontinue participation in FPL's CILC/CDR/CS
rate upon receipt of the request by FPL. If the termination option below is chosen, your
FPL account will be returned to the applicable Firm rate and you will no longer be
subject to participating in FPL load control events.
❑ I choose to Terminate the FPL account(s) listed below from the CILC/CDR/CS rate
and be placed on an applicable Firm service rate effective with the next billing period
following the date of this request. Deadline for submitting this request is
December 31st 2014.
Signature Date
On Behalf Of
FPL Account(s) Number
2
186
1601
40
March 26, 2014
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOCC
1801 27th St
VERO BEACH FL 32960
ATTN: Terry Southard
Attention: 2014 rate termination opportunity
As we've discussed, recent changes in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules
require owners of generators to comply with new, more stringent emission standards.
Customers who rely on these generators to participate in Florida Power & Light
Company's commercial load management programs must comply with the new rules.
Compliance may require that a generator be retrofitted with additional emission controls
or may require the purchase of a new generator..
Participants in FPL's commercial load management programs receive significant
financial benefits from these programs and we believe most participants will find that
these savings allow for a relatively quick payback for the costs associated with any
EPA -required equipment upgrades.
Normally, these rates require long termination notices — five years for Commercial /
Industrial Load Control (CILC) and Commercial Demand Reduction (CDR) and three
years for Curtailable Service (CS) — for a customer to end participation.
However, we recognize that the new EPA rules may make it cost -prohibitive for some
customers to continue voluntary participation in these programs. We want to reasonably
accommodate customer requests to exit the rate due to the impact of the EPA's new
rules. Therefore, we are offering affected customers an opportunity to discontinue
participation in these rates anytime in 2014 without incurring early termination charges.
Please evaluate your decision very carefully. As stated, your financial savings from
participating in these rates are significant. But, if you believe termination is necessary,
please complete the enclosed form and return it to me no later than December 31, 2014.
Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Tom Kunz
•
i
187
FPL.
Florida Power & Light
Commercial / Industrial Load Control
Commercial / Industrial Demand Reduction
Curtailable Service
2014 EPA Change in Regulations
Rate
Termination Opportunity and Request Form
Summary
Recent federal regulations require owners of generators to comply with new emission
standards adopted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The standards are
known as (EPA) 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart 7777 and 40 CFR part 60, subparts 1111
and JJJJ. These new rules impact reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) of
all sizes, Including generators participating in utility -sponsored demand side
management programs. It is the responsibility of generator owners to review EPA's
RICE rules and ensure that their generators comply with these new rules. If you use a
generator to participate in FPL's voluntary Commercial/Industrial Load Control (CILC),
Commercial Demand Reduction (CDR) or Curtailable Service (CS) rates, you may be
affected by these new rules.
We encourage customers to carefully evaluate their specific circumstances with respect
to the new EPA regulations. Many customers are likely to find that continuing
participation in the CILC/CDR/CS rate will be cost-effective taking into account the
significant annual savings that these rates offer along with the costs of complying with
the new EPA regulations. But, for some customers, the costs of complying with the new
rules may not make continued participation cost-effective. The rates typically require
termination notice of five years for CILC or CDR and three years for CS. In Tight of the
significant compliance challenges the new rules may present to some customers, FPL is
providing customers an opportunity to exit the rate due to the impact of the new EPA
rules.
1
188
•
•
Customers who wish to exit the CILC/CDR/CS rates due to EPA rule compliance issues
may do so in 2014 without incurring early termination charges. If you determine that
termination is necessary, please submit this completed form to your FPL account
manager no Tater than December 31st, 2014.
If you do not elect the termination option, then:
1. Your service will continue on the currently applicable rate
2. Your generator must comply with all local, state and federal regulations; and
3. AD other rights and obligations under FPL's CILC/CDR/CS rates, as specified in
the applicable agreement, remain in effect
Termination Request
The termination option allows you to discontinue participation in FPL's CILC/CDR/CS
rate upon receipt of the request by FPL. If the termination option below is chosen, your
FPL account will be returned to the applicable Firm rate and you will no longer be
subject to participating in FPL Toad control events.
O 1 choose to Terminate the FPL account(s) listed below from the CILC/CDR/CS rate
and be placed on an applicable Firm service rate effective with the next billing period
following the date of this request. Deadline for submitting this request is
December 31st 2014.
Signature Date
On Behalf Of
FPL Account(s) Number
2
189
(,t7t
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL LOAD CONTROL PROGRAM AGREEMENT
•
•
618.1 a 35 ,3
RECEIVED
JUL 1 5 1993
This Agreement is made this a/ day of%,aciwir. . 1913, by and between
4.3D1/10 ROMre- CA -37y QD (hereinafter called the 'Customer'), located at I S"+O3 25 ST
<''"r'"t t.° "*1 1 in .,0U , Florida, and FLORIDA POWER . UGTIT COMPANY, a corporation
organized under the laws or the State of Florida (hereinafter called the 'Company').a
;G;n fro . .v• -•r '
WITNESSETH
Far and In consideration.of the mutual covenants and agreements expressed herein, the Company and the Customer agree as
follows:
1. The Company agrees to furnish and the Customer agrees to take electric seivice subject to the terms and conditions of
the company's O tnmerdal/Industrial Load Control Program Schedule CILC-1(hereiaafter clled'Scbedule C7LC71') as
currently approved or as may be modified from time to time by the Florida Public Service Commission (hereinafter called
the 'Commission) The Customer understands and agues that, whenever reference is made in this Agreement to Schedule
CILC-1, both parties intend to refer to Schedule CIL.0-1 as it may be modified from time to time. A copy of the
Company's presently approved' Schedule C1LC-11s attached beretp as Exhibit A and'bereby made an integral part of this
Agreement.
2. To establish the initial qualification for•service under Schedule CELC-1, the Customer must have had a maximum demand
during the previous twelve months of 200 kw greater than the 'Floss Demand" level specifiedin paragraph 7 below.
3. Service under Schedule CILC•1 will be subject to determinations trade under Commission Rule 25.6.0438,•FAG, Non -
Firm Service Terms and Conditions, or any other Commission determination. The Company and the Customer agree that
Schedule CILC-a may be modified or witbdrawn subject to determinations made under Comminion Rule 25-6.0438, F.A.C.,
Non -Flan Electric Service - Terms and Conditions, or any other Commission determination.
4. Prior to the Customer's receipt of service under Schedule CILC-1 the Customer must provide the Company access to
inspect any and/alPof the Customer's load control equipment, and must also have received approval from the Company
tbatsaid equlpineat is satisfactory to effect control of the Clutomer's load. The Customer shall be responsible for meeting
any applicable electrical code standards and legal requirements pertaining to the installation, maintenance and repair of
the equipment. The Customer shall be responsible for maintaining the Customer's load control equipment and shall
provide the Company access at any reasonable time to inspect the condition of the equipment for purposes of determining
wbetber the load control equipmentis satisfactory to effect control of•tbe Customer's controllable load. It is expressly
understood that the initial approval and tater inspections by the Company arenot far the purpose of, and are not to be
relied upon by the Customer for, determining whether the load control equipment has been adequately maintained oris
in compliance with any applicable electrical code standards or legal requirements.
•
5. The Customer agrees to perform the necessary changes by (date) ,7,,,4eares'?,10 allay control of a portion
of the Customer's load. Schedule C1LC-1 cannot apply earlier than this date unless agreed to by the Company.
Should the Customer fall to complete the above work by the above-specified date, or should the Customer tail to begin
taking service under Schedule CILC-1 during that year, this Agreement shall became null and void unless oil:letwlse agreed
by the Company. In order to receive service under Schedule CiLC-1, it shall be necessary for the Customer to execute
a new Agreement, which will again make the availability of service subject to the 'Limitation of Availability` in Schedule
CILC-1.
6. Upon completion of the installation of the load control equipment, a test of this equipment will be conducted• at a time
and date mutuan agreeable to the Company and the Customer. The test will consist of a period of load control of not
less than one hour. Effective upon the completion of the testing of the load control equipment, the Customer writ agree
to a''Firra Demand°. Service under Schedule d LC -1 cannot commence prior to the installation of load control equipment
and the successfitt completion of the test.
7. The Customer agrees to a 'Firm Demand' level of 0 kw during the periods when the Comparry is controlling the
Customer's service. This 'Firm Demand'•level shall not be exceeded during periods when the Company Ls controlling load.
Upon mutual agreement of the Company and the Customer, the Customer's Firm Demand may subsegyeutty be raised
or towered, as long as the change in the 'Firm Demand' level is not a result of a transfer of load from the'contioUable
portion of the Customer's Toad. The Customer shall notify the Company upon adding firm load.
•
1
190
•
8. In order to minimize the frequency and duration of interruptions under the CILC Program, the Company will attempt to
obtain reasonably available additional capacity and/or energy under the Continuity of Service Provision In Scbedule CILC-1.
The Company's obligation in this 'regard is no different than its obligation in general to purchase power to serve Its
Customers during a capacity shortage; in otherwords, the Company Isnot obligated to account for or otherwise reflect
in its generation and transmission planning'and construction the posslbWfty of providing rapacity and/or energy under the
Continuity of Service Provision. Customers:receiving service under Schedule CILC-1.may elect •to.eootinue taking service.
under the Continuity of Service Provision and- it will be provided only if such capacity and/or energy•can be obtained.by
the Company and can be transmitted and distributed to non-firm Customers without any impairment of the Company's
system or service to otber firm Customers, The Customer DM / does not elect to continue taking service under the
Continuity afService Provision. The Customer may countermand the election specified above by providing written notice
to the Company pursuant to the guidelines set forth in Schedule CII.0-1, The Company's obligations under this paragraph
are subject to the terms and conditions specifically set forth in Schedule CILC-1.
9. The Customer agrees to be responsible for the determination that all electrical equipment to be controlled is in good repair
and waking condition. The Company shall not be responsible for the repair, maintenance or replacement of tbe
Customer's equipment
10. If the Customer no longer wishes to receive any type of electric service from the Company, the Customer may terminate
this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days' advance writtennotice to the Company.
11. The Company may terminate this Agreement at any time If the Customer falls to comply with the terms and conditions
of Schedule CILC-1 or this Agreement. Prior to any such termination, the Company shall notify the Customer at least
ninety (90) days to advance and describe the Customer's failure to comply. The Company may then terminate this
Agreement at the end of the 90 -day notice period unless the Customer takes measures necessaty to eliminate, to the
Company's satfsiliction, the compliance deficiencies described by the Company. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if, at any
time during the 90 -day period, the Customer either refuses or Calls to initiate and pursue corrective action, tbe Company
shall be entitled to suspend forthwith the monthly billing under the Schedule CILC-1, bill the Customer under the
otherwise applicable firm service rate schedule and apply the rebilling and penalty provisions enumerated under TERM
OF SERVICE in Schedule CILC-1
12. The Customer agrees that the Company will not.be liable for any damages or Injuries that may occur as a result of control
of electric service pursuant to the terms of Schedule CILC-1 by remote control or otherwise.
13. This Agreement supersedes all previous agreements and representations, either written or oral, heretofore made between
the Company and the Customer with respect to matters herein contained. Any modifications) of this Agreement must
be approved, in writing, by the Company and approved by the Commission.
14. This Agreement may not be assigned by the Customer without the prior written consent of the Company.
15. This Agreement is subject to the Compaoy's 'General Rules and Regulations for Electric Service' and the Rules of the
Commission.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Customer and the Company have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day
and year fits[ above written.
Witnesses:
CUSTOMER
cap y, INDIAN RIVER
sied; /14,[411(./
Name: Terrance G. Pinto
Title: Director of Utility Services
FLORIDA POWER & LIG$!' OMPANY
Signed: cy.-z,
Name: &1f- HallSP r
Title:
(AP& /41
1
191
24 1341.te o,z
0-53-96-d0,2/6 6 1215 ��
COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL LOAD CONTROL PROGRAM AGREEMENT
•
. This Agreement is made this ' y2.. day of .s./irg,s, 1914' by and: between
_ TnAian River•. tadz IItil3es Dept (hereinafter called tbe'Customer'),.located atsouth County:
'//G Hi Florida, and FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY,a corporation Ih7.ve•••� `'in Vero Burch rporation
organized under the laws•of the State of F1ar da (hereinafter called the 'Company').
NNS 1 6 1995
P6
a)
For and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements expressed herein, the Company and the Customeragree as
follows:
1. The Company agrees to •famish and the Customer agrees to take electric service subject to the terms and conditions of
the Company's Commercial/Industrial Load Control program Schedule CU C1(hereinafter called 'Schedule dU.0-1') as
currently approved or as may be modified from time to time by the Florida Public Service Commission (hereinafter called
the 'Commission"). The Customer understands and agrees that, whenever reference ismade in this Agreement to Schedule
CMC -1, bot: parties intend to refer to Schedule CILC-1 as it may be. modified from time to time. A copy of the
Company's. presently approved Schedule CILC-1 is attached hereto as F'chibit A and hereby made an integral partof this
Agreement.
2. To establLsb the initial gira116ration for service under Schedule CILC-1, the Customer•must have had a maximum demand
during the previous twelve months or200.1tai greater that; the 'Firm Demand' level specified in paragraph7 below.
3. Service under Schedule CILC-1 will be subject to determinations made under Commission Rule 2S-6.0438; RAC., Nan -
Firm Service -Terms and Conditions, or any other Commission determination. The Company and the Customer agree Met
Schedule CILC-1 may be modified or withdrawn subjectto deterinlnatioas made under Commission Rule 25-6.4438, FAC.,
Non -Finn Electric Service - Terms 'and Conditions, or any other, Commission determination.
•
•
4. Prior to the- Customer's receipt of service under. Schedule CtLC-1 the Customer must provide the Company access to
inspect any and all of the Customer's load control equipment, and must also have received approval from the Company
that said equipment issatisfactory to effect control oftbe Customer's Ioad. The Customer shall be responsible for meeting
any applicable electrlcafcode-standards and legal requirements pertahrtog to the installation, maintenance and•repafr•of
the equipment_ The Customer shalt be responsible for maintaining the Customer's load santrol equipment and shall
provide the Compauy access atany reasonable time to inspect the condition of the equipmeat.for purposes of determining
whether the load -control equipment is satisfactory to effect control of the Customer's controllable load. It is expressly
understood that the initial approval and later inspections by the Company are not for the purpose of and are not to •tae
relied .upon by the Customer for, determining whether the load control equipment has been adequately maintained or Ls
In compliance with any applIcable electrical code standards or legal requirements.
3. The Customer agrees to perform the necessary changes by (date) July. 1997. ,.to allow control of a portion
of the Customer's toad Schedule CIL01 cannot apply earlier than Ibis date unless agreed to by the Company.
Should the Customer fall to complete the above work by the above-specified date, or should the Customer tali to begin
taking service under Schedule CILC1 during that year, this Agreement shall become null and void unless otbeidrdse agreed
by the Company. In order to•reeeive service under Schedule CILC-1, it shall be accessary fbr the Customer to execute
a new Agreement, which will again make the availability of service subject to the'Umitalon of Availability' In Schedule
CILC-L •
6. Upon completion of the installation of they toad control equipment, a test •of this.equipment will be cotiaucted. at a time
and date mutuallyiagrecable to•the•Company and the Ccsstbmer. The test will. cotssist of a period of toad control ofnot
cess than one bout.. Effective upon the completion. of the.testing of the load control equipment, the Customer will agree
to a 'Firm Dernant. Service under Schedule CILC-1.cannot commence pribr to the installation of load control equipment
and the successthi pamptet1on of the test.
•
7. The GLstomeragr `ee;, to a 'Fant Demand° level of 0 kw during thenods when the Com a
ntrolling the
Customer's service. Tilts 'Firm Demand" levai shall not be exceeded during periods when the Compaaoyyis cois.ntrolling load.
Upon mutual egreealent,of the Company and;the Customer, the Customer's Fina Demand may subsequently be raised
or lowered, as long is the,change in'the'Arm Demand' level is not a result of a transfer of load from the controllable
portion of the Customer's Iliad. The Customer, shall notify the Company upon adding firm load.
192
•
8. In order to minimize the frequency and duration of interruptions under the CILC Program, the Company'wpl attempt to
obtain reasonably available additional capacity and/or energy under the Continuity of Service Provision In Schedule CILC-1.
The Company's obligation in this regard is no different than Its obligation in general to purchase power to serve its
automeri during a rapacity shortage; in other words, the Company !s not obligated to account for or otherwise. reflect
in its generation and transmission planning and construction the possibility of providingcapacity and/ar•eaergy under the
Continuity of Service Provision. Customers receiving service under Schedule CILC-1 may elect.to coadnue'taking service
undertbe Continuity of Service Provision audit will betprovided only If such capacity and/or energy can be obtained by
the Company and can be transmitted and distributed'to non-firm CustorD r3 witkout any Imp
system or service to other firm Customers. The Customer gloms does�ot eet_ecpto continue't king service under the
Continuity of Service Provision. The Customer may countermand the elec5n specified above by providing tvritten notice
to the Company pursuant to the guidelines set forth In Schedule CILC-1. The Company's obligations under this paragrapb
are subject to the terms and conditions specifically set forth in S hedule CU.0-L
9. The Customer agrees to be responsible for the determination that all electrical equipment to be controlled is In good repair
and working condition. The Company shall not be responsible for the repair, maintenance or replacement of the
Customer's equipment.
10. If the Customer no longer wishes to receive any type of electric service from the Company, the Customer may terminate
this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days' advance written notice to the Company.
11. The Company may terminate this Agreement at any time, if the Customer falls to comply with the terms and conditions
of Schedule CILC-Lor this Agreement. Prior'to anysucb termination, the Company shall notify the Customer at least
ninety (90) days In advance and describe the Customer's failure to comply. The Company may then terminate this
Agreement at the end -of the 90 -day notice period unless the Customer takes measures necessary to eliminate, to the
Company's satisfaction, the compliance•defideades described by the Company. Notwithstanding the foregoing, it, ar'any
time during the 90 -day period, the Customer either refuses or fans to Initiate and pursue corrective action, the Company
shall be carded to suspend forthwith the monthly billing under the Schedule CILC-1, bill the Customer under the
otherwise applicable firm service rale schedule and apply the reblfllng•and penalty provWons enumerated under TERM
OF SERVICE in Schedule CILC-1.
12. The Customer agrees that the Company will not be liable for any damages or injuries that may occur as a result of control
of electric service pursuant to the terms of Schedule CILC-1 by remote control or otherwise.
13. This Agreement supersedes all previous agreements and representations, either written or oral, heretofore made between
the Company and the Customer with respect to matters herein contained ' Any modification(s) of this Agreement must
be approved, In writing, by the Company and approved by the Commission.
14. This Agreement may not be assigned by the Customer without the prior written consent of the Company.
15. This Agreement is subject to the Company's 'General Rules and Regulations far Electric Service° and the Rules of the
Commission.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Customer and the Company have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day
and year first above written
Witnesses.
. CUSTOMER
Company:r TAN ".ii`�:.ANTY
Signed:
Na'.. Kereth R. Mbchl<
Chairman
Title: Board of County Commissioners
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMP
Signed:
Name: /49411/e N 6;e6We f/
True: 2mearrele, e 2Vr C."
193
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE)1 New England 1 US EPA Page 1 of 5
w•Pa�e / �Cvh4.a�t:r�
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE)
What Are Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines or
RICE?
RICE use pistons that alternatively move back and forth to convert pressure
into rotating motion. They're commonly used at power and manufacturing
plants to generate electricity and to power pumps and compressors. RICE are
also used in emergencies to produce electricity and pump water for flood and
fire control. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently
finalized new air quality regulations that place requirements on owners and
operators ofaMdevart o ationary RICE.
Why Does EPA Regulate RICE?
RICE are common combustion sources that collectively can have a significant impact on air quality and pubic health.
The air toxics emitted from stationary engines include formaldehyde, acrolein, acetaldehyde and methanol. Exposure to
these air toxics may produce a wide variety of health difficulties for people induding irritation of the eyes, skin and
mucous membranes, and central nervous system problems. RICE engines also emit the conventional air pollutants
created when fuel Is bumed including carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and particulate matter (PM). The health effects of these pollutants indude a range of respiratory (breathing)
issues, especially asthma among children and seniors.
How Does EPA Regulate Stationary Engines?
EPA air quality requirements for stationary engines differ according to:
• whether the engine is new or existing, and
• whether the engine is located at an area source or fnaior source and whether the engine is a compression ignition
or a spark Ignition engine. "Spark Ignition" engines are further subdivided by power cycle - -i.e., two vs. four stroke,
and whether the engine Is "rich bum" (burning with a higher amount of fuel as compared to air) or lean bum" (less
fuel compared to air) engine.
Several regulations have expanded the number and type of stationary RICE that must comply with federal
requirements. These Include:
• National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines (RICE) — 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63. Subpart ZZZZ ("the RICE rule")
• New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)- Standards of Performance for Stationary Spark Ignition Internal
Combustion Engines (40 CFR Part 60 Subpart JJJJ - Scroll to reach the Subpart.) — "the Spark Ignition NSPS rule"
• Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal Combustion Engines (40 CFR Part
60 Subpart1111- Scroll to reach the Subpart.) — "the Compression Ignition NSPS rule"
Top of Page
RICE Rule Applicability
The RICE rule Does Not Apply tog
1. Motor vehicles, or to non -road engines, which are:
• self-propelled (tractors, bulldozers)
• propelled while performing their function (lawnmowers)
• portable or transportable (has wheels, skids, carying handles, dolly, trailer or platform). Note: a portable non -
road engine becomes stationary if it stays In one location for more than 12 months (or full annual operating
period of a seasonal source)
2. Existing emergency engines located at residential, institutional, or commerdal area sources, used or obligated to
be available 515 hr/yr for emergency demand response, and not used for local reliability. Engine must meet
Subpart ZZZZ emergency engine operational requirements:
• Unlimited use for emergencies (e.g., power outage, fire, flood)
• Emergency engines may operate for 100 hryr for any combination of the following:
1. maintenance/testing;
2. emergency demand response (in situations when a blackout is Imminent — either the reliability coordinator has
declared an Energy Emergency Alert Level 2 as defined In the North American Reliability Corporation (NERC)
Reliability Standard; or there is a deviation of voltage or frequency of 6 percent or greater below standard
voltage or frequency);
3. 50 hr/yr of the 100 hr/yr allocation can be used for:
http://wwvv.epa.gov/regionl/rice/
http://www.epa. gov/region lbice/
• RICE Rule Applicability
• Determining RICE Rule Compliance
Requirements
• Emission Standards
• Determining RICE New Source
Performance Standards Compliance
Requirements
No Events Scheduled.
EPA Finalizes Revisions to Clean Air
Standards for Stationary Engines
RICE NESHAP Home pas
Presentations on RICE Requirements
from 2013 Webinars
• EPA's Air Quality Regulations for
RICE: Overview of 2013
Amendments (PDFI (61 op. 1 am.
About PDF)
• EPA's Air Quality Regulations for
RICE: Area Sources (POFI;42 pp. 1
Ma, about PDFI
• How to Comply with EPA
Regulations for RICE: Overview &
Stack Testing (PDF)115 pp, 793 r,
about POF)
• )low to Comply with EPA
Regulations for RICE: A Step by
Step Guide (PAF) 116 PP. 666 K, plod
Sample Request Form for Extension of
Compliance (PDF) (5 pp. 33 K. about PPF)
(due 120 days before compliance date, or
by January 3, 2013 for those Compression
ignition (diesel) RICE with a RICE
NESHAP compliance date of May 3, 2013)
Synopsis of Proposed Changes to RICE
NESHAP (P13914 pp, 33 K. About POf1
PA Combustion Portal
EPA's New Combustion Portal covers
requirements for a variety of combustion
rules and regulations
Samole Initial Notification- Spark Ignition
(2pp. 61 K. MS Wood)
Due February 16, 2011 for existing non-
emergency engines with emission limits
Samde Initial Notification- Compression
ignition (3 pp. 601:. MS Wo) -I)
Due August 31, 2010 for existing non-
emergency engines with emission limits
Notification of Compliance Status 15 pp. 70
K. MS Woolf
Due 60 days after completing a required
performance test, or due 30 days after
completing a compliance demonstration
which does not include a performance
test.
Regulation Navigation Tool
Applicability Flowchart for Table of
Requirements (2021:. MS Powa)Puinq
Table of Requirements (45 K. M6 Ev:ell
10/17/2014
194
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) I New England! US EPA Page 2 of 5
1. non -emergency situations if no financial arrangement
2, local retiabffiy as part of a financial arrangement with another entity if specific criteria met (existing RICE at
area sources of HAP only)
3. peak shaving until May 3, 2014 (existing RICE at area sources of HAP only) if part of a peak shaving (load
management) program with the local distribution system operator and the power is provided only to the
facility or to support the local distribution system
The RICE rule Applies to;
1. Engines >500 Horsepower (HP) at major source of HAP:
Existing engines If constructed before December 19, 2002
New engines if constructed on or after December 19, 2002
Reconstructed engines if reconstruction began on or after December 19, 2002
2. Engines 5500 HP located at major source of HAP and engines of all horsepower located at an area source
of HAP:
Existing engines if constructed before June 12, 2006
New engines if constructed on or after June 12, 2006
Reconstructed engines if reconstruction began on or after June 12, 2006
Top of Page
Determining RICE Rule Compliance Requirements
RICE Rule requirements are complex — but they are similar for several groups of engines, as summarized In the tables
below.
Key Definitions for Terns Used in Compliance Summary Tables Below:
• C): Compression Ignition (diesel)
SI: Spark Ignition (gas including natural gas, landfill gas, gasoline, propane, etc.)
• 2SLB: 2 -stroke lean bum
• 4SLB: 4 -stroke lean burn
• 4SRB: 4 -stroke rich burn
• la: 4 -stroke
• LFG/DG: landfill gas/digester gas
• ULSD: Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel
Notes:
• 2 -stroke: power cycle completed in 1 revolution of crankshaft
• 4 -stroke: power cycle completed in 2 revolutions of crankshaft
• Lean burn: higher air/fuel ratio (fuel -lean)
• Rich bum: lower air/fuel ratio (fuel -rich)
rhti)itf4 Siif:;:b�yt:".
Existing non-emeruencv:
• CI 5100 HP at major source
• CI >300 HP at area source
• SI 100500 HP at major source
• Existing nonemergency SI 4SLB/4SRB >500 HP at area
source used >24 hours/year and not in remote area
Siihr tegory
Existing emergencv/black start:
• <100 HP at major source
• 5500 HP at major source
http://www.epa.gov/regionl/rice/
Implementation Question and Answer
Document for NESHAP for Stationary
RICE (PDF) (f ; pp, Lir:, about PDF)
Woifi
EPA New England is eager to work with
trade associations, municipalities,
community groups and others to provide
Information to any sources affected by
these new regulations. Please contact us
to discuss your Interest In organizing a
workshop in your area or a webinar
(Internet training) for your members or
clients.
EPA contacts:
Roy Crystal (Crystal.Royaapa.gov),
Compliance Assistance Provider for the
RICE Rule , 617-918-1745
Susan lance' (Lancey.SusanCgepa.gov),
Region I Air Toxics Coordinator. 617-918-
1656
Connecticut
sine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
• Initial emission performance test
• Subsequent performance testing every 8,760 hours of operation or 3 years for engines
>500 HP (5 years if limited use)
• Operating limitations - catalyst pressure drop and inlet temperature for engines >500 HP
• Notifications
• Semiannual compliance reports (annual if limited use)
Existing non -emergency CI >300 HP:
• Ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD)
• Crankcase emission control requirements
• Initial and annual catalyst activity checks
• High temperature engine shutdown or continuously monitor catalyst inlet temperature
• Notifications
• Semiannual compliance reports
Conti)ti,i;f t:i; �.c<I llifritti•itf5
• Operate/maintain engine & control device per manufacturer's Instructions or owner -developed
maintenance plan
• May use oil analysis program instead of prescribed oil change frequency
• Emergency engines must have hour meter and record hours of operation
10/17/2014
195
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) 1 New England 1 US EPA
• All at area source
Existing non -emergency:
• <100 HP at major source
• CI 5300 HP at area source
• SI 5500 HP at area source
• SI 2SLB >500 HP at area source
• SI LFG/DG >500 HP at area source
• SI 4SLB/4SRB >500 HP at area source used 524
hours/year or in remote area
)=xistina non -emergency:
• SI 4SRB >500 HP at major source
New non -emergency:
• SI 2SLB >500 HP at major source
• SI 4SLB >250 HP at major source
• SI 4SRB >500 HP at major source
• CI >500 HP at major source
Page 3 of 5
• Keep records of maintenance
• Notifications not required
• Reporting and ULSD for emergency engines used for emergency demand response or local
reliability
Cc rt'.ii.:'.,..i RD(, : tHi ,..
• Initial emission performance test
• Subsequent performance testing semiannually (can reduce frequency to annual)
(subsequent performance testing required for 4SRB engine complying with formaldehyde
% reduction standard if engine is 55000 HP)
• Operating limitations - catalyst pressure drop and inlet temperature
• Notifications
• Semiannual compliance reports
E:niji;i,: 5 yoiy ..; i iliatm_e R;:q:iiie+'n;=ii:>
• New emergency/limited use >500 HP at major source
• New non -emergency LFG/DG >500 HP at major source
Top of Page
• Initial notification
• Reporting and ULSD for emergency engines used for emergency demand response or local
reGabitity
• Initial notification
• Monitor/record fuel usage daily
• Annual report of fuel usage
Emission Standards: Existing RICE at Major Sources
Non -emergency Emergency
CI SI 2SLB SI 4SLB SI 4SRB SI LFG/DG
<100 Change oil and filter and inspect cleaner (CI) or spark plugs (SI) every 1,000 hours of operation or annually; inspect hoses and Change oil/filter &
belts every 500 hours of operation or annually inspect hoses/belts
every 500 hours or
100-300 230 ppm CO 225 ppm CO 47 ppm CO 10.3 ppm CH2O 177 ppm CO annually; Inspect ped air
300-500 49 ppm CO or 70% CO cleaner (Cl) or spark
reduction plugs (SI) every 1,000
hours or annually
>500 23 ppm CO or 70% CO No standards No standards 350 ppb CH2O or 76% No standards No standards
reduction CH2O reduction
Note: Existing limited use engines >500 HP at major sources do not meet any emission standards. Existing black start engines 5500 HP at major sources must meet work
practice standards.
HP
Emission Standards: Existing RICE Located at Area Sources
Engine siibc:metjor,'
Non -emergency
CI SI 2SLB SI 4S in remote areas SI 4S not in remote SI LFG/DG
areas
Emergency or Black Start
5300 Change oNfilter A Inspect Change oilfilter, Change olVfilter, Inspect Change oll/filter, Inspect Change ofhtilter, inspect Change oil/fitter & inspect
air cleaner every 1,000 inspect spark plugs, & spark plugs, & inspect spark plugs, & inspect spark plugs, & inspect hoses/belts every 500 hours
hours or annually; Inspect inspect hosesfoelts hoses/belts every 1,440 hoses/belts every 1,440 hoses/belts every 1,440 or annually; Inspect air
cleaner (CI) or spark plugs
http://www.epa.gov/regionl/rice/
10/17/2014
196
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE)1 New England 1 US EPA Page 4 of 5
hoses/belts every 500 every 4,320 hours or hours of operation or hours of operation or hours of operation or (SI) every 1,000 hours or
hours or annually annually annually annually annually annually
300- 49 ppm CO or 70% CO
500 reduction'
>500 23 ppm CO or 70% CO
reduction
Change oil/filter, inspect if engine used >24
spark plugs, & inspect hrs/yr
hoses/belts every 2,160
hours of operation or 4SLB; Install oxidation
annually catalyst
4SRB: Install NSCR
Emission Standards: New RICE Located at Major Sources
Non -emergency Emergency
CI SI 2SLB SI 4SLB SI 4SRB SI LFG/DG
<250 Comply with CI NSPS Comply with SI NSPS Comply with SI NSPS Comply with SI NSPS Comply with Si Comply with CI/SI
NSPS NSPS
250- 14 ppm CH2O or 93% CO
500 reduction
>500 580 ppb CH2O or 70% CO 12 ppm CH2O or 58% CO
reduction
350 ppb CH2O or 76% CH2O No standards No standards
reduction reduction
Note: New limited use engines >500 HP at major sources do not meet any emission standards under the NESHAP.
New RICE Located at Area Sources: meet Stationary Engine NSPS
• CI: part 60 subpart 1111
• SI: part 60 subpart JJJ
Top o1 Paoe
Determining RICE New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) Compliance Requirements
The NSPS rules indude two alternative compliance approaches:
1. Operators comply by purchasing an engine certified by the manufacturer.
2. Operators comply by meeting emission Iimks for an engine not certified by the manufacturer.
If you own or operate a Compression Ignition engine you are subject to the NSPS at 40 CFR 60, Subpart IIII If the engine was:
• Constructed (ordered) after July 11, 2005, and manufactured after April 1, 2006 (July 1, 2006 for fire pump engines), or
• Modified or reconstructed after July 11, 2005.
• Except for engines > 30 liters per cylinder (t/cyl) displacement, performance testing Is not required - you achieve compliance by:
• purchasing a new engine that has been certified by EPA, and
• Installing, configuring, operating, and maintaining the engine per the manufacturer's instructions.
If you own or operate a Spark Ignition engine you are subject to the NSPS at 40 CFR 60, Subpart JJJJ If the engine was:
• Constructed (ordered) after 6/12/2006 and the engine is
• >500 HP manufactured on/after 7/1/2007 (except lean bum 5005HP<1.350)
• leen bum 5005HP<1,350 manufactured on/after 1/1/2008
• <500 HP manufactured on/after 7/1/2008
• emergency >25 HP manufactured on/after 1/1/2009
• modified/reconstructed after 6/12/2006.
• For certain Spark Ignition engines manufactured on/after July 1, 2008, the engine manufacturer is required to certify that the engine meets emission limits. As the
owner or operator of the engine you can comply by purchasing a certified engine, and operating it according to manufacturers Instructions. These SI engine types
include:
5 25 HP,
• gasoline engines >25 HP, and
• rich bum LPG engines >25 HP.
• For other Spark Ignition engines. EPA made it optional for the manufacturer to certify that their engines meet the applicable emission limits. Owners or operators can
comply either by purchasing an engine that the manufacturer has voluntarily certified, or by conducting performance testing to demonstrate that the engine meets the
applicable emission limits.
http://www.epa.gov/regionl/rice/ 10/17/2014
s
•
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) I New England 1 US EPA Page 5 of
Tm ar Panp
Loa updaled on Friday, Seplomber 12.2014
"area source' means any stationary source of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) that Is net a major source. (An 'area source' has the potential to emit less than 10 toms annually of a
single hazardous alr pollutant (HAP) or Zeas than 25 Ions annually of any combination al HAP.)
o "major source" emits ar has tho potential to emit 10 tons per year or more of any hazardous elr pollutant (HAP) or 25 tons per year or more of arty combination of HAP.
diesel engines, with combustion achieved by compressing the fuel, and burning diesel fuel
using spark plugs for IgnitIon• burning gasoline, and also other fuels, Including natural gas, landfill gas, digester gas, propane and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG).
http://www.epa.gov/regionl/rice/
10/14/2014 198
CONSENT: November 18, 2014
Office 0 fi
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Rcingold, County _Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Depute' County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, :\ssistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM:ttt
William K. DeBraal — Deputy County Attorney
THROUG . Manny Cabo — Telecommunications ManagerCy."--•
SUBJEC Lease Extension and First Amendment to Ground Space Lease for Tower
Located at 3925 65th Street — Bellsouth Ground Lease
November 12, 2014
• Black Dot Wireless, as agent for Florida 2B MPL Tower Holdings LLC via its attorney-in-
fact CCATT LLC has requested to extend a ground space lease located at 3925 65th
Street, Vero Beach, Indian River County. You may recall that at its meeting of July 8,
2014, the Board approved a ground space Lease Amendment for Sprint located 3955
65th Street at the same tower site.
The original tenant, Bellsouth Mobility, has leased ground space from the County at the
65th Street tower since August 1990. Over the years, the cellular industry has seen
frequent mergers and acquisitions which have resulted in Florida 2B MPL Tower
Holdings LLC (Florida 2B MPL) as the current owner of the tower while the County is
the owner of the land underneath the tower. The current lease is set to expire in
January, 2016, and Florida 2B MPL currently pays $17,954.02 per year in rent. Staff
has been approached by Florida 2B MPL offering to renew the lease for two additional
5 -year periods. Effective January, 2016 the annual rent will be increased to $18,702.10.
The rental amount will increase 4% each year thereafter until the termination of the
agreement in 2026. The proposed Lease Extension and First Amendment is attached
to this memorandum. A 4% annual increase is similar to other lease agreements and
their renewals and was the increase in the original 1997 lease.
FOR
• ^: T Imr. - .CONSEN'
Cc_. :NI ATTORNEYi
199
•
•
Florida 2B MPL Ground Lease Renewal
November 12, 2014
2IPage
FUNDING:
There is no funding associated with this item.
OPTIONS:
1. Approve the Lease Extension and First Amendment to the ground space lease
with the annual 4% increase in rental fees.
2. Reject the Lease Extension and First Amendment and direct staff to renegotiate
its terms.
3. Reject the Lease Extension and First Amendment and allow the lease to expire
in January, 2016.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board select Option 1 and approve the Lease Extension and
First Amendment to the ground space lease with the 4% annual rental increase and
authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Lease Extension and First Amendment and
Memorandum of Lease Extension and First Amendment on behalf of the Board, and
any other documents necessary to effectuate said amendment.
Attachments
Copy to Manny Cabo
2
200
Cell Site Name: TC VERO
Business Unit No.: 840753
Fixed Asset No.: 10023046
Market: South Florida
•ddress: 3925 65th Street, Vero Beach, FL
LEASE EXTENSION AND FIRST AMENDMENT
This Agreement for Lease Extension and First Amendment ("First Amendment") entered into on the
day of , 2014, by Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, 1801
27th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960 ("Lessor"), and Florida 2B MPL Tower Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, by and through its attorney-in-fact CCATT LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
having a mailing address of 2000 Corporate Drive, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317 (hereinafter referred to as
"Tenant").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Lessor and Bellsouth Mobility Inc. ("Original Tenant") entered into that certain Lease
Agreement dated August 14, 1990 (as amended and assigned, .the "Agreement"), whereby Lessor leased to
Original Tenant a portion of that property (said leased portion being the "Premises") located at 3925 65th Street,
in the City of Vero Beach, County of Indian River, State of Florida, commonly referred to as the Winter Beach
Tower, which property underlying the Premises (the "Property") is described in Book 896, Page 995 in the
Indian River County Register of Deeds Office ("Registry"), together with those certain access, utility and/or
maintenance easements and/or rights of way granted in the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, as Bellsouth was the original Tenant on the 1990 lease, but over the ensuing 23 years, the
Eliellular industry has seen frequent mergers and acquisitions which have resulted in Florida 2B MPL Tower
Holdings LLC as the current Tenant of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Florida 2B MPL Tower Holdings LLC is now the lawful and responsible Tenant under the
terms of the Agreement and this First Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the term of the Agreement between Tenant and Lessor ("the Parties") will expire in
January 20, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend the Agreement, and amend the Agreement to provide for a 4%
annual increase in rental payments made by Tenant; and
WHEREAS, Lessor and Tenant desire to amend the Agreement to modify the notice section thereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms and promises stated herein, and other good
and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Lessor and Tenant
agree to amend and extend the Agreement as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated as if fully restated herein.
2. Paragraph four (4) of the Agreement is hereby amended to provide for two (2) additional five (5) year
tension terms commencing on January 21, 2016 (each five year extension is hereinafter referred to as a
enewal Term"). The initial term of the Agreement and all Renewal Terms are collectively referred to as the
1
201
"Lease Term". The Lease Term shall automatically be extended for each successive Renewal Term unless
Lessee notifies Lessor of its intention not to renew at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the then
iurrent five year term. Lessor agrees and acknowledges that except that as such permitted use or other rights
iay be amended herein, Tenant may continue to use and exercise its rights under the Agreement as permitted
prior to the commencement of the two additional extension terms.
3. Paragraph five (5) of the Agreement is hereby amended to provide for a new rental rate payable annually
in advance in accordance with the following schedule:
Start Date — End Date
Annual Rental
January 21, 2016 — January 20, 2017
$18,702.10
January 21, 2017 — January 20, 2018
$19,450.18
January 21, 2018 — January 20, 2019
$20,228.19
January 21, 2019 — January 20, 2020
$21,037.32
January 21, 2020 — January 20, 2021
$21,878.81
January 21, 2021 — January 20, 2022
$22,753.96
January 21, 2022 — January 20, 2023
$23,664.12
January 21, 2023 — January 20, 2024
$24,610.69
January 21, 2024 — January 20, 2025
$25,595.12
January 21, 2025 — January 20, 2026
$26,618.92
For the avoidance of doubt, Tenant may offset future rent by any amount paid to Lessor in excess of rent due
and payable under the Agreement as amended hereby.
•
4. Paragraph 18 of the Agreement is hereby amended to reflect the changes in addresses of the Parties:
Tenant: Florida 2B MPL Tower Holdings LLC
ATTN Network Legal
208 S. Akard Street
Dallas, Texas, 75202-4206
With a copy to:
CCATT LLC
Attn: Legal Dept.
2000 Corporate Drive
Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317
Lessor: Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
Attention: Telecommunications Division
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
i
Expansion of the Leased Premises. Lessor grants, to the extent practicable and on a space available
basis, the Tenant the right to enlarge the Leased Premises or the Lessor shall make space available on
the property for Tenant so that Tenant or its authorized sublessees may implement any necessary
2
202
•
modifications, supplements, replacements, refurbishments, or expansions to the Tenant's
communications fixtures and related equipment, cables, accessories and improvements, tower,
associated antennas, equipment shelters or cabinets, or any equipment related thereto (collectively, the
"Communications Facility"), or for any other reasons, as determined by Tenant in its sole discretion.
Should Tenant exercise the right to expand the Leased Premises, Tenant will pay and Lessor will accept
as additional rental under the Agreement an amount equal to the then current rent calculated on a per
square foot basis as multiplied by each additional square foot added to the Leased Premises. Upon
notice to Lessor, a description and/or depiction of the modified Leased Premises ground will become
part of the Agreement without any additional action on the part of Tenant and Lessor; however, at the
request of Tenant, the parties will execute a Memorandum of Lease in recordable form memorializing
the modification of the ground space of Lessor's Property, which either party may record at its option.
6. 24/7 Access. Lessor hereby grants to Tenant, its authorized sublessees, and to any public or private
utility serving Tenant's Communications Facility or related equipment, access to the Leased Premises
and to and over the Property twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week (24/7), including but not
limited to, access from an accessible, open and maintained public road to the Premises, for the
installation, maintenance, repair, modification, alteration, or refurbishment of the Communications
Facility or any equipment related to such Communications Facility as such access is deemed necessary
by Tenant, in its sole discretion, without the requirement of notice by Tenant to Lessor. In the event that
any public or private utility serving Tenant's Communications Facility is unable to use the access
provided to Tenant, the Lessor hereby agrees to grant additional access to Tenant or to such public or
private utility, for the benefit of Tenant, at no cost to Tenant and pursuant to the same terms and
conditions as noted above. The terms and conditions regarding access in the Agreement remain in full
force and effect, except as modified by this paragraph.
••
•
Sale of Property.
(a) Lessor shall not be prohibited from the selling, leasing or use of any of the Property or the
Surrounding Property except as provided below.
(b) If Lessor, at any time during the Term of the Agreement, decides to rezone or sell, subdivide or
otherwise transfer all or any part of the Leased Premises, or all or any part of the Property or
Surrounding Property, to a purchaser other than Tenant, Lessor shall promptly notify Tenant in writing,
and such rezoning, sale, subdivision or transfer shall be subject to the Agreement and Tenant's rights
hereunder. In the event of a change in ownership, transfer or sale of the Property, within ten (10) days
of such transfer, Lessor or its successor shall send the documents listed below in this subsection (b) to
Tenant. Until Tenant receives all such documents, Tenant shall not be responsible for any failure to
make payments under the Agreement and reserves the right to hold payments due under the Agreement.
i. Old deed to Property
ii. New deed to Property
iii. Bill of Sale or Transfer
iv. Copy of current Tax Bill
v. New IRS Form W-9
vi. Completed and Signed AT&T Payment Direction Form
vii. Full contact information for new Lessor including phone number(s)
(c) Lessor agrees not to sell, lease or use any areas of the Property or Surrounding Property
for the installation, operation or maintenance of other wireless communications facilities if such
installation, operation or maintenance would interfere with Tenant's Permitted Use or communications
3
203
equipment as determined by radio propagation tests performed by Tenant in its sole discretion. Lessor
or Lessor's prospective purchaser shall reimburse Tenant for any costs and expenses of such testing. If
the radio frequency propagation tests demonstrate levels of interference unacceptable to Tenant, Lessor
shall be prohibited from selling, leasing or using any areas of the Property or the Surrounding Property
for purposes of any installation, operation or maintenance of any other wireless communications facility
or equipment.
(d) The provisions of this Section shall in no way limit or impair the obligations of Lessor
under the Agreement, including interference and access obligations.
8. Rental Stream Offer. If at any time after the date of this First Amendment, Lessor receives a bona fide
written offer from a third party seeking an assignment or transfer of the rental payments associated with
the Agreement ("Rental Stream Offer"), Lessor shall immediately furnish Tenant with a copy of the
Rental Stream Offer. Tenant shall have the right within ninety (90) days after it receives such copy to
match the Rental Stream Offer and agree in writing to match the terms of the Rental Stream Offer. Such
writing shall be in the form of a contract substantially similar to the Rental Stream Offer. If Tenant
chooses not to exercise this right or fails to provide written notice to Lessor within the ninety (90) day
period, Lessor may assign the right to receive rental payments pursuant to the Rental Stream Offer,
subject to the terms of the Agreement. If Lessor attempts to assign or transfer rental payments without
complying with this Section, the assignment or transfer shall be void.. Tenant shall not be responsible
for any failure to make payments under the Agreement and reserves the right to hold payments due
under the Agreement until Lessor complies with this Section.
9. Memorandum of Lease. Either party will, at any time upon fifteen (15) days prior written notice from
the other, execute, acknowledge and deliver to the other a recordable Memorandum of Lease
substantially in the form of the Attachment 1. Either party may record this memorandum at any time, in
its absolute discretion.
10. Except as amended herein, the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect. To the extent of any conflict between the terms of this First Amendment and the terms of the
Agreement, the terms of this First Amendment shall control.
4
204
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Lease Extension and First Amendment is executed by the authorized
Sepresentatives of the parties, as of the day and year first above written.
FLORIDA 2B MPL TOWER HOLDINGS LLC
A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY CO.
BY: CCATT LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY
ITS: ATTORNEY IN FACT
BY:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
(printed HPlen Smith , Chairman
(title) Real Estate Transaction Manager Board of County Commissioners
WITNESS: Cf:Wz'"? `i►%tIi
WITNESS:
•
oyed as a form
fficiency
William K. DeBraal
Deputy County Attorney
•
5
Approved by the BCC:
ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court
And Comptroller
BY:
Deputy Clerk of Court
J\c-k
sep�aird, County Administrator
205
•
Prepared by:
Black Dot Wireless
27271 Las Ramblas, Suite 300
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
Return to:
CCATT LLC
2000 Corporate Drive
Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317
ATTACHMENT 1
p
.. Fz .4
LEAS XTENSI D
This Memorandum of
, 2014, by
mailing address at 18.01 27th St
Oower Holdings LLC, ,Delaware 1
'ted liability comps ha ting a
4>:A.
(hereinafter referred to as " ant ").
>irst Amendment ("Memorandum") is entered into on this day of
ounty, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, having a
e ach ,,FL 2960 (hereinafter referred to as "Lessor") and Florida 2B MPL
.�mpany, by and through its attorney-in-fact CCATT LLC, a Delaware
nag a. dress of 2000 Corporate Drive, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317
T AMENDMENT
WHE_
August
property (s
Indian River,
(the "Property") is
together with those ce
and
ellso M ility Inc. ("Original Tenant") entered into that certain Lease Agreement dated
d: assign d, the "Agreement"), whereby Lessor leased to Original Tenant a portion of that
eing_ . e "Premises") located at 3925 65th Street, in the City of Vero Beach, County of
lorida, co ::'.:nly referred to as the Winter Beach Tower, which property underlying the Premises
in Book 896, Page 995 in the Indian River County Register of Deeds Office ("Registry"),
s, utility and/or maintenance easements and/or rights of way granted in the Agreement ;
WHEREAS, Florida 2B MPL Tower Holdings LLC is now the lawful and responsible Tenant under the terms of the
Agreement and the First Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the term of the Agreement between Tenant and Lessor ("the Parties") will expire in January 20,
2016, and the Parties entered into that certain Lease Extension and First Amendment of approximately even date herewith
("First Amendment"), of which this is a memorandum, to extend the Agreement, and to make certain other changes, as set
forth below.
•
1. The Agreement commenced and has been in effect since January 21, 1991 and the parties agree to continue
the Agreement with two (2) additional five (5) year extension terms commencing on January 21, 2016.
2. The portion of the land being leased to Tenant (the "Leased Premises") is described in Exhibit 1 annexed
hereto.
6
206
3. If Lessor, at any time during the Term of the Agreement, decides to rezone or sell, subdivide or otherwise
transfer all or any part of the Premises, or all or any part of the Property or Surrounding Property, to a
purchaser other than Tenant, Lessor shall promptly notify Tenant in writing, and such rezoning, sale,
subdivision or transfer shall be subject to the Agreement and Tenant's rights hereunder.
4. Lessor agrees not to sell, lease or use any areas of the Property or Surrounding Property for the installation,
operation or maintenance of other wireless communications facilities if such installation, operation or
maintenance would interfere with Tenant's Permitted Use or communications equipment as determined by
radio propagation tests performed by Tenant in its sole discretion. Lessor or Lessor's prospective purchaser
shall reimburse Tenant for any costs and expenses of such testing. If the radio frequency propagation tests
demonstrate levels of interference unacceptable to Tenant, Lessor shall be prohibited from selling, leasing or
using any areas of the Property or the Surrounding Property for purposes of any installation, operation or
maintenance of any other wireless communications facility or equipment.
5. If at any time after the date of the First Amendment, Lessor receives a bon
party seeking an assignment or transfer of the Rent payments associated •
Offer"), Lessor shall immediately furnish Tenant with a copy o {? . Ren
the right within ninety (90) days after it receives such copy
writing to match the terms of the Rental Stream Offer. Su
substantially similar to the Rental Stream Offer. If Tenant choos
written notice to Lessor within the ninety (90) day period,
payments pursuant to the Rental Stream Offer, subject to th
assign or transfer Rent payments without complying with t
void. Tenant shall not be responsible for any failure to
right to hold payments due under the Agreement until Le
en offer from a third
t ("Rental Stream
ant shall have
and agree in
of a contract
t or fails to provide
t to receive Rent
. If Lessor attempts to
ent or transfer shall be
greement and reserves the
6. This Memorandum contains only selected provisi
full text of the Agreement and the First
incorporated herein by this refere
Memorandum, the terms and co
may be executed in any numbe
together shall constitute one and the
have the same meanings as defined in the
dment, and reference is made to the
terms and conditions, which are
ovied in the First Amendment and this
in full force and effect. This instrument
shall be deemed an original and which
alized terms used but not defined herein shall
r he Agreement, as applicable.
207
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amended Memorandum as of the day and year first above
written.
•
FLORIDA 2B MPL TOWER HOLDINGS LLC
A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY CO.
BY: CCATT LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY
ITS: ATTORNEY IN FACT
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY: BY:
(printed name) Peter D. 0
(title) Board of Co
WITNESS:
WITNESS:
Approve
Clerk of Court
Clerk of Court
Spproved as to form and legal sufficie
1
William K. DeBraal 4
Deputy County Attorney
•
8
aird, County Administrator
208
LESSOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
•
STATE OF )
SS.
COUNTY OF )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that .,''" : is the person who
appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this ins
was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the
, to be the free and vol
mentioned in the instrument.
DATED:
rum
stated that said person
•
9
of
and purposes
209
•
STATE OF
TENANT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
COUNTY OF
I certify that the following person(s) personally appeared be
that he/she voluntarily signed the foregoing Memorandum of F'
purpose stated therein and in the capacity indicated: Florida 2B
liability company, by its Attorney in Fact, CCATT L V''-` ►�a�:
Date:
[SEAL OR STAMP]
, its
knowledging to me
ase Agreement for the
LC, a Delaware limited
im " d liability company, by
10
210
Exhibit 1 to Memorandum of Lease
Leased Premises
The Leased Premises is located on a portion of the Property described and/or depicted as follows:
The East one-half of the Northwest onc-quarter of the Southwest one-
quarter of Section 10, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, Indian River
County, Florida.
•
LEGAL DESCRPTION
LEASE PARCEL
A parcel of land being a portion of the East one-half of the
Northwest one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 10.
Township 32 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida,
being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of the Northwest one—quarter
of the Southwest one-quarter of said Section 10, proceed
5 00^26'30" W along the East line of the Northwest one-quarter of
the Southwest one-quarter of said Section 10 a distance of 1,020.53
feet: thence N 89033'30" W a distance of 274.35 feet to the Point of
Beginning: thence S 00°26'30" W a distance of 50.00 feet; thence
N S9°04'59' W a distance of 58.00 feet: thence N 00°26'30" E a dis-
tance of 50.00 feet; thence S 89°04'59" E a distance of 58.00 feet
to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 2,899.9•square feet, more or less.
11
211
•
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ACCESS/ANCHOR EASEMENT
A parcel of land being a portion of the East one-half of the Northwest
one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 10, Township 32
South, Range 39 East, Indian River County. Florida, being more particu-
larly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest •
1/4 of said Section 10. proceed N 89°04'59' W along the North line of the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 10 a distance of 274.36 feet; thence S 00°26'30' W
a distance of 40.00 feet to a point on the South right-of-way line of 65th
Street (AKA South Winter Beach Road), said point also being the Point of
.Beginning; thence .S 00°26'30" W a distance of 667.81 feet; thence
S 89°04'59" E a distance of 274.36 feet; thence S 00°26'30" W a distance
of 633.48 feet; thence N 89°39'22" W a distance of 660.29 .feet; thence
N 00°26'40" E a distance of 640.09 feet; thence S 89°04'59" E a distance
of 355.92 feet: thence N 00°26°30" E a distance of 667.81 feet to a point
on said south right-of-way line of 65th Street; thence S 89°04'59" E along
said south right-of-way line of 65th Street a distance of 30.00 feet tp the
Point of Beginning.'
•
Containing 440,485.5 square feet or
10.11 acres. more or less.
12
212
•
Prepared by:
Black Dot Wireless
27271 Las Ramblas, Suite 300
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
Return to:
CCATT LLC
2000 Corporate Drive
Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317
MEMORANDUM
OF
LEASE EXTENSION AND FIRST AMENDMENT
This Memorandum of Lease Extension and First Amendment ("Memorandum") is entered into on this
day of , 2014, by and between Indian River County, a political subdivision of the
State of Florida, having a mailing address at 1801 27th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960 (hereinafter referred
to as "Lessor") and Florida 2B MPL Tower Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, by and
through its attorney-in-fact CCATT LLC, a Delaware limited liability company having a mailing address
of 2000 Corporate Drive, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317 (hereinafter referred to as "Tenant ").
WHEREAS, Lessor and Bellsouth Mobility Inc. ("Original Tenant") entered into that certain Lease
Agreement dated August 14, 1990 (as amended and assigned, the "Agreement"), whereby Lessor leased
to Original Tenant a portion of that property (said leased portion being the "Premises") located at 3925
65th Street, in the City of Vero Beach, County of Indian River, State of Florida, commonly referred to as
the Winter Beach Tower, which property underlying the Premises (the "Property") is described in Book
896, Page 995 in the Indian River County Register of Deeds Office ("Registry"), together with those
certain access, utility and/or maintenance easements and/or rights of way granted in the Agreement; and
®WHEREAS, Florida 2B MPL Tower Holdings LLC is now the lawful and responsible Tenant under
the terms of the Agreement and the First Amendment; and
1
213
•
WHEREAS, the term of the Agreement between Tenant and Lessor ("the Parties") will expire in
January 20, 2016, and the Parties entered into that certain Lease Extension and First Amendment of
approximately even date herewith ("First Amendment"), of which this is a memorandum, to extend the
Agreement, and to make certain other changes, as set forth below.
1. The Agreement commenced and has been in effect since January 21, 1991 and the parties
agree to continue the Agreement with two (2) additional five (5) year extension terms
commencing on January 21, 2016.
2. The portion of the land being leased to Tenant (the "Leased Premises") is described in
Exhibit 1 annexed hereto.
3. If Lessor, at any time during the Term of the Agreement, decides to rezone or sell, subdivide
or otherwise transfer all or any part of the Premises, or all or any part of the Property or
Surrounding Property, to a purchaser other than Tenant, Lessor shall promptly notify Tenant
in writing, and such rezoning, sale, subdivision or transfer shall be subject to the Agreement
and Tenant's rights hereunder.
4. Lessor agrees not to sell, lease or use any areas of the Property or Surrounding Property for
the installation, operation or maintenance of other wireless communications facilities if such
installation, operation or maintenance would interfere with Tenant's Permitted Use or
communications equipment as determined by radio propagation tests performed by Tenant in
its sole discretion. Lessor or Lessor's prospective purchaser shall reimburse Tenant for any
costs and expenses of such testing. If the radio frequency propagation tests demonstrate
levels of interference unacceptable to Tenant, Lessor shall be prohibited from selling, leasing
or using any areas of the Property or the Surrounding Property for purposes of any
installation, operation or maintenance of any other wireless communications facility or
equipment.
5. If at any time after the date of the First Amendment, Lessor receives a bona fide written offer
from a third party seeking an assignment or transfer of the Rent payments associated with the
Agreement ("Rental Stream Offer"), Lessor shall immediately furnish Tenant with a copy of
the Rental Stream Offer. Tenant shall have the right within ninety (90) days after it receives
such copy to match the Rental Stream Offer and agree in writing to match the terms of the
Rental Stream Offer. Such writing shall be in the form of a contract substantially similar to
the Rental Stream Offer. If Tenant chooses not to exercise this right or fails to provide
written notice to Lessor within the ninety (90) day period, Lessor may assign the right to
receive Rent payments pursuant to the Rental Stream Offer, subject to the terms of the
Agreement. If Lessor attempts to assign or transfer Rent payments without complying with
this Section, the assignment or transfer shall be void. Tenant shall not be responsible for any
failure to make payments under the Agreement and reserves the right to hold payments due
under the Agreement until Lessor complies with this Section.
6. This Memorandum contains only selected provisions of the First Amendment, and reference
is made to the full text of the Agreement and the First Amendment for their full terms and
conditions, which are incorporated herein by this reference. Except as otherwise provided in
2
214
•
the First Amendment and this Memorandum, the terms and conditions of the Agreement
remain in full force and effect. This instrument may be executed in any number of
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and which together shall constitute
one and the same instrument. All capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the
same meanings as defined in the First Amendment or the Agreement, as applicable.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Memorandum as of the day and year first
above written.
FLORIDA 28 MPL TOWER HOLDINGS LLC
A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY CO.
BY: CCATT LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY
ITS: ATTORNEY IN FACT
BY:
(printed n. cicn Smith
(title) Real Estate Transactinn Manager
WITNESS:
WITNESS:
Approved as to form and 1 a fficiency
William K. liYeBr
Deputy County Attorney
3
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Approved by the BCC:
ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court
And Comptroller
BY:
Deputy Clerk of Court
C.__. _. ..41e:.1I
i seph A : aird, County Ad b ' istrator
I
215
•
LESSOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
STATE OF FLORIDA )
SS.
COUNTY OF INDIAN )
RIVER
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is
the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this
instrument, on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it
as the Chairman of
- :..
• II II . •
the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
*of Indian River County, Florida,
a politicalsubdivision of the
State of. Florida
DATED:
Notary Seal
3e*
(Signature of Notary)
(Legibly Print or Stamp Name of Notary)
Notary Public in and for the State of
My appointment expires:
4
216
•
TENANT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
STATE OF -1-6)(p-
COUNTY OF 1-1+4,24.A5
I certify that the following person(s) personally appeared before me this day, each
acknowledging to me that he/she voluntarily signed the foregoing Memorandum of First
Amendment to Lease Agreement for the purpose stated therein and in the capacity indicated:
Florida 2B MPL Tower Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, by its Attorney in
Fact, CCATT LLC, a Delaware limited liability
n Sr \ i k. , its 'Q -G r•
Date: lot ltoH By:
Print Name: Car•evt
Notary Public
[SEAL OR STAMP] My Commission Expires: 3- (ii ' (
company, by
5
Caren Shaughnessy{
Votary Public.
State of Texas
Expires:03-l9-2018
217
•
Exhibit 1 to Memorandum of Lease
Leased Premises
The Leased Premises is located on a portion of the Property described and/or depicted as follows:
The East one-half of the Northwest onc-quarter of the Southwest one-
quarter of Section 10, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, Indian River
County, Florida.
LEGAL DESCRPTION
LEASE PARCEL
A parcel of land being a portion of the East one-half of the
Northwest one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 10.
Township 32 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida,
being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of the Northwest one-quarter
of the Southwest one-quarter of said Section 10. proceed
S 00^26'30" W along the East line of the Northwest one-quarter of
the Southwest one-quarter of said Section 10 a distance of 1,020.53
feet: thence N 89033'30" W a distance of 274.35 feet to the Point of
Beginning: thence S 00°26'30" W a distance of 50.00 feet; thence
N 89°04'59' W a distance of 58.00 feet: thence N 00°26'30" E a dis-
tance of 50.00 feet; thence S 8904'59" E a distance of 58.00 feet
to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 2,899.9.square feet, more or less.
•
218
•
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ACCESS/ANCHOR EASEMENT
A parcel of land being a portion of the East one-half of the Northwest
one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 10, Township 32
South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida. being more particu-
larly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest
1/4 of said Section 10. proceed N 89°04'59' W along the North .line of thq
Southwest 1/4 of Section 10 a distance of 274.36 feet; thence S 00°26'30' W
a distance of 40.00 feet to a point on the South right-of-way line of 65th
Street (AKA South Winter Beach Road), said point also being the Point of
.Beginning; thence S 00°26'30" W a distance of 667.81 feet; thence
S 89°04'59" E a distance of 274.36 feet: thence S 00°26'30" W a distance
of 633.48 feet; thence N 89°39'22" W a distance of 660.29 feet: thence
N 00°26'40" E a distance of 640.09 feet; thence S 89°04'59" E a distance
of 355.92 feet; thence Al 00°26"30" E a distance of 667.81 feet to a point
on said south right-of-way line of 65th Street; thence S 89°04'59" E along
said south right-of-way line of 65th Street a distance of 30.00 feet tp the
Point of Beginning.
Containing 440,485.5 square feet or
10.11 acres. more or less.
7
219
JEFFREY R. SMITH, CPA, CGFO, CGMA
Clerk of Circuit Court & Comptroller
P.O. Box 1028
Vero Beach, FL 32961-1028
Telephone: (772) 770-5185
October 21, 2014
Honorable Peter O'Bryan, Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners
And
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Chairman O'Bryan and County Commissioners:
Enclosed please find our check in the amount of $51,094.45 which represents excess fees for
non -court operations due to the Board of County Commissioners for the fiscal year ending
September 30,2014.
The excess fees are accounted for by the following: 1) We have seen a slight increase in our
recording fees in the last few months, and 2) We have had a vacant position open in Recording
since May of 2014.
Our office appreciates the continued support of the County's departments and staff. Should you
have any questions regarding this letter or the attached report, please contact me at extension
3160 or Diane Bernardo at extension 1205.
Sincerely,
CPA, CG-t� , CG n'1 FY
ey R. Smith, CPA, CGFO, CGMA
Clerk of Circuit Court and Comptroller
Cc: Joe Baird, County Administrator
Jason Brown, Budget Director
Diane Bernardo, Finance Director
Cindy Carlsward, Chief Deputy of Court Operations
220
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
GENERAL FUND
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014
FINAL
REVENUES BUDGET
NON COURT OPERATIONS REVENUE 1,140,335
COURT OPERATIONS REVENUE
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
TOTAL REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
PERSONAL SERVICES
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
CAPITAL OUTLAY
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
TRANSFERS FROM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
TRANSFERS TO BOCC
TRANSFERS TO STATE FOR COURT OPERATIONS
fibTOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
EXCESS OF REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES $
FUND BALANCES 10/01/13
FUND BALANCES 9/30/14
I, Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller of
Indian River County, Florida, do hereby certify that the
foregoing are true and accurate annual reports of all official
expenses and net income and unexpended budget balances
as of the close of the fiscal year ended September 30,2014.
I have hereunto set my official seal this date, October 24, 2014.
Jeffre
•
mord-
k of Court and Comptroller
3,352,048
11,739 3,588
4,504,122 4,518,468
GENERAL FUND
VARIANCE
FAVORABLE
ACTUAL (UNFAVORABLE)
1,162, 537 22,202
3,352,343 295
(8,151)
14,346
4,721,241 4,707,886 13,355
609,530 577,840 31,690
75,63263,220 12,412
5,406,403 5,348,946 57,457
(902,281)
902,281
902,281
(830,478)
902,281
(51,094)
(20,709)
830,478
71,803
(51,094)
(20,709)
(71,803)
221
•te 10/21/2014
Jeffrey R. Smith.. •
Clerk of me. Circuit Court
Indian River County, Florida
P.O. Box.1028 Vero Beach, FL 32960
Wells Fargo Barik, N.A.
:EXACTLY • 51,094DOLLARS:AND 45CENTS'~`*
VOID IN 6 MONTHS
PAY BOARD OF:. COUNTY COMMISSION
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
1801 27TH STREET
VERO.,BEACH ,: FL 32960.0000
11-24
1210
NO. 0368777
0°0368 L 2 L0'00 2L,8u:265850 /099766o
Jeffrey R. Smith
Clerk of the Circuit Court
Indian River County Vero Beach, Florida 32960
020306
NO. 0368777
Invoice Number
Invoice Date
Amount
Invoice Number
Invoice Date
Amount
EXCESS FEES
09/30/2014
$15, 043.25 EXCESS FEES
09/30/2014
$36,051-.20
22
October 31, 2014
David C. Nolte, ASA
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER
WE ARE HERE TO SERVE YOU!
1800 27th Street m Vero Beach, FL 32960
Joseph A Baird, Administrator
Indian River County
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach FL 32960
Dear Mr. Baird,
Enclosed you will find a copy of our Annual Report for the year ending September 30,
2014.
Sincerely,
.0a 41,
David C Nolte ASA
IRC Property Appraiser
(772) 567-8000 m Fax: (772) 770-5087
http://www.ircpa.orq
223
•
•
•
VI/0£/6 S3DNV1VB ONfld
£T/TO/OT SDNV1V9 0Nf19
C
• m
m N
= O
T
X
m <
O • z
C • m
m {to
90 O
O =
m
2 X
s O
C
• DD
✓ I • m
0
N
N N
N
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)
N
Inc) sra;sueri
O
N N
W
N
tD D
LO lwD
o o
N N
W W
N N
W W
tO
o o
spaaaaid asey»nd aseai
N
N
5 00'6£6'Z£
4.1
NJ
W
0
0
OO'V£Z'8TT'£ $
N
5 00117S'£60'£
to to
r Ma
W W W
T
N N N
N
1+ W T
O W A
o 00 W
00 N w
O O
888
N N N
N N N
to o
0 CO
CO to
0 0
sanuana8 Ie1o1
N
$ 0017£Z'8IT'£
5 00'O8V'9ZT'£
N
N
A (0 w W W
A A A A A
H N H N
ID 00 A W I+
N N
W
O O-
N 00
O N
00
O 0
N N N N N
V O
N 0W
0 0
N
0
D
0
c
Z
3
0'
l0
co
00
m
CO
0
Oa
(0
D
a
d
T D 2 -
y D 0
- I G1 Z v D
2 0 0m Z
3 z
^ m m� m
m z Z <
• r O v z
T (�
0 -• Zi m73 v >> 00
mQ D OD G m Z
T D Z z
C
v Z 2 m '
- 0 C)
3 VI m m
n
m 0 m D
7) C Z
O 0 O
y
0 C
0
m
A ▪ Z !n
O D
D 2
0
0
D
224
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
$ 00'8ZS'8S
CO
8
Allnb3 puna lelol
N
N
N
N
aauele9 pun
saplllgell lelol
$ 00'8ZS'8S
H
D n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D r
cv
E,
• CD n
C O O
ET...;
o c
O. r r r . 0 0 0 7 0
Gi a ni t0 O CO ..
O y 6 Q Q ? y^ 7 til
▪ CU H
3 - a ▪ <
CD IA tx. 10
Q
w O O 0. N
m = a c
a 3 a, 7
D ro <
CT 7 n
G o
ro7
m 3
v,
0
(70
l0 l0 O CO 00 00 O O
N
03 00
W
O
O
V1 ' Vf
N N
P W lD O
O 4- V In
A In CO A
N lA A V
O O 0 b
O O O O
S13SSV 1V1O1
N
N
Amount to Provide- Other liabilities
slassv Jaq O
O 5
S
D 3
ro
O
0
3
0
G1
0
0
3
m
Petty Cash
Equity in Pooled Cash
Accounts Receivable
Due from Other Funds
papplsaJun-gse7
co r W H Ul O O O
N
N
F+
03 00
W
O
O
0
CO V V
In W O
O O O
O O O
JagwnN luno»V
uollesuadwo7
N
<
ro v
(c0
c N
c
d
D
m
- r
m �^
co • z
m O
z so
w
O m
O Z
A
D
n
O
c
z
0
O
c
N
133HS37NV1V9
0
v
-43D
z
D
z
z
0
D
z
rn
0
c
z
O
0
225
•
•
0
-1
r
900? puog uolllslnb3y puel
P!alsla uolleSineN puelul epuolj
aDueualulew IelldsoH
hulsla lo4uo3 olinbsoW
h!�lslo lalul uellsegaS
CHNM aanla s,uior'1S
luawuJano9 Jay1O
saDIAJaS AJuaSJaw3
Board of County Commissioners
00
(1
W N
NJ N N Ol
I0 In 01 ▪ • 00 I I- ▪ 01 �O
O 00 to W O� N V V ▪ 00
00'SSI'910'E
O O O O O O O O
O b b b b b b V
NJ N ON 01 01I-. l0 - W 00
N 01 Or W 00 ID 03 ID
to N to N Vf VT to V?
N
N N A
01 01 tt0 ,033 In ..!4:'' O `000
N 1N-' O A -4 l'0 W J
U1 co to 0 0 0 N N
O O b O O O O 0
O o O O O O O O
saaj ssaDx3
ana .io palnqulsla lunowy
-v
(D
((DD
0
(D
226
•
•
W W W W
N I.4 I-, I-.
W (Ji (J1 U1 01
N (D A W N
D
n r' D
S 00 d O
�-,
0 0.)o -a
- a 00 Q
ot)V (D m
Q° VI H "�
D p F. <
O = (D C.
S.
00
to
N
00
00
1-+
O
O
saoinaas da3 ZST£
to to to to to to
I--1 VI
VI N
O 00
O 00
O 1-�
O O
O o
S3SN3dX3 9NI1d213dO
S3JIA I3S 1VNOS i3d 1V101
o N
Ln A
C
(0 o
m
3
ro1
0
3
(-)
fD
o 1,,
3 O1
73
a.
ro
0)
sv
o'
tJ? to
apuejnsul ytleaH 2 a4!1 EZZ
S3S/SWS ESZZ
aaAoldw3-luawaJllad ZSZZ
Ie!DUJO-luawaipab TSZZ
aay20-eD!3 EST
awu,an0 VT
1-4 N
W
m
CD roV) CD
rho m
3 a0
1
o s)
tntn. tntntntntntn tntJ)tn
cn N I--, 1-- V I-4
N I -k Cr) N N 1--. W A W 00 01 1--4
00 O V O O N (D 01 VI A pl V 00
W O W O N W N 01 N O V to 10
V 0 01 0 V LO 00 W 01 O N 1- N
W 0 (O 0, W vi . (JJ V1 0 0 01 U'1
O O b b b b b b b o b b b
O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
to
in
to to to
00 U1 (n
V V V
N CO CO
A 0 O
O O b
O O O
in
1-+ A
A A
A A w
O b O
to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to
N I --
In N I --k I.-1 I-1 V I-1
W 01 N N I.1 .a. A W I-, U1 N
A 1-' i-' O O _co O rn (n A N O W
W N 1/1 O N --' s'...101 W O In W W
W 00 00 0 V V A W N 0 01 V U'1
A 01 (D 01 W Un Ln W (O O 1•- (O CO
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
saoyuaS Ieuosiad
Indian River County
B/A B/A B/A Current
Original DOR #1 #2 Budget
T
V)
0) O
N (0
01 c <
an
0 (0 -0
I-+ '+ c
LU
N
O r
-,
227
•
S3SN3dX3 9NI1d213dO lbiOl
digs.iagwaW/sang bsbs
uoReDnp3 £SBS
suogdu3sgnS ZSIS
s)loog TSIS
A A A A A A A A A A A A
ID LO 01 01 Q1 01 A A A A N N
01 01 Ul U•1 In A Cn In In In A In In In Ul A In In
NJ I--+ 00 N) I-4 V A W N I- Ln A W N I-+ W N N
O O D (' O O N m O O C„ o
m as 3 c = m, u,
A m p�' ,-. n n .� n • n r► 0q ,•*
yr (D D 5 (D rn�D (D n) (D n m 7-
..--
0d0
cn In m 3 In m m ,n (D
c ma) c
C o ,_`_. W (nD -. a) ii.
v = 3 N 3
-O '^ (D o_ m c (D
a) CAI F3 •
0
c
0
1
a
if). VI to V). V). t/> V1• V1 V> iR V). VI -
suoneulunwwo3 Tb
wain -lad '2 lane -ll Ob
U.)
W F-( V W 1' V )-+ 1-•( I--1
00 N 01 N V7 A I-- 01 A J V Ol
i0 O In O O O N O Ul O lD Cr,O V In
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 b O" O O 0 0 b b 0 0 0 b 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N
1J V). VI.
saDwaS •m;uop Jayto b£
ialiodaj linos ££
VI- tn. i /) i). t/? i/I• t/? tl? t/>• u it if>• iA V). u {/t 1./). 1./). i/f N N v- V) VT V).
W
W N 01 N W A W 00 A V l0 N
00 O In N 01 O N U1 (1 O lO in O V (0
N O O I--% lD O Ol O W O O O V O U'1
O O O 1--( V O I-•( O LO O O O tD O N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Indian River County
B/A B/A B/A Current
Original DOR #1 #2 Budget
H
d O
—
-< CD W m
c
L
N Dp
O m '0
1", ,'* D
cu
d
N
0 ((D
228
O
D
r
00 ELZ'ZII'E $
i!T
0017 Z'8tVE $
•
AdllflO 1VlldVD 1V1O1
cri
0
00
0
O
O
rn
rn
W
0
0
w
salp!4an VS179
luawd!nb3 aD!}IO ESb9
F-'
W F-,
O to
O O
O o
O O
O b
O o
lI yr to �n to
AV11fO 1VIIdt0
0
1
5
ou
Oco
D
xc
D
co c
cCAI M
Alunop Jana ue!pul
VIOZ-ETOZ walk leps!3
229
October 31, 2014
Sheriff Deryl Loar
Indian River County
The Honorable Peter D. O'Bryan, Chairman
Indian River Board of County Commissioners
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3388
Dear Chairman O'Bryan:
Attached is check number 99477 in the amount of $59, 390.50, which represents funds
due to the Board of County Commissioners as detailed below:
Fund 016, General Fund Reversion $59,390.50
Please place this item on the consent agenda for the November 181h board agenda. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at 978-6406.
Sincerely,
Deryl Loar, Sheriff
DL:ltj
cc: Jason Brown, OMB Director
Diane Bernardo, Finance Director
Attachment
55 41' Avenue. Vero Beach, Florida 32960 www.ircsheriff.org
(772) 569-6700
230
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE I ,
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES & CHANGES IN FUND D BALANCE -BUDGET & ACTUAL
FORTHEPERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER,30, 2014 I 1 1
General Fund
Fund 16
REVENUES
BUDGET
1 ACTUAL
VARIANCE
OTHER REVENUE
COMMISSARY SALES
1
OTHER•INCOME
INTEREST .
TOTAL REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
516.00
JUDICIAL
PERSONAL•SERVICES
1,861,107
1,861,107
0
OPERATING EXPENSE
I
111,420
I 108,195
3,225
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
1 0
0
1
CONTINGENCY
1
.
TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES
1,972,527
1,969;302
3,225
1
521.00
LAW ENFORCEMENT
1
I PERSONAL SERVICES
18,227,122
18,132,440
94,682
OPERATINGEXPENSE
4,208,568
3,769;441
I 439;127
CAPITAL OUTLAY
1,085,435.
1,513,159
(427,724)
1
523.00
CORRECTIONS
PERSONAL SERVICES
10,968,563
10,935;563
33,000 •
(80,480)
OPERATING -EXPENSE
1,899,449.
1;979,929
CAPITAL OUTLAY
135,532
137,971
.(2,439),
1
TRAINING 1
1.
521.991LAWENFORCEMENT CONTINGENCY
523.99 CORRECTIONS -CONTINGENCY
1
TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY 1
38,524,669
36,468,503
56,166
I
1
DEBT SERVICE
.PRINCIPAL 1
0
INTEREST 1
0
i
TOTAL EXPENDITURES I
38,497,196
38,437,806 1
59,390
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER(UNDER) EXPENDITURES
(38,497,196)
(38,437,806)
59,390
I
1
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES AND (USES
1 i
APPROPRIATION FROM BCC 1 1
38,375;067 1
38,375,067
HOUSING PRISONER REVENUE 1
SCAAP REVENUE I 1
55,721
55,721
OTHER REVENUE , SALE.OF SURPLUS PROPERTY, ETC.
66,408
66,408
OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT -BCC 1.-
(59;390)
1 1 1
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES AND (USES)
38,497,196
38,437,806
(59,390)
1
I 1
EXCESS OF REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES
OVER(UNDER) EXPENDITURES & OTHER USES
0 I
0
0
1 I 1
FUND BALANCE -BEGINNING OFYEAR 1
00
0
I
FUND BALANCE-END.OF YEAR'
0
0
0
1 1 1 I
231
•
Carole Jean Jordan, CFC ,
Tax Collector
" HOW MAY WE HELP You?"
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph A. J. Baird, County Admitrator
FROM: Carole Jean Jordan, Tax Collect
SUBJECT: Agenda Item
DATE: October 30, 2014
Please place the following on the Agenda for the Board of County Commissioners
meeting on Tuesday November 18, 2014 under Constitutional Officer's Matters: Tax
Collector, Carole Jean Jordan.
We are hereby presenting our Annual Fiscal Report for the Fiscal Year Ended September
30, 2014 as required by Section 218.36 of the Florida Statutes. Also attached is the
Report of Distribution of Excess Fees for fiscal year ended September 30, 2014.
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and if you have any questions or if we can be
of any assistance, please feel free to call me at extension 1337.
cc: Jason Brown, Budget Director
P.O. Box 1509, Vero Beach, FL 32961-1509 .
E-mail: TaxCollector@IRCTax.com Website: www.IRCtax.com
Phone: (772) 226-1338 Fax (772) 770-5009
232
AGENCY FUNDS
`cf
CO0
N
O co
o
0 cc
w
O C F D
H 0 W O a
Z4(C)
W p p
U Z Q 0
> < Wcc
Z
Q
Q p }
Li Z W
Z D
J X
< 0
•
O
00 0 CO
W
J
Q
W
Z
W
U
DEFERRED
COMPENSATION
0 J
0 <cr p
0 W Z
Z Z D
LL
u.
ACCOUNT NUMBER
cz) co o co 60) CD co u0 ) r-
U) N N -
.- co O 00
CO
M
C
N
0 0 0 c� V' U) 0 CO
0
Z
8 p
1- LL
W CC
co cn < 0 Q m J >-->
U
I- 0>Q0 LL
0 W W > I -
cc J o Z C/)
�
20QUJZf-W
U) Z C)
QZI-f-COLI()
Z8 Z(OW2<
2).-H 2 J
U�Wc
OO?=)?0
OTHER ASSETS - PREPAID
AMOUNT TO PROVIDE -OTHER LIABILITIES
M
co
n
N
69
M
CO
CO
b9
O
CD
u)
N
69
a)
N
V
r -
vi
0
0
U)
CO
U)
N
69
TOTAL ASSETS
LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
LIABILITIES:
co
u7 N
N O
n
n
ca
M
co o CO
N-
0 CO N N
O 0M) N! N
N 0 N
N
69
N CO CO CO 00 0
0 0 0 0 0 N
N N N N N N
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
cc
W
Z
0
C
CO
2
0
Z
0
U
L.L.
0
0
0
CO
0
I• -
CU
D
0
DUE TO STATE OF FLORIDA
M
co
N
M M
N N
co
0 W
Z 8
2 W
CC w CO
W W I- <
2 3 00
O
CC W W LL O <
CO
OZ (/)0)(/)Z
0 W W_ W_ W_
CL h ~ ~ 2r3- W
W� J J J 0
� p 2 2 2 8 J
ZHJJJ� Q 1:__>-
2
CLc/) c D 0
~< O W W W J CWi
W W CL222U -J
DZ W I - I - I - U < 0
0 D0000< I- Z
O �
69
69
69
69
V9
FUND BALANCE
TOTAL FUND EQUITY
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
233
•
REVENUES
CHARGES FOR SERVICES:
COUNTY OFFICERS COMMISSIONS
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES:
INTEREST
OTHER REVENUES
TOTAL REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
GENERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES:
FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE:
PERSONAL SERVICES
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEBT SERVICE:
PRINCIPAL RETIREMENT
INTEREST
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
TAX COLLECTOR
STATEMENT OF REVENUES,EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014
fikS OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES
GENERAL FUND
VARIANCE
FAVORABLE
ACCOUNT NUMBER BUDGET ACTUAL (UNFAVORABLE)
341.80 $5,391,700 $
361.10 8,500
5,523,481 $ 131,781
8,180 $ (320)
$ 5,400,200 $ 5,531,661 $ 131,461
513.10 $ 2,415,496 $ 2,361,609 $
513.30 639,590 632,340 $
513.60 204,500 202,591 $
513.71 - $
513.72 - $
53,887
7,250
1,909
$ 3,259,586 $ 3,196,540 $ 63,046
$ 2,140,614 $ 2,335,121 $ 194,507
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
TRANSFERS IN
LEASE PURCHASE PROCEEDS $ - $ - $
LEASE PURCHASE CIP -
TRANSFERS OUT TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (1,919,489) (2,093,839) (174,350)
TRANSFERS OUT TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS (221,125) (241,282) (20,157)
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
EXCESS OF REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES
FUND BALANCES 10/01/13
$ (2,140,614) $ (2,335,121) $ (194,507)
FUND BALANCES 9/30/14 $
I do solemnly swear that the foregoing is a true, correct and complete report of all revenues and e penditures of my office for the
year ending the 30th day of September, 2014.
•
Signature)
Office of -x Collector, Indian River County
234
EXCESS2014
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR
CAROLE JEAN JORDAN, TAX COLLECTOR
EXCESS FEE DISTRIBUTION
YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2014
COMMISSIONS 2013/2014
COLLECTED EXCESS FEES
AGENCY 2013/2014 % $ 2,335,120.69
GENERAL FUND $ 2,981,513.52 70.4754% $ 1,645,685.77
MUNICIPAL SERV DIST $ 146,894.42 3.4722% $ 81,080.31
EMS SERV DIST $ 402,238.63 9.5079% $ 222,020.92
ROCKRIDGE SLD $ 60.25 0.0014% $ 33.26
LAURELWOOD SLD $ 113.02 0.0027% $ 62.38
GIFFORD SLD $ 1,411.58 0.0334% $ 779.14
LAUREL CT SLD $ 16.20 0.0004% $ 8.94
VERO LAKES MSTU $ 1,878.00 0.0444% $ 1,036.59
VB HIGH SLD $ 1,362.96 0.0322% $ 752.30
IXORA PK SLD $ 90.68 0.0021% $ 50.05
PORPOISE PT SLD $ 7.03 0.0002% $ 3.88
VERO SHORES SLD $ 76.03 0.0018% $ 41.97
POINCIANA SLD $ 251.11 0.0059% $ 138.60
ROSELAND RD SLD $ 14.14 0.0003% $ 7.80
GLENDALE LK SLD $ 64.95 0.0015% $ 35.85
WALKERS GLEN SLD $ 25.91 0.0006% $ 14.30
FLORALTON SLD $ 47.01 0.0011% $ 25.95
TIERRA LINDA SLD $ 27.14 0.0006% $ 14.98
WHISPERING PINES SLD $ 21.59 0.0005% $ 11.92
MOORINGS SLD $ 234.17 0.0055% $ 129.25
E. GIFFORD WATERSHED $ 18.92 0.0004% $ 10.44
WEST WABASSO MSBU $ 156.13 0.0037% $ 86.18
LAND ACQ BOND $ 29.42 0.0007% $ 16.24
LAND ACQ BOND 2004 $ 94,796.84 2.2408% $ 52,324.37
LIBRARY BOND $ - 0.0000% $ -
LANDFILL $ 162,089.34 3.8314% $ 89,467.35
BEACH BOND $ - 0.0000% $
FIND $ 8,663.20 0.2048% $ 4,781.77
SCHOOL BOARD $ 127.19 0.0030% $ 70.20
ST JOHNS WMD $ 82,463.44 1.9492% $ 45,516.78
SEB INLET DIST $ 7,850.23 0.1856% $ 4,333.04
MOSQUITO CONT $ 67,052.75 1.5850% $ 37,010.65
HOSPITAL $ 243,464.40 5.7549% $ 134,383.39
FELLSMERE WCD $ 1,500.00 0.0355% $ 827.94
IR FARMS WCD $ 1,500.00 0.0355% $ 827.94
ST JOHNS IMPROV DISTRICT $ 1,500.00 0.0355% $ 827.94
SEB RIVER IMPROV DISTRICT $ 1,500.00 0.0355% . $. ' 827.94
VERO LAKES WCD $ 178.50 0.0042% $ 98.53
DELTA FARMS WCD $ 1,500.00 0.0355% $ 827.94
SEBASTIAN STORM DRAIN $ 19,834.45 0.4688% $ 10,947.89
TOTAL $ 4,230,573.15 100.0000% $ 2,335,120.69
0.00
DUE TO COUNTY 100.208.1000 $ 2,093,838.74
DUE TO OTHER GOVT 100.208.0000 $ 241,281.95
TOTAL EXCESS FEES $ 2,335,120.69
235
Leslie R. Swan
Supervisor of Electio72S
Indian River County
October 28, 2014
The Honorable Peter 0' Bryan, Chairman
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
Building A
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960-3388
Dear Chairman O' Bryan:
RECEIVED
OCT 2 8 2014
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSION
Attached is check number 12690 in the amount of $ 5,256.77, which represents funds due to the
411 Board of County Commissioners for the period ending September 30, 2014, as detailed below:
Excess 13/14 Budget
SOE Fees
Candidate Qualifying Fees
TOTAL
$ 1,762.48
$ 3,169.29
$ 325.00
$ 5, 256.77
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to
contact me at extension 3435.
Sincerely,
Leslie Rossway Swan
Supervisor of Elections
CC: Diane Bernardo
Jason Brown
�r'o Bea"ch 967 • 'Office: (772) 226=3440 1 Fax: (772
icASHjONL IFpALL GheckLock .pEpUR1,T2MEATURE
Lesiie: Swan. :
SUPERVISOR' OF; ELECTIONS
-Coun41.0f,..1 iian:River-State of Florida
Vero:Beach; Flonda.32967 • •
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA.
VERO BEACH, FL 32963
63643/870
12690
10/28/2014
YTOTHE BOARD OFCOUNTY COMMISSIONERS $ "5 256.77
ORDER OF I '
Five Thousand Two Hundred Fifty -Six and 77/100
BD: OF C.OUNTY.GOMMISSIONERS
1 R. C:. Finance;: Department
101: 27th`. Street. -
Vero Beach; FL: -32960.
13/14. Year -End;
1. 26900
A TAMPER RESISTANT TONER AREA A
DOLLARS
Io06
700C31.3 2': 200004 5 3 2 38 spun
Leslie Swan / SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
208.010 • DUE TO OTHER GOVERNME SOE Fees from Candidates
208.010 • DUE TO OTHER GOVERNME Qualifying Fee
208.010 • DUE TO OTHER GOVERNME Excess Budget 13/14
•
OPERATING-WACH 13/14 Year End
•
10/28/2014
12690
3,169.29
325.00
1,762.48
5,256.77
237
•
•
•
Public Hearing - B.C.C. 11.18.14
Office of
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
DATE: November 5, 2014
SUBJECT: Ordinance Regarding Solid Waste Franchise Agreement Application Process
BACKGROUND.
The current solid waste franchise agreements expire on September 30, 2015. It is anticipated that the
Utilities Department will be bringing a procurement package to the Solid Waste Disposal District Board
for approval by the end of this year in order to begin the request for application process for entering into a
new franchise agreement or agreements by October 1, 2015.
In consultation with the Office of Management and Budget, the Purchasing Division and the Utilities
Department, the County Attorney's Office drafted the attached proposed ordinance which clarifies that the
request for applications process for a solid waste franchise agreement and renewals for such franchise
agreements will be conducted consistent with the request for proposal process set forth in the Indian River
County Purchasing Manual. On November 4, 2014, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County authorized the County Attorney's Office to set a public hearing concerning this proposed
ordinance.
Approved for November 18, 2014 BCC Meeting
Public Hearing
COUNTY ATTORNEY
F: Anomrv:lirda6GEVERAL B C CAgenda Afemosl57iDD RFA Orrbnance.doe
238
Indian River Co.
adi.roved
Date
Admin.
t >a
!l /3/P/
Co. Atty.
i►
(!�S
Budget
iv
14
Department
'i�•,
4j )
t/t (
Risk Management
---
--
238
Board of County Commissioners
November 5, 2014
Page Two
FUNDING.
There is no additional funding associated with this agenda item.
RECOMMENDATION.
The County Attorney's Office respectfully requests that the Board open the public hearing and then adopt
this ordinance revising the solid waste franchise agreement application process.
ATTACHMENT(S).
Proposed ordinance.
F.'Arromrydirda'.GE. ERADB C CUgenda AfemosIStl'DD RFA Oebmrce.doc
239
•
ORDINANCE NO. 2014 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING SECTION 204.12 "STANDARDS FOR
FRANCHISE ISSUANCE" AND SECTION 204.15
"FRANCHISE RENEWALS" OF CHAPTER 204 OF THE
CODE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ENTITLED "SOLID
WASTE DISPOSAL" TO REQUIRE THE APPLICATION
PROCESS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUEST
FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS; AND PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
Section 1. Amendment of Chapter 204 (Solid Waste Disposal).
Sections 204.12 and 204.15 of Chapter 204 of the Code of Indian River County, Florida
are hereby amended to read as follows (added language is underlined, and deleted
language noted by strikethrough):
Section 204.12. — Procedure Standards for franchise issuance.
(a) Upon. receipt of the application, the director shall review the application and
the application, he shall forward the application to the district board for its
meeting. At the district board meeting it shall be the applicant's burden to
The district board may accept
applications for one or more franchise areas in the County. The district board shall
approve an application or applications for a franchise in a manner consistent with the
Request for Proposal process set forth in the policies and procedures manual
prepared pursuant to Section 105.06 of the County Code. The district board may
include process requirements for applications in addition to those set forth in the
policies and procedures manual prepared pursuant to Section 105.06 of the County
Code. The evaluation criteria must at a minimum include the following:
1
240
•
ORDINANCE NO. 2014-
(1) The applicant's collection vehicles and equipment are sufficient to provide
adequate and reliable service;
(2) The applicant and its employees have sufficient technical experience and
abilities to ensure the timely, reliable, and effective delivery of the services
proposed by the applicant;
(3) The applicant has the financial resources and other characteristics to
ensure the timely, reliable, and effective provision of the services proposed
by the applicant; and
(1) The applicant will strictly comply with all of the requirements of this part,
(5)
and
The applicant's proposal is in the public interest.
Section 204.15. - Franchise renewals.
(a) The district board shall renew a franchise in a manner consistent with the terms
set forth in the franchise agreement and if necessary, follow the Request for
Proposal process set forth in the policies and procedures manual prepared
pursuant to Section 105.06 of the County Code.
anew -application,
2
241
•
•
•
ORDINANCE NO. 2014-
(d) No franchise shall be renewed by the district board unless the district board
Section 2. Severability. If any part of this ordinance is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this ordinance shall
not be affected by such holding and shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 3. Codification. It is the intention of the Board of County Commissioners that
the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Indian River County
Code, and that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re -lettered and the
word ordinance may be changed to section, article or such other appropriate word or
phrase in order to accomplish such intention.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the
Florida Department of State.
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press Journal on the 8th day of
November, 2014, for a public hearing to be held on the 18th day of November, 2014, at
which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner ,
seconded by Commissioner , and adopted by the following
vote:
Commissioner Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher
Commissioner Tim Zorc
Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan
Commissioner Bob Solari
The Chairman thereupon declared the ordinance duly passed and adopted this
day of , 2014.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
, Chairman
ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of
Court and Comptroller Approved as to form and legal sufficien
By: By:
Deputy Clerk
3
Dylan Reingold, County Attomey
242
•
•
ORDINANCE NO. 2014 -
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance was filed with the Florida Department of State on the
day of , 2014.
4
243
Min SCRIPPS TREASURE COAST
rem NEWSPAPERS
Indian River Press Journal
�T
1801 U.S. 1, Vero Beach, FL 32960
SCRIPPS AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER •
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared, Sherri Cipriani, who on oath says that she is Classified Inside Sales
Manager of the Indian River Press Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida: that the
attached copy of advertisement was publshed in the Indian River Press Joumal in the following issues below. Affiant further
says that the said Indian River Press Journal is a newspaper published in Vero Beach in said Indian River County, Florida, and
that said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, daily and distributed in
Indian River County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement;
and affiant further says that she has neither paid or promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission
or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. The Indian River Press Journal
has been entered as Periodical Matter at the Post Offices in Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida and has been for a period
of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement.
Customer
Ad Pub
Number Date Copvline PO #
INDIAN RIVER CO ATTORNEY 2658817 11/8/2014 NOTICE OF INTENT 204.12
Sworn to a
ubscribed befre me this day of, November 08, 2014, by
Sherri Cipriani
/1,64“
, who is
[X] personally known to me or
[ ] who has produced as identification.
et/14.411/4
Sandra Coldren
SEAL
t••.iT•.C:r{%'••. SANDRACOLDREN
o+P• �� h1.,ks MY COMMISSION 1 FF 104035
. ��. EXPIRES: April 1, 2017
Bonded Thru Notary Public Underwriters
Notary Public
r�.A.1.
NEWSPAPER E -Sheet®
LEGAL NOTICE
ATTACHED
*********************
DO NOT
SEPARATE PAGES
NAL
Q)
rn
'Cr)
CO
CO
u,
(S3
N
Ad Number:
Insertion Number: N/A
00
w
Section-Page-Zone(s):
1 Col x 135 ag
NOTICE OF INTENT
Saturday, November 08, 2014
HOMEOF
'AOMNISn1Ana3
Lin nm
FTXIMO mm
N 3 PATETHS
OF
TAFiFH naw BR
TION Of THIS
ALL
CLAIMS NOT
TED WITHIN THE
TWE PERIODS SET
FORTH IN SECTION
]33.]0] OF THE
FLORIDA PR00ATE
R WILL BE ECM
000 1IFua E 0001005
11:1=.1°,11i
1160RE AOI YEARS
001002105
5R THE
DATE
BA DEATH
H It
Du d10 ata ...a
elutionxl Inti•
4 miil' Nvr.mb•r
PewserrreWew
Added A. McGmou
Nae B•tl4 R 3561
A.Xerrry ler hrs.
WILL BE E
vero
2014
• -
',10MIIIS1RAT10N
W TIE CIRCUIT -
COURT N AND FOR
...COUNTY,
OBACASE iWu
IN RE: ESTATE Of
J 01AN 01N YAPOAVIS.
DAL
Owe.
TO xaCREDITORSTO ALL PERSONS
HAVING
OR
HAVING CMS OR
OFANND3 AGAINST
Nona
NO0CEOF-
4DMDOS1RA11011
PIE The •m*Saa*Ds*F
NOAANN: Fu
DA MART
DAVIS. detested.
Whete d. of death
• sep.mb.r m,
Cla p•Ceen in
Ncav Cwn ler
Y'r. CAM, R*r1
Prob. DiuMon.
I. Ws. al adich
15P,4 PS
Mr.•
An'msF."Mien n
a tl+im
.halo ace. No
O.29 re 11X1ad 11 THE
LATER OF THREE
100 TIYF 01 TOE
00 MSS RHNCATION
EM. 001
PHIS AFTER THE
OATS OF SERVICE
OFA COPY OF nes
NOiNE ONnMAL
•mm .
claims m. demo
nIn.t mo a+o.
iu"aaes"miari
Arr. THE DATE HOF
METIOFIRRSGFTN S NO-
TICE
0.
TICEl CLAIMS NDT
FILED WITHIN TNT
IA
E PEUODS SET
RTN IN SECTION
/1011101 PNOBATI
COR WILL BE FOR
NOTWRXST .DWG
THE NYE PEUODS
SET FORTH A00VE
NY CLAIM FILED
"" "1 (OAR THE
Na a1Nh•
4Ail
THOMAS CIEMENS
NOn0 -
NOME OF -
ADMATS1NA1ON
Moral
Jaden Fitt
`Mn Fields. P. PPA
5 0.3*
1-11Far MN 1].P
s'm.1N�ryrut
daea
POk0lbalm 414
914
1295913
BOARD 0 COUNTY COYYISSIONER3
FOR ST. MOE COUNTY DECLARATION
UNOTCEOLGJCIIHN N G 1AE
THIS MATTER CANE ON BEFORE the
Cmm Cpmmoaon.rF d a
7, 20144 "w unto Se. 7-42 Dab
2 fltafl BIS" dna uavra d
t v mull L•r Vit
•till and 100 me r•pue EaA St
facie CSvnry � amp Olrin�l m dr
'tldn0 Iw+W ar ttb
LOT
214321-tat
J'in 5,. St Um the Bwaims1 is m-
a.
a
l
Bwd.l P.pit1f0d"bdy Nc'uian0
County Minding Onlaal and hart i
51here-
00.hn:0NpMm deurd comm. el County Std tom
1. Thr Building d•5crtbed born is
er•by declared to M ,unsafe and to
..• My damaged uncarthary Is l.
Theme -ilding condition
pubis
3. Specific conditions .icexist M-
eta.: EReri4r siding a•vn
nhod. inside rats have ben opened
and•6mia1 airing has Wen Mrum .
paru ungs been temomd In
M1ane u N so -u otsO4Dae °g»IVYw
did o. INS mplYr herr
l.*144200.I250 n ado spar
"satyr a Dar matter may G MON
beforems St Ltd• County Beard of
County Commtaamm loud in Dar
St LuccimCoup. Comimusn Charm
lesa tltird : St Le
omAda.. Ms -
Cm mL.•P FL
nmm e
talon .ten respell:: (mil no dot
A. Anions mean n BON public hearing
YMud• 6sWhp m mee M: yr C•ma0d ustl r•mmal d the
Odinp. ice f Ni, r,uUm.
ul against
ethy reel property.
oety .11 WM was mown, which ,vmr
mmntt was ,Mgto Ss Lucie t County
• racr 1.
Order du to oothers am um.
�A���i Fy n . t . proceeds
vrwl •pdnn M cwt
S Ilam *20 p.m drden . appeal aha
Mier with rasp.: Wry maL
wcorwitiered te rom.gs .Har
al am beta comm. commis-
sion,
aagency.1 Maim.
du M •M
y nia record al
MM. may need m ensure n
Daa verba-
tim
m
mooedofmeem° and "da w team
mem and waehM wan Mud : N
pat a m w based. Mace. : r•Ru•stM
Wv•rrvrY m :: pnw.eNps. h1
bWub orybm amp , Mamp .i0
M30•wvn h Arry pearl mw: po.•0.
[[ ...on
rYene MW a
Mdisability "airing
ahawrl.r * : 0l . mi. Ire
[ "Tal cont, t 0r.11 taE-la:; ;TA-
Oo R]]lial-teto a lu. fary-
e mH°'Oi411 hours F!w : Au".
]1 TM nrA.• 17:21 mrtiaued Iran
Nas'*-
te Ntend and M 4*0 4( 00 com-
ments
orm
:emirM a atm" d : wfl
rino aril ,Im M hes.. t f
M suWpdNa Macs mry
m: G:.atmt
8. Should you "mire additional nc
noSrr-
mIrlm.iiYdg mmNc,mrer
GmMMtasimACLM.a
M.
OP" at mm 442-1441.
Subni0.0 by
01493 4 OAryn
y
Frm0hrw
AAO. O0ebet 23, Nps A. B. 14
NIA
TCNmS6053
▪ THE MOAT
COURT FO MART.
COUNTY. FLORIDA
PROBATE ONIEJON
CCOMPAYSIA
N RE FSTARE H
loo., 4MJDEh
D•m•d. TIDE
Tm1admin:axtrati'monf
Ratn• 'OerEerl, d'-
, Acme Lt•
31. 31 a.m .a
MA le
fl.Na. h*Cn:"a
Lich Et P.O. Box
6. Stun. Ronda
SM.
The 'unot O
a. *am
r•punr
pea mrd.. • Are,
anon. aro mt
OF PCS NOTICE OR
DATE OF SERVICE
OI A COM R NICE
EPN¢O1T.
AO Om aN e(
claims nma0Aston',
n onnds
emra lam MO �
ONT
AFWITHIN TER PIE DATE OF
THE FIRST PUBICA-
TION Of THIS N0.
TLLRL CLAIMS NOT
FILED WRHIN THE
11080141BICSET
733.7022 OF TnHE
(20111E
NOTICE .F.
4110M200111A003
FLORIDA PROBATE
CODE 01111 BE FOIL
EVERTHE 75,440O
PERIOD
5
SETFORTH IABO
ANYLE
W0 III YEARS OR
MORE AFTER THE
DA
STOTT? TE
Of DEATH IS
Te. 4a of 60 wu
n b v4mP
RH.'Wmd Rayn"
Hent
4 BOA
703. Ocem Walt
AJ603
une NarLMr3D16
.S 11 Bar Mamba:
non. :r "sena
HarAritZynot
JAA
em
Oran wan
ono "MR ]lab
Item. 661-461002
E VIII � AHArria•
S+nM�"in E.Mat
Mt11•4wmba i 15.
2314
01.
COURT INANI DFFOR
MAR1IN COIR.
HUBATE MEM
DISE .1.71.
N RE: ESTATE OF
ANN
NAME FEOER-
ori¢
TATO CREE ..
RSON0
0.12NU000PIS OR
insE.ATE:
'22:1.4313:
"`3na Weadau.
*95 * E11• d arm
."raN
Dru24n 201 46
me ngo Or
Wy.Fled'.Pm
s6
Noss or whi
Pod0v. r3aW3bA[
An
tend e:"; Q en:`.
M"""c'B, " to mo'efNl
loco Lan wah tltia
Eco`THIN 104
2AER OF THREE
Hs AFTER
3531 15*0101IO5S
OA
D yDAYS THISHAFTERT R9E THE
NONCE -
NOTICE R AGENCY ACTION TAKEN BY
ME
n. 0011* MYHYE OASYi.. MANAGEMENT
NM. 6 phren BON on 0..r 17. BON,
Co... Un Pm. Dat `+m Agrimt
heal3000 nmm
TM total M..
'aha is 0139 mod d Igroundwal•Lurl,m
wet.. . ked n Man"
Comm Samoa 34 Toomlim 31 M.
AlriA4NATAZAsiii'MA2
.L4414t1.
tl Vee witAm mos* a copy of a Tedniml
N:cig:nwv Davis
ID6vi01 mil: aen m.
e•carr
f5mvarmaxtvlmae0. ram. . �.d,Ya
PM Box 91:aB1�PN1M1ii FL m5>L
Tmt6w pre T6R b GM3p :
m P•mtSZwebsito at geridsmetweeMpareiting-
s0Ne el Dain
toad Gad en Te . 1 aamam 5. hen
�,ap,�Hnrrd 150. .Nva naw'
eri
palma. and ma.'.p. rind
a Mceiona
Mical
.5 "on RSA) a Mut api "My
rwbe•NON RA's
"apo 2Lt M Rbl• a04t10 ASX-
u Adru..M Cote.*0: P•
.n mut bemCFblra oil ONme CL. n
te
pH•tlw3net P. a b. 105. PLL
•m Fbde3.191bHy1.1 Rale BOA Pat
vaOi': o.EOarylA LAwn
"'A1JYF"A Ill drn of"me w 0001
.ion
: maw d Dena ade..
. does Gm
rat mall or anapumas l am"ad Mdm4 A ppmmmm
n •amidru"Mg tM N deem.
9d nun Desna
of Me mode• seven
by Dar Maria CNN M m• DsHes,
mattersPala..florals.rm,MeDr
la vu• hoer, :he Dr
M=d• °emma
e Ili•mcs
days.
•M: remised
reKg. Maines
boars TIO M deemed E.
('aims: dayon .
10 **IS1II1ibiMr�'.Arw tm.apl1011 Fbain
byms
AJAP•n umalyn.a0amglom n.m0mbore 9MN
.wa mat tN•ti.l.l ando-
m jmt IM Dsrritl 100 m BOM •
w amid• u 1. Mrd+e•n
p•Nib di Nva
raa,'da°M m• Lv0 Nmim el p6
4e•ua'm•P•ML•
ami Chaps 26:6. GAC
tliH"i• air: en m b mbeau=
W a'"ai•
W and
n. 00. 1327,
guays �phd b Aernnd+ • hearing
p
DM6N aim°el ybe Intlta
Me -
DM. Ts Intlim mry b•
Do,atlan.mb n
MB W�i>maus
on :pmer. m" ra
'm wi.n me rag.. Ira.
SME coma. ••twat. of Mang. m 9
W
E1.4,11 r - ed 26,01.111•
If
aMrh o do so. dw
MaeNa In0pl0ain
euro d 04jM, m dam.awla-
6a rwhm Y.u.nw haw cmesmMg :
naYm alm:<mmcr."
• Yp Danealso run. utl593.92e ..rami 5.4
FEV•n. MMgb�1 n: ewaSupport P�"o we
2x4 PLO' R 33174 W. OMI 324
Put NemeMe
Naavmv 42014
TCN2Es1P1
r--
NOOR OF •
Aosusss umora -.
OF
OF
DAT
E COPY Of SERVICE010
11'3:A47=11
OR.ON PIM
l
1 ieaon� si Ira
vam..r oaa:ad°
WITHIN
TNNPEE NONTNs
AFIFR 111E ATF
TIE TMST PUBUCM
TION OF THIS NO-
ME.
CLAIMS NOT
LEI WRHIN THE
NYE PFI Csty
310002 OF THE
FLORIDA PROBATE
CODE WILL BE FOR -
SET FORTH ABOVE.
TW ImAIM MARSLOR
OPE AFTER THE
DFF E13 FHA T N ANTE
oAMIED. nAal IhE:
im;a even
SEWN LL PEDERSEN
Pmentl
IT . h.MA 5
5
JAtom.rdtt
.. Pmenel
09209`1 FFlBa.dh*PA.
16
R 112
s
Rhona 2661721
Annuriwt"'"m
awl«n
..Nat
Po
iN A. 14
1.3.934
NONCE OF,
1039020TRAT1ON
W THF lacer
OWN OF THE
NINETEENTH
JUDWAI OI1CUR
ST.UPI'
PROBATE
lIRE: ESTATE
(AUL EP
1 W.I. M
NM PA
NOP..
CREDITORS
TM Meii.Vaaon of
PA14
JOdEP PAYU It I.
WA::"d,u 1 el,m
p•Mup In 1.1 G6.
00 .5 Mali
ds�aanE3N F�.leriam,:
ra'al is "Mehr is
Co" St. Lucia
Dar,100 0*s•.
The
ems 9SL The
d
As Pwstmai
eeeeeee snout and
tha furs. MM.
An creditorstttthe
d•esaa>A uml mer
ains .r L,anda
against d•csdant's
estae en wham a
owl iItogaDa'heti*
to be
maul ®ab °heir
WITHIN THE LATER
OF THS
AFTFTHOE TIME OF
OFIRST
TI500.
TICNS OR 130(0 GAYS
Arra TNF DATE R
5FIN10 00 A COPY
R THIS NORGE ON
A M.m 50the ...cadent erid
claims •. Oemmule
31
oastsa w ae
am nwn
NINON
MONTHS
ARTA ME IMT2 OF
ME FIRST PUBLICA-
TION OF THIS N0.
LLE DLWI
33.703 OF THE
FLORIDA PROBATE
WOE WEI BE FOR.
0X10017 MIESTPAOER1005
SET FORTH ABOVE.
INY CLAW FILED
WO RI YEARS 00.
0 0 EOENFP6HOATE
OCF OFATX IS
Tw�d.�Iofdur�
uPcs i A.
Norm.
Pamd
4n sE Southwood
n9
Smart R 3aPI
Pw aa-
J R•pne�tlNc
MY T. MALI. E*
Florida Bar N*.:
016501
E. MILONERMALE PA
iDman
fors Pismo• Florida
3.1253
.1.2146442.
1.
A
1N0vmwr 1
'aue1n
COURT FOR
ST. EWE
COUNTY RONDA
PrODBA.ONEON
x.00,03_
s62014o9mm
N RE ESTATE R
RICHARD L ROSS.
Deemed
NOTICE TO
"Mistra" of
TC E SCRIPS TREASURE COAST NEWSPAPERS E 5ATIND0V, NOVEMBER 0. 2012 E 13E
NOTICE OF •
AOMN1514910N
g ml4 Cluck
kConn
Ire Lech. Coon of
St. lade Comity.
ohri0a, Prvhna Dr
iia Is201 Drive.
Indian m FaDrive.,
Fon
H
• nam ,FMaAEb
'content
AFI .•deer nITI a el
'•m amo
N*er ""Jowhom
upmis
vwM
b•
this claims w.I'
Ceara ON OR BF-
fORE 111E LATER .
MONTHS AFTER
00011180 01100
OF PCS 1NOT. OR
P WES
7140DATE OF ME
ICE
OF A COPY. 1145
NOTICE ON WM-
m• deeeden a
claim °aema', n •aromas
do" F� MII"eht
WITHIN 3 MONTHS
AFTER ilE ATE CO
ME FOIST
PUBITION OF THIS A-
-
AELL CLAWS NOT
TIED WITHIN THE
NYE PERIODS SET
i0RT1 IE SECRON
;MAW PIPOBA*E
CODE WILL BE FOIL
A TOFV`WIFN STANDING
SHE TWE PERIODS
ET FC_LAIN IAEA
Tw PE AYiER
O F DENT'1 DATE
OF DEATH Is
11. 4*00.d 6n 5246
n Naranbv 4 m14u
R:NL Rem
munwmal
3222312.1
SmatR N]M
v.
as No.
LIA0.
D A PA
Mr elSOIP
Mem.
m.
1 SMdan River
Fen Pan. R 34350
PoH mag MwwOv°I.
,14
t0INIA
�RO'0. 0053. d, -
a a
mond 00 SME.
713.71 for unpaid
toning ed vasa
2111 OF MFFING
5: Nenmber
20M T01365131
NOTICE OF MEETING
PUMP NONCE
TOIJ� e e salt"
a1
sour r.:.rr.,
og".6M Ya.
xxiAt AI. NA.
Ira.
tie idi. s le•
enaman .Itb n.
lab: Net6r'mber 1.
TOIa5n14
NOTICE. SALE'
No. is
ext aft 4
•
z a�pt�ii9` wa
SMartarum i ems M
A The ender."
w sialYt
Mao. Me
'llm,ll t 9i.
Naaeh*Y :ny
Lula D+d3M2
.11
...H. Legg.
n'vA*"31a au
V 3.3150*
A. WM NO]
Mao Nu
Ea.
Fad• AMutt
SADA •6
P.
1, 4
324 O5 ECM..
RISUC AUCDON
In yr:trimis i1
ler whish
tcihm A lr61MAgn Ir
a F"M I TI m
h• UnaeW
B*b's
Mndaa • e.. no4haw
°I"E:,ie
tin Mo. to claim
pct ie.mr'n tiv
below Bmt•a fur.
MOW or otheneise
d' 1 en
LY.N
11.
2014a L.
P
2YI+,DR 3Pm
Customer Nm
ImrtldKArg nmb
B53at°�mrun Odc
N"nl.�sa
N.wsro Tia mars
H SIStaaaFeai"
ELTeat App.. °Di
Y3dr,nutp.
End.py Cwtrm
han. MsOdda-.''
04 TaNs. Ce 1. It
vk NwCFa X1,4
ToORMN
Nevem" 24. SOM
et F0 em ren
NOTICE R
PUBIC AUCTION
In accordance Nth
uu LJw, thmJ
�a�ai9 rnePtahf:;
°aaih Is
mmgdv M 430
ur1cL .
6FLF
Maps tWedd ,,Ta
la Me me. el mad
".Ina n i
Wts
(TI.Pme
'w n W to. nr
Sudor p.ym•m e
hmaq eaMred.
m ..d� 1
me SAI.. s`Vrd
RAI T:e.sl e s
'pha bid J,r e
°amP; u. xgu•.
ren x
712 .5. HIGHWAY 1,
3343.0 S0.1021111L
Jedis Green- Held
iuw Tvbmes
E°cur0 BeFminrM'At m
Lea+/D.Min
Egoln°i.ai, n`ol
Witham Dari'- Had
gds/ Tom TVStur
e.w
Pub.
Nerarker 1.
TwraMb
NOTICE OF MEE1110
NOTAW.I.
PUANG
3012222 0 52
0050
e.d el c...
is mmi,am.r.
NIGm Riven Ceumy,
HoNes• Hearing1001 Dana 1O
• nameor.oMed oull-
AN ORDINANCE OF
THE 00AR0 OF
COUNTY OF R WDA.
R ER COVNi Y.
WLO SECIIONY20E 'N0.
FRANCHISE FGR
A0.00'* 0 ISSU-
NANCE) AND SEC
o. 9416 IR.
CCPSPIOE10002R xs'
TIE CODE *2 10 v
ENni0 OI •OL113
ASTE 130503
TO0 odsNFPR0.
6510TO 10300
iFM WIN THE
REQUEST fOR M0.
POSAO PL ROVPROIDICESNG
NS:
FOR SFVFMOtIIM.
AN01E1FFE[T LVE
Th• Public NOW.,
'Mm
4"t7.D•cia"1% as ._.n...w
Mad M nun•et may b
Ma ma of MM.
tiArRe�n a• Cem-
500* lex,l* a,a4
which tima
ad parties nut b
The pume•heran
dISTRA:nets Tar wir.
s 111:3
Baa :'
Van BuL N.iea
ny•n• who ma
iaa:n' .vI a
Mrie DAM mod
um ;A.:ABA.1%1 the
L a..
tastinmny
Gamy+ " Fcdue:
Wale D'ma06te Aa
BOP wa
SS hen m BNmes
of : Tamp
NONCE OF MEETING
buffet Iran 10 lee
to 65 yYNet*
AHAQ`W UR9hbor-
mm0 :mi � iar•.
Te.o Is SI loco w
at ssillT. tiVs•
e.'T. Moat %des -
AA'
XIIEO(2O []BN
1NJP ]Y1*Ij TON
N34b4
Ch•NS mdA4
"e'tta"
brerW.
P•�pa PropmrUes
Llt, e a rc•y
O l• a' .aMdeL
a t"ils
2410.700.0003-000.
]a.�aTaon• (•pal d
T OTSE N'3 SDID
13 AP 2u1aEl 10N
/SONO
41) Oimasa Nn
the10't�iax.i
.
ation
so:
4 sm?yG
ht c n
MYER
COW. BOARD R
COUNTY
PE�DSIOW riCHAMALM
OF
TRUSTEES. ANY
PROCEEDINGS IS
.34 r.m .r
amt: Xr T006fmt
ducting
our. Plant and
I. Deme Its.
Plasm a n5tic
ry lurnYu! pmN
pmm3sa1 440: pslen
Ape 16,1:
p 7T • Gann ntl°I:
ruins. sachhiin-
•d •umstod °mama
rem
ing
toad:."dwhich Inw▪ an *Ow.
autos Me testimo
peat m be baies
at•d this da
iKen Berm, 10001.
P..un'Hon OM
Pum" Nwernher
Tunsu g,
ROME GF MEETING
A D TOR 6UCH
VRPO3E YAY
NEED TO ENSURE
THAT A VERBATIM
RECORD OF TNS
PROCEEDINGS 15
MADE
PUBL.. Nero*
TV nn
Your
ultimate
source for
jobs,
homes,
wheels &
stuff.
Treasure
Coast
Classifieds
Find your
way into
cyberspace
Locate your
Computer
System
in the
Treasure
Coast
Classifieds.
tcpalm.com
classified
. .
(NOTICE OF METING
HIo2YY aONE
FORT
HISTOMC
RERR
PRESERVATION
BOARD
NOTICE n5 HEREEIT
WEN that on Ns
Pf the.
Fon Dry
MU nd: Pub
eli
yyui H ec
'N, 3012 a:"t"
pm Men
m.CSAg
mmFort N
C2a.n
U.S100 N•rth
Rtt 1.T
Fon
n. rie;lL. TI•
RRAAm
er N Me Id
eoAwwiing applies
1) oa4t30t. Of M
s4 in t•
bmIby th
'PPrrelr. OOw 1
110, tarr o
the
tw. IwY0 V'21
OtRAIUr I"IO 1.
'S -14A 00id00.
] e
mmtppTppM �YY I da.
eN . HSAT
vU531N0E1 io
1 Catifuu d Av
set c`n •p1lpy tl n
Ogg: %NTi""d nla'
ga :e"lMeket
andscape
NOT=
O0wCE V41111
DISTRICT BOARD R
NUSTFEs Oi INR
N RIVER SWATS
HOOD hl CREGUEAR
0ER 14 201A ATll
ROO W FNF 80Agp
ROAN OF THF ..
OBRYAN AILDIN
N DIE ANO CING
ON TNF MAW ALL
RIS OF 5M
EA STATE COL COLLEGE
AT 3201 VIRGINIA
PIERCE. FLORIDA
.ESS[ NOME
n5 ALSO GIVEN
MAT
.ER AT.30NOVFY16. AN� 00.
GENOA HG
lL OE
BOY 2104%17
BFH L BflYAN A0.
BUIL.
H OLOSIDE
ON
THE
MAIN CAMPUS.
229 VIRGINIA
520,
NUE. FI DAORT HERCE,
FIOR34911.
6521. ANY 0
S W15NYG00
T 00AR0 02
CONSIDERATS IOTN
RDUYEN
<ERNING ISSUES
OR P5350111 011
"NY BE `NCTCI .
2020020/ OF 0 100
AT LEAST
The #1
Advertising
Source For
Recent Home
Buyers
Treasure Cant
Classl00ds
lcp•6ntmr NaatlM1d
FIND OUT
ABOUT THE
POWER OF
ADVERTISING
in
Treasure Coast
Classifieds
tcpalm.com
classified
It's Always
A Buyer's
Market at
Treasure Coast
Classified
TREASURE
COAST
CLASSIFIED
0VIMSOW.11*154 FIX
A oaw vat
. There is musk in classified.'.,
advertising. • •-
Find anything from piano's to
percussion. _ • _
TCPalm.com/
classifieds
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
Puhhc.Notice Items
(Int•
ormational)
TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE
Stan Boling, AICP/ ommunity Development Director
FROM: Phillip J. Matson, AIp
MPO Staff Director I`
DATE: November 4, 2014
SUBJECT: Transportation Disadvantaged Annual Public Hearing
To help local governments fulfill the functions of transportation disadvantaged planning, the
State Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged (CTD) requires that all counties
appoint a Designated Official Planning Agency (DOPA). The DOPA must fulfill.
410 responsibilities and duties as outlined in Chapter 427, Florida Statutes, and Rule 41-2. For
Indian River County, the Metropolitan Planning Organization is designated as the County's
DOPA.
•
As part of the statutory responsibilities, ' the Indian River County Metropolitan Planning
Organization appoints members to the Indian River County Transportation Disadvantaged
Local Coordinating Board (TDLCB) to assist in the coordination of transportation
disadvantaged services within the county. The purpose of the TDLCB is to identify local
service needs and to provide information, advice, direction, and support to the Community
Transportation Coordinator, the Senior Resource Association, Inc.
The TDLCB is required by the State Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged to hold
an annual public hearing in order to gather public input on transportation disadvantaged related
issues. At this time, the Transportation Disadvantaged Local Coordinating Board (TDLCB) is
inviting all interested citizens to a public hearing to discuss transportation disadvantaged issues
and to provide input to the Local Coordinating Board on transportation services (demand
response and fixed route) and unmet needs.
DATE: November 20, 2014
TIME: 10:00 AM
LOCATION: Conference Room B1-501
County Administration Building B
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
1 244
Anyone who needs a special accommodation for this meeting must contact the County's
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinator at 772 226-1223 at least 48 hours in
advance of the meeting.
FUNDING
There is no funding associated with this agenda item.
RECOMMENDATION
This is an informational item. No recommendation is required.
Indian River
Co.
Approved
Date
Admin.
14.
/1 f �I/7
Legal
;/) "flit
1/�
II -5114
r(4
Budget
I t(>:
Dept.
tf/y/Ay
Risk Mgr.
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM:
FOR: flit15 ( tq.9 I
1
2
245
--PUBLIC NOTICE
.(INFORMATIONAL),
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE
Stan Boling,
; Community Development Director
THROUGH: Sasan Rohani, AICP; Chief, Long Range Planning S'f(
FROM: Bill Schutt, AICP; Senior Economic Development Planner, Long -Range Planningt
DATE: November 3, 2014
SUBJECT: Notice of Scheduled Public Hearing for Upcoming Board Meeting
• It is requested that the following information be given formal consideration by the Board of
County Commissioners at its regular meeting of November 18, 2014.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Please be advised that the following public hearing item has been scheduled for Board
consideration:
December 2, 2014
1. County Initiated Request to Amend the 5 Year Capital Improvements Program and
Supporting Data and Analysis of the Capital Improvements Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. [Legislative]
RECOMMENDATION:
The above referenced public hearing item is provided for the Board's information. No action is
needed at this time.
APPROVED AGENDA
ITEM:
FOR:n1���1 26 /L/
B
41.7
F:\Counity Development\Users\LONG RANGE\PNI\Pni77.doc
Indian River Co.
Ap • • ved
Date
Admin.
14,!
////3//`f
Legal
.,'
�( -5- - 11
Budget
A
t 1 jG (4
Dept.
/ /ie
Risk Mgr.
--
246
ti
Office of the
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
Michael C. Zito, Assistant County Administrator
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
County Administrator
DATE: November 6, 2014
SUBJECT: Indian River County Legislative Delegation Meeting
• The Indian River County Legislative Delegation Meeting is scheduled for Friday, December 5th,
2014. The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m., and is being held at the City of Vero Beach, City
Council Chambers.
At the Board of County Commission meeting of October 21, 2014, the Board discussed and
established the Legislative Priorities for the 2015 Legislative Session. Staff recommends the
Board of County Commissioners determine which items on the priority list will be presented to
--the delegation, and who will make the presentation.
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM
BY:
ea.g,Th auk/
FO November 18, 2014
Indian River Co
Approved
Date
Administrator
_
// -5-./LTJ
Legal
t Ka
)1-13 - i
247
➢ Legislative Priorities (2015 Legislative Session)
o Sale of City of Vero Beach Electric to Florida Power & Light
o Indian River Lagoon
• North County Septic to Sewer Conversion
• Oyster Bed Project
• Canal Water to West Regional Waste Water Treatment
Plant
• Alternative Water Supply Projects
o All Aboard Florida
o Florida State Statute Chapter 180 — Utility Service Areas
o County Funding of Court Related Functions - Requirement
for 1.5% annual increase in expenses
o Beach Renourishment
o Reimbursement for Department of Juvenile Justice
Overcharges
o Support zone boundary modification to Canaveral Port
Authority Foreign Trade Zone 136 to include areas located in
Indian River County
o Reauthorization of Enterprise Zones
o Legislative oversight of FMPA
2015 Legislative Priorities — Approved 10/21/14
248
•
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BUILDING DIVISION
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: JOSEPH A. BAIRD
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: OCTOBER 21, 2014
SUBJECT: CONDEMNATION, DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF
UNSAFE STRUCTURES LOCATED AT 13185 76TH COURT AND 34
20TH LANE S.W.
THROUGH: STAN BOLING, DIRECTOR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FROM: SCOTT P. MCADAM, MCP, CBO
BUILDING OFFICIAL
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board
of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of November 18, 2014.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The structures listed in the attached condemnation list have been condemned and ordered
repaired or removed by the Building Official. Said structures have been inspected by staff
and are considered unsafe and detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the general
public.
As per county code requirements, the owners of the properties and others with an interest
in the properties were issued notices to repair or remove the structures within 60 days,
and advised of their right to appeal the condemnation order before the Indian River
County Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals. In addition, condemnation
cards were posted on the properties. The owners were also notified that the Board would
consider a Resolution to demolish the buildings and impose liens, if they failed to
demolish the structures or obtain permits to repair the structures. None of the owners
have applied for repair permits, demolition permits, or appealed the decision of the
Building Official.
F:\Community Development\BUILDING\BCC Agendas\11.18.14.doc
249
•
s
ANALYSIS:
The subject structures have been vacant for a considerable time. During that time,- the
buildings have continued to deteriorate and have been frequented by vandals and
transients. Not only have the owners failed to maintain the structures in compliance with
the Minimum Standard Codes, they have failed to bring the structures into compliance as
required by posted notice. Since the owners have not filed an appeal to the condemnation
order, the county may now proceed with demolition of the structures and with assessing a
lien against the property for demolition and removal. Recent County demolition
contracts have averaged $4,175 per residential site.
The County Attorney's Office has reviewed the title reports on these two parcels and
found no encumbrances (i.e. mortgages, liens) other than code enforcement liens or tax
certificates from unpaid taxes.
FUNDING
Funding in the amount of $8,350.00 (2 x $4,175) for the demolition and removal of the
unsafe structures on the two residential sites is available in the MSTU Fund/Reserve for
Contingency. After demolition bids are received and a demolition contract is awarded, a
budget amendment will need to be processed to move those funds to the MSTU/Road &
Bridge/Other Contractual Services- Account # 00421441-033490.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners declare the referenced
structures unsafe and a nuisance and order the buildings demolished, with related debris
removed from the property by a private vendor approved through standard bid
procedures.
Staff further recommends that the Board adopt the attached resolution authorizing the
Building Official to report the county's demolition and debris removal cost for said
structures to the County Attorney for the preparation and recording of a lien to be placed
on the real property of the owners of the demolished unsafe structures for the purpose of
recovering the County's demolition costs.
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM:
BY:
FOR:
at.6
November 18, 2014
F:\Community Development\BUILDING\BCC Agendas\ 1 1.18.14.doc
Indian River
Co.
Approved
Date
Admin.
///13/iY
Legal
_l.
i'%-)) - (7/
Budget
(Jt
Dept.
1l3 Iy
Risk Mgr.
.
250
•
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2. Condemnation List
3. Pictures of Condemned Structures
F:\Community Development\BUILDING\BCC Agendas\11.18.14.doc
251
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE DEMOLITION OF
UNSAFE STRUCTURES AND THE RECOVERY OF
COSTS.
WHEREAS, Indian River County has adopted the Property
Maintenance Code at Chapter 403, Indian River County Code; and
WHEREAS, Section 403.08 of the Property Maintenance Code
provides for the recovery of the costs of repairs to and/or demolitions of unsafe
structures; and
WHEREAS, Section 100.080 of the Indian River County Code
provides that the Board of County Commissioners may cause, by resolution, a
lien to be filed in the Official Record Books of the County against properties on
which the county has incurred demolition costs; and
WHEREAS, A notice of intent to adopt a lien resolution has been
given to the proposed lienee(s),
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the
unsafe structures on the properties described on the attached Condemnation List
be demolished; and that any costs incurred by County government as a result of
such demolition undertaken at the direction of the Board of County
Commissioners shall be recovered from the property upon which each unsafe
structure is located, as identified in the attached Condemnation List. The costs
of such demolition shall be reported to the Building Director who shall notify the
County Attorney's Office to prepare lien(s) for the recovery of those costs,
F:\Community Development\BUILDING\BCC Agendas\ 11.18.14.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -
to be placed upon the real property of the unsafe structures as listed in the
attached Condemnation List, any such liens bearing interest at the rate
established by the Board of County Commissioners for the calendar year in
which the lien is recorded, such interest to commence accruing from the date the
lien is recorded in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, until such
time as the lien, including interest, is paid.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
, and seconded by Commissioner and,
upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Wesley S. Davis, Commissioner
Joseph E. Flescher, Commissioner
Peter D. O'Bryan, Commissioner
Bob Solari, Commissioner
Tim Zorc, Commissioner
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 18th day of November, 2014.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
, Chairman
ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk
By
Clerk of Court and Comptroller
APPROVED AS TO FORM -'PND
LEGA FFICIENCY /
By
William K. DeBraal
Deputy County Attorney
F:\Community Development\BUILDING\BCC Agendas\11.18.14.doc
253
•
•
CONDEMNATION LIST:
1. Owner: Linda Jackson
Property: 13185 76th Court (3 structures house, pool 8 shed)
Tax ID#: 30-38-36-00004-0010-00017.0
Legal Desc.: Lot 17, Indian River Twin Estates Subdivision, Jean's
Unit, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat
Book 8, Page 31, of the Public Records of Indian River
County.
2. Owner: Vincent Valenti
Property: 34 20th Lane S.W.
Tax ID#: 33-40-31-00003-0030-00003.0
Legal Desc.: Lot 3, Block 3, Vero Beach Highlands Subdivision, Unit
1, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat
Book 5, at Page 29, of the Public Records of Indian
River County, Florida.
F:\Community Development\BUILDING \BCC Agendas\ 1 1.18.14.doc
W, ty S.i
why
•.afl2iir+�'�L'x.'•L`t+'�.—�'�'-t..x '� LLdl'h' ..' T`i �S'�u. _ _ _ _ _
__ '� � �:. ;~ +.. � A• Vii... S,.eC.r_�%
Y ar' k,GiJ�''�ea ii Y
LS6. Ifi'3;.
gry&-
TV!: P.
;� 6
z w
8
>' §
_,..,,,,„...__....._.„...„....,,,,....,....„,..,,_
,..,,......
x
.. «,M»' = = -,fib-'*�,.C'* a-' `�' ' 'ji ...'0-
•
rte' sf,,,..�•�`'�i• ' i--i^ ��i. +.¢ 'If ��"h...-.-•-'�� ✓„�y'.� b`��"�'.
.�r.r �• •.&,f�e� ���s.�.s•?s `t��^-`.aa+/far.:C" � ▪ -012'x':.,
::
Cry.: .7-01-. aw-; �" '�cr �s .. -.: • ,,
.�a�
l':-'1-!„--,• -:11-3.....,,-
'fid �i�' _ d Yt+' F ,;
�• +$f"v.`+7.'^F .- -`moi•"" ;
Ce.
9
0
�,� ��� x;
��
6
CONDEMNATIONS
11/18/2014
1
13185 76th CT.
OWNED BY:
LINDA JACKSON
PARCEL #
30383600004001000017.0
2
12/29/2014
12/29/2014
12/29/2014
a(,7 -A- 4
12/29/2014
au? -A-5
12/29/2014
a(,,I - A-6
34 20th LN SW
• OWNED BY:
• VINCENT VALENTI
• PARCEL #
• 33403100003003000003.0
14
12/29/2014
ato?-A-7
12/29/2014
.),G$- A- 8
12/29/2014
12/29/2014
12/29/2014
11,g- A- 11
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph A. Baird
County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: Ap
/OC
Stan Boling, AICP
Community Dev op ent Director
FROM: Roland M. DeBlois, AICP
Chief, Environmental Planning
DATE: November 5, 2014
RE: Approval of Contract Agreement with Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC
for Dock Renovations at the Jones's Pier Conservation Area
It is requested that the Board of County Commissioners formally consider the following information at
the Board's regular meeting of November 18, 2014.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At its meeting on September 16, 2014, the Board of County Commissioners authorized county staff to
negotiate a contract agreement with Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC to repair docks at the Jones's
Pier Conservation Area, as described in a Request For Proposals (RFP) (see motion summary minutes,
Attachment 1 to this report).
At that time, the Board authorized staff negotiations with Summerlin's Marine Construction with a caveat
that the work include renovation, not removal, of a dilapidated single-family dock on the northern
shoreline of the property. The Board also directed county staff to contact the Florida Inland Navigation
District (FIND) to determine the opportunity to request additional grant funds toward the project, given a
revised cost estimate as reported to the Board at the September 16 meeting.
Staff has since contacted FIND and has negotiated a contract agreement with Summerlin's Marine
Construction, LLC (including renovation of the northern dock), and is reporting back to the Board with
the contract agreement for the Board's approval consideration.
ANALYSIS
At the September 16 Board meeting, staff reported that a FIND grant that had been awarded for the
project covered $15,000 of an estimated revised overall project cost of $66,099, as reflected in the
following table:
1
269
•
•
Jones's Pier FIND Waterways Assistance Program Project
(REVISED ESTIMATE AS,PRESENTED AT THE 9/16/14•BCC MEETING)
Project Elements
Estimated Cost
FIND Cost (50% -
not to exceed
$15,000)
County Cost
Re -decking and repair of main dock
$46,650
$7,500
$39,150
Installation of boatlift for marine patrol vessel
$9,449
$4,000
$5,449
Removal of dilapidated single-family dock
$5,000
$1,000
$4,000
Installation of kiosk and signage
$5,000
$2,500
$2,500
TOTAL
$66,099
$15,000
$51,099
Since the September 16 meeting, staff contacted FIND to determine the opportunity of increasing FIND's
share toward the revised cost estimate of the project. Staff's finding was that, under the current approved
grant, there is no opportunity to obtain increased funding beyond the $15,000 cap. It was suggested by
FIND staff, however, that if the County chose to phase the project, the County could apply for a "second
phase" FIND grant in the February -April 2015 application window for additional funding for FY 2015-
16.
Single-family dock repair/replacement
Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC has provided a cost of $10,880 to repair/replace the northern.
single-family dock (see Attachment 2). That cost would be in addition to the $5,000 cost of removal and
disposal of the existing dilapidated dock. Based on that cost, the overall project estimate is further revised
as follows:
Jones's Pier FIND Waterways Assistance Program Project
(REVISED TO INCLUDE REPLACEMENT OF NORTHERN S.F. DOCK)
Project Elements
Estimated Cost
FIND Cost (50% -
not to exceed
$15,000)
County Cost
Re -decking and repair of main dock
$46,650
$7,500
$39,150
Installation of boatlift for marine patrol vessel
$9,449
$4,000
$5,449
Removal & replacement of dilapidated single-
family dock
S15,880
$1,000
$14,880
Installation of kiosk and signage
$5,000
$2,500
$2,500
TOTAL
$76,979
$15,000
$61,979
Phasing of project elements
The contract agreement with Summerlin's Marine Construction includes all of the elements of the project
with the exception of kiosk and signage installation. If the County chooses to phase the project in an
effort to secure more FIND grant funds, certain elements (such as the boatlift, kiosk and signs, and/or
removal/replacement of the northern dock) could be delayed as a second phase. Under that scenario,
however, the delayed elements could not be constructed prior to FY 2015-16, and FIND grant funding
would not be guaranteed. For those reasons, coupled with the docks being a key feature of the Jones's
Pier site for which repair is necessary for public access, staff's position is that the project should proceed
as one phase, prior to FY 2015-16.
Funding
County environmental land bond funds are eligible to be used as the County's funding source for the
work. As of September 30, 2014, the cash balance of the environmental land bond fund account was
2
M:\LAACUONES'S PIER\FIND Grant APP 2013\Jones Pier Approval of Summerlin Contract Agreement BCC item for I I-18-14.rtf
270
$201,800.32, an amount which covers the estimated $61,979 needed for the Summerlin contract and for
the overall project.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached contract agreement (and
Change Order #1 for replacement of the northern dock) with Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC to
conduct the marine construction work described herein, with County costs to be funded with
environmental land bond funds.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Motion summary minutes from 9/16/14 BCC meeting.
2. Summerlin's estimate for replacement of northern single-family dock.
3. Contract Agreement (with Change Order #1 for northern dock replacement).
APPROVED:
FOR: November 18, 2014
BY:44•` + \\I 441
3
M:\LAACUONES'S PIER\FIND Grant APP 2013Vones Pier Approval of Summerlin Contract Agreement BCC item for 1 I-18-14.rtf
271
I.R.County
Approved
Date
Admin.
// /j f/+/
Legal
1 1 I`�
'17�
Budget
4
f1
Dept.
O
///7j11N
Risk Mgr.
.! .
11-0-iy
3
M:\LAACUONES'S PIER\FIND Grant APP 2013Vones Pier Approval of Summerlin Contract Agreement BCC item for 1 I-18-14.rtf
271
10:20
a.m.
11.
12.
10:24
a.m.
2. Request to Speak from Marty Baum Regarding the Oslo Boat
Ramp
114
Marty Baum, Indian Riverkeeper, 1192 NE Frances Street,
spoke in opposition to the Oslo Boat Ramp Project.
C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
None
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MATTERS
None
DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A.
Community Development
1. Recommendation of Award for RFP No. 2014030: Jones's Pier
Boat Dock Improvements
(memorandum dated September 8,2014)
Chief of Environmental Planning Roland DeBlois provided
background on the need for boat dock improvements at the
historic Jones's Pier site located on south Jungle Trail. He
stated that in 2013, the County secured a 50% matching
grant from the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND),
but that the cost for the project came in higher than
originally estimated under the grant. Chief DeBlois
thereafter gave staffs recommendation for Board approval
of Summerlin's Marine Construction LLC to undertake the
dock removal, repair, and boat lift installation work, with
the County's costs funded by Environmental Land Bond
Funds.
Vice Chairman Davis suggested repairing, not removing,
the dilapidated single-family dock to the north.
Chairman O'Bryan asked Chief DeBlois to report back to
FIND and advise them that the project costs are higher than
originally estimated.
115-127
ON MOTION by Vice Chairman Davis, SECONDED by
Commissioner Flescher, the Board unanimously: (1)
approved the Evaluation Committee's final ranking; and (2)
authorized staff negotiations with Summerlin's Marine
Construction LLC, to conduct the marine construction
work described in Request For Proposal (RFP) No.
2014030, with the caveat to renovate, not destroy, the
dilapidated single-family dock to the north, with County
costs tobe funded with Environmental Land Bond Funds.
Board of County Commission Minutes.
September 16, 2014
ATTACNM.ZNT 1 Page 11
272
Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC
200 Naco Road #C
Fort Pierce, FL 34946
Phone # 772-464-6090
Fax # 772-464-7470
Summerlin7cs@aol.com
Name / Address
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
1800 27TH STREET, BLDG B
VERO BEACH, FL 32960
att: Roland
Estimate
Date
Estimate #
9/23/2014
1917
Project
Description
IN REFERENCE TO JONES PIER NORTH DOCK, SUMMERLIN'S AGREES TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL IS INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL BID.
FURNISH AND INSTALL 5' X 77' NORTH DOCK FOR THE SUM OF $10.880.00. WORK TO BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE TO
ENCLOSED DRAWINGS.
WE RECOMMEND A CURB ON EACH SIDE TO PREVENT FALLS FOR THE SUM OF $I.350.00.
THE TERMINAL PLATFORM IS CURRENTLY 10 x 22'. WE RECOMMEND A 8' x 20' TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THE DEP CURRENT
REGULATIONS. COST FOR THE 8' x 20 = S3,200.00.
PERMITS:
DRAWINGS - IF REQUIRED $400.00 - $600.00
ENGINEER - $300.00
PERMIT FEE- TBD
FULL PAYMENT IS DUE UPON COMPLETION.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE.
TO ACCEPT THIS PROPOSAL AND BE PLACED ON OUR
SCHEDULE. YOU MUST SIGN AND RETURN TO OUR OFFICE.
THIS ESTIMATE IS ONLY VALID FOR 90 DAYS.
•
Signature
ATTACHMENT 2
273
Contractor Agreement
THIS AGREEMENT is by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida
organized and existing under the Laws of the State of Florida, (hereinafter called OWNER) and Summerlin's
Marine Construction, LLC (hereinafter called CONTRACTOR).
OWNER and CONTRACTOR, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, agree as
follows:
ARTICLE 1- WORK
1.01 CONTRACTOR shall complete all Work as specified or indicated in the Contract Documents. The
Work is generally described as follows:
Renovations to Jones Pier Docks
ARTICLE 2 - THE PROJECT
2.01 The Project for which the Work under the Contract Documents may be the whole or only a part is
generally described as follows:
Project Name: Renovations to Jones Pier Docks
RFP Number: 2014030
Project Address: 7770 Jungle Trail, Vero Beach, FL
ARTICLE 3 — TERM AND CONTRACT TIMES
3.01 Term: This Agreement shall remain in effect for a term of one (1) year, unless otherwise sooner
terminated by mutual consent of the parties.
3.02 Time of Completion: Project shall be completed, to include approval by the Building Division 30
days from receipt of the Notice to Proceed.
ARTICLE 4 - CONTRACT PRICE
4.01 OWNER shall pay CONTRACTOR for completion of the Work an amount in current funds equal to
the sum of the amounts determined pursuant to paragraph 4.01.A and summarized in paragraph 4.01.B,
below:
A. For all Work, at the prices stated in CONTRACTOR's Proposal, attached hereto as an exhibit.
B. THE CONTRACT SUM subject to additions and deductions provided in the Contract Documents:
Numerical Amount: $61,099.00.
Written Amount: Sixty one thousand ninety nine dollars and 00/100.
Page 1 of 8
ATTACHMENT 3
274
ARTICLE 5 - COMPENSATION
5.01 Owner shall make only one payment for the entire amount of the contract when the work has
been completed. Payment may be requested per Station, should work at one be completed and
approved by the Building Division prior to completion at the second. Upon a determination of
satisfactory completion, the COUNTY Project Manager will authorize payment to be made. All payments
for services shall be made to the CONTRACTOR by the COUNTY in accordance with the Local
Government Prompt Payment Act, as may be amended from time to time (Section 218.70, Florida
Statutes, et seq.).
ARTICLE 6 — INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION
6.01 The CONTRACTOR shall not commence work on this Agreement until it has obtained all
insurance required under this Agreement and such insurance has been approved by the COUNTY's Risk
Manager.
6.02 CONTRACTOR shall procure and maintain, for the duration of this Agreement, the minimum
insurance coverage as set forth herein. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the
CONTRACTOR's fee:
A. Workers' Compensation: To meet statutory limits in compliance with the Workers'
Compensation Law of Florida. This policy must include employers' liability with a limit
$1,000,000 for each accident, $500,000 disease policy limit and $100,000 disease each
employee. Such policy shall include a waiver of subrogation as against Owner on account of
injury sustained by an employee(s) of the CONTRACTOR.
B. General Liability: A per occurrence form policy, including Premise Operations, Independent
Contractors, Products and Completed Operations including X, C, U (Explosion, Collapse,
Underground) Broad Form Property Damage, Broad Form Property Damage Endorsement, with
a combined single limit of not Tess than $1,000,000 general aggregate to include
products/completed operations, personal injury/advertising liability, fire damage /legal liability,
and medical payments. Limits can be layered with an Excess Liability Policy (Umbrella). ,
C. Business Automobile Liability: Coverage shall include Owned vehicles and Hired/Non-Owned
vehicles, for a combined single limit (bodily injury and property damage) of not less than
$1,000,000/combined single limit (Bodily Injury/Property Damage); personal injury protection -
- statutory limits; $100,000 uninsured/underinsured motorist; $100,000/hired/non-owned auto
liability. Limits can be layered with Excess Liability Policy (Umbrella).
D. Builder's Risk Insurance: The contractor shall procure and maintain builder's risk insurance ("all
risk") with limits equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the completed value of the
structure(s), building(s), or addition(s). It shall include a Waiver of Occupancy Endorsement to
enable the County to contract calls for the installation of machinery or equipment, the policy
must be endorsed to provide coverage during transit and installation. The maximum deductible
allowable under this coverage is $500.00 per claim. (If applicable)
E. Longshoreman's Insurance: Contractor shall procure and maintain Longshoreman's insurance
to the extent required by law.
6.03 Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary.
Page 2 of 8
275
•
•
6.04 All required insurance policies shall be placed with insurers licensed to do business in Florida
and with a Best's rating of A -VII or better.
6.05 The insurance policies procured shall be occurrence forms, not claims made policies with the
exception of professional liability.
6.06 A certificate of insurance shall be provided to the COUNTY's Risk Manager for review and
approval, ten (10) days prior to commencement of any work under this Agreement. The COUNTY shall
be named as an additional insured on all policies except workers' compensation and professional
liability.
6.07 The insurance companies selected shall send written verification to the COUNTY's Risk Manager
that they will provide 30 days prior written notice to the COUNTY's Risk Manager of its intent to cancel
or modify any required policies of insurance.
6.08 CONTRACTOR shall include all Subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish
separate certificates and endorsements for each Subcontractor. All coverages for Subcontractors shall
be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
6.09 The COUNTY, by and through its Risk Manager, reserves the right periodically to review any and
all policies of insurance and to reasonably adjust the limits of coverage required hereunder, from time
to time throughout the term of this Agreement. In such event, the COUNTY shall provide the
CONTRACTOR with separate written notice of such adjusted limits and CONTRACTOR shall comply within
thirty (30) days of receipt thereof. The failure by CONTRACTOR to provide such additional coverage shall
constitute a default by CONTRACTOR and shall be grounds for termination of this Agreement by the
COUNTY.
6.10 The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and hold harmless the COUNTY, and its officers and
employees, from liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable
attorneys' fees, arising out of or related to the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful
conduct of the CONTRACTOR and other persons employed or utilized by the CONTRACTOR in the
performance of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 7 - CONTRACTOR'S REPRESENTATIONS
7.01 In order to induce OWNER to enter into this Agreement CONTRACTOR makes the following
representations:
A. CONTRACTOR has examined and carefully studied the Contract Documents and the other related
data identified in the Request for Proposal documents.
B. CONTRACTOR has visited the Site and become familiar with and is satisfied as to the general, local,
and Site conditions that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work.
C. CONTRACTOR is familiar with and is satisfied as to all federal, state, and local Laws and Regulations
that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work.
D. CONTRACTOR has obtained and carefully studied (or assumes responsibility for having done so) all
additional or supplementary examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data
concerning conditions (surface, subsurface, and Underground Facilities) at or contiguous to the
Site which may affect cost, progress, or performance of the Work or which relate to any aspect of
Page 3 of 8
276
the means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction to be employed by
CONTRACTOR, including applying the specific means, methods, techniques, sequences, and
procedures of construction, if any, expressly required by the Contract Documents to be employed
by CONTRACTOR, and safety precautions and programs incident thereto.
E. CONTRACTOR does not consider that any further examinations, investigations, explorations, tests,
studies, or data are necessary for the performance of the Work at the Contract Price, within the
Contract Times, and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract
Documents.
F. CONTRACTOR is aware of the general nature of work to be performed by OWNER and others at
the Site that relates to the Work as indicated in the Contract Documents.
G. CONTRACTOR has correlated the information known to CONTRACTOR, information and
observations obtained from visits to the Site, reports and drawings identified in the Contract
Documents, and all additional examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data
with the Contract Documents.
H. CONTRACTOR has given OWNER written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies
that CONTRACTOR has discovered in the Contract Documents, and the written resolution thereof
by OWNER is acceptable to CONTRACTOR.
I. The Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms
• and conditions for performance and furnishing of the Work.
s
ARTICLE 8 - CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
8.01 The Contract Documents consist of the following:
A. This Agreement (pages 1 to 7 inclusive);
B. Certificate of Liability Insurance
C. CONTRACTOR'S RFP Submittal (pages 1 to 23 , inclusive);
D. Sworn Statement Under Section 105.08, Indian River County Code, on Disclosure of Relationships
(pages 10 to 11 of 13 , inclusive);
ARTICLE 9 - MISCELLANEOUS
9.01 Independent Contractor. It is specifically understood and acknowledged by the parties hereto
that the CONTRACTOR or employees or Subcontractors of the Contractor are in no way to be considered
employees of the COUNTY, but are independent contractors performing solely under the terms of the
Agreement and not otherwise.
9.02 Request for Proposals. It is specifically understood and acknowledged by the parties hereto that all
of the requirements set forth in the Request for Proposals dated May 27, 2014 (including addenda 1
through 2) shall be incorporated herein.
Page 4 of 8
277
•
9.03 Merger; Modification. Except as set forth in Section 8.2 above, this Agreement incorporates and
includes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, correspondence, conversations, agreements or
understandings applicable to the matters contained herein and the parties agree that there are no
commitments, agreements, or understandings of any nature whatsoever concerning the subject matter of
the Agreement that are not contained in this document. Accordingly, it is agreed that no deviation from
the terms hereof shall be predicated upon any prior or contemporaneous representations or agreements,
whether oral or written. No alteration, change, or modification of the terms of this Agreement shall be
valid unless made in writing and signed by the CONTRACTOR and the COUNTY.
9.04 Governing Law; Venue. This Agreement, including all attachments hereto, shall be construed
according to the laws of the State of Florida. Venue for any lawsuit brought by either party against the
other party or otherwise arising out of this Agreement shall be in Indian River County, Florida, or, in the
event of federal jurisdiction, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
9.05 Remedies; No Waiver. All remedies provided in this Agreement shall be deemed cumulative and
additional, and not in lieu or exclusive of each other or of any other remedy available to either party, at
law or in equity. Each right, power and remedy of the parties provided for in this Agreement shall be
cumulative and concurrent and shall be in addition to every other right, power or remedy provided for in
this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. The failure of
either party to insist upon compliance by the other party with any obligation, or exercise any remedy, does
not waive the right to so in the event of a continuing or subsequent delinquency or default. A party's
waver of one or more defaults does not constitute a waiver of any other delinquency or default. If any
legal action or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement or because of an alleged
dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any provisions of this Agreement, each
party shall bear its own costs.
9.06 Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable for the remainder of this Agreement,
then the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it
is held invalid or unenforceable shall not be affected, and every other term and provision of this
Agreement shall be deemed valid and enforceable to the extent permitted by law.
9.07 Availability of Funds. The obligations of the COUNTY under this Agreement are subject to the
availability of funds lawfully appropriated for its purpose by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County.
9.08 No Pledge of Credit. The CONTRACTOR shall not pledge the COUNTY's credit or make it a
guarantor of payment or surety for any contract, debt, obligation, judgment, lien or any form of
indebtedness.
9.09 Public Records. Indian River County is a public agency subject to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes.
The CONTRACTOR shall comply with Florida's Public Records Law. Specifically, the CONTRACTOR shall:
A. Keep and maintain public records that ordinarily and necessarily would be required by the
COUNTY in order to perform the service.
Page 5 of 8
278
•
•
B. Provide the public with access to public records on the same terms and conditions that the
COUNTY would provide the records and at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in chapter
119 or as otherwise provided by law.
C. Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records
disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law.
D Meet all requirements for retaining public records and transfer, at no cost, to the COUNTY all
public records in possession of the CONTRACTOR upon termination of the Agreement and destroy any
duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure
requirements. All records stored electronically must be provided to the COUNTY in a format that is
compatible with the information technology systems of the COUNTY.
A. Failure of the CONTRACTOR to comply with these requirements shall be a material breach of this
Agreement. The CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes (Public
Records Law) in connection with this Agreement.
9.10 Notices. Any notice, request, demand, consent, approval, or other communication required or
permitted by this Agreement shall be given or made in writing and shall be served, as elected by the party
giving such notice, by any of the following methods: (a) Hand delivery to the other party; (b) Delivery by
commercial overnight courier service; or (c) Mailed by registered or certified mail (postage prepaid), return
receipt requested at the addresses of the parties shown below:
County: Indian River County
Attn: Roland M. DeBlois, AICP
Chief, Environmental Planning and Code Enforcement Section
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
(772) 226-1258
Facsimile: (772) 978-1806
rdeblois@ircgov.com
Contractor: Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC
Attn.: Joy Summerlin-Yancy
200 Naco Road # C
Fort Pierce, FL 34949
(772) 201-6099
Facsimile: (772)464-7470
Summerlin7cs@aol.com
Notices shall be effective when received at the address as specified above. Facsimile transmission
is acceptable notice effective when received, provided, however, that facsimile transmissions received
(i.e., printed) after 5:00 p.m. or on weekends or holidays, will be deemed received on the next day that is
not a weekend day or a holiday. The original of the notice must additionally be mailed. Either party may
change its address, for the purposes of this section, by written notice to the other party given in
accordance with the provisions of this section.
Page 6 of 8
279
s
•
9.11 Survival. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, each obligation in this Agreement to be
performed by CONTRACTOR shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement.
9.12 Construction. The headings of the sections of this Agreement are for the purpose of convenience
only, and shall not be deemed to expand, limit, or modify the provisions contained in such Sections. All
pronouns and any variations thereof shall be deemed to refer to the masculine, feminine or neuter,
singular or plural, as the identity of the party or parties may require. The parties hereby acknowledge and
agree that each was properly represented by counsel and this Agreement was negotiated and drafted at
arm's length so that the judicial rule of construction to the effect that a legal document shall be construed
against the draftsperson shall be inapplicable to this Agreement
9.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall
be deemed to be an original copy and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
9.14 Sovereign Immunity. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to, or shall be interpreted to,
constitute a waiver or limitation of the COUNTY's sovereign immunity.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, OWNER and
CONTRACTOR have signed this Agreement in duplicate. One counterpart each has been delivered to
OWNER and CONTRACTOR. All portions of the Contract Documents have been signed or identified by
OWNER and CONTRACTOR or on their behalf.
This Agreement will be effective on , 20_ (the date the Contract is approved by the
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners, which is the Effective Date of the Agreement).
OWNER:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By:
By:
Chairman
seph A. Baird, County Administrator
APPRO
By.
TO
fiLyOn Reingold, County Attorney
UFFICIENCY:
Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller
Attest:
Deputy Clerk
(SEAL)
Page 7 of 8
CONTRACTOR:
LSC
By:
(Contbr) \k{(
n,, 6L// -Y\ "�
,
(CORPORATE SEAL) ; 6V
Attest
280
•
•
Contract Documents on File in County Commission Office:
B. Certificate of Liability Insurance
C. Contractor's RFP Submittal
D. Sworn Statement on Disclosure Relationships
Page 8 of 8
281
•
SECTION 00942 - Change Order Form
No. 1
DATE OF ISSUANCE: November 18, 2014 EFFECTIVE DATE: November 18, 2014
OWNER: Indian River County
CONTRACTOR: Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC
Bid No.: N/A
Project: RENOVATIONS TO JONES' PIER DOCKS
OWNER's Proj. # RFP 2014030
This Change Order authorizes the following changes in the Contract Documents for the
Renovations to Jones' Pier Docks Construction Agreement:
Description:
Change Order No.1 is to replace /reconstruct the northern single-family dock on the Jones'
Pier property, in addition to the original contract sum.
Reason for Change Order:
County determination to replace/ reconstruct the dilapidated single-family dock rather than
just remove/dispose of the dock.
Attachment: (List documents supporting change)
Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC Estimate for Replacement of Northern Dock
CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE:
APPROVED:
By:
Description
Amount
Original Contract Price
$61,099.00
Net Increase of this Change Order:
$10,880.00
Contract Price with all approved Change Orders:
$71,979.00
ACCEPTED:
By:
APPROVED:
By:
CONTRACTOR (Signature)
Date:
OWNER (Signature)
Date: Approved by the BCC 11/18/14
00942 - 1
M:\LAACUONES'S PIERIFIND Grant APP 2013\Summerlin Contract Change Order 1.doc Rev. 05/0-1
Summerlin Contract Change Order 1
282
Approval of Contract Agreement with
Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC
for Jones' Pier Dock Improvements
Board of County Commissioners
November 18, 2014
Install educational
(I-listonc-home6 !sheriff's depu
caretakePresidence
ata.- A- 1
12/29/2014
aB'-ik- 2
Jones' Pier FIND Grant Estimate
(Presented at 9/16/14 BCC Meeting)
Project Elements
Estimated Cost
FIND Cost
County Cost
Re-deck/repair main dock
$46,650
$7,500
$39,150
Install boatlift for marine patrol
$9,449
$4,000
$5,449
Remove dilapidated dock
$5,000
$1,000
$4,000
Install kiosk/educational signage
$5,000
$2,500
$2,500
Total
$66,099
$15,000
$51,099
September 16, 2014 BCC Meeting:
• Board authorization for staff to negotiate a contract with
Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC for Jones' Pier
dock repairs (per RFP)
• Board direction that the northern dilapidated dock be
renovated (not just removed)
• Board direction that staff check with the Florida Inland
Navigation District (FIND) on opportunity for increased
grant funding
12/29/2014
a.81 -q-3
Summerlin's Marine Construction, LLC
• Re -deck and repair main dock:
• Install boatlift (including electric):
• Remove dilapidated s.f. dock:
• Replace dilapidated s.f. dock:
$46,650
$9,449
$5,000
$61,099*
+ $10,880
$71,979*
(* Does not include kiosk and signage; not part of RFP /
marine construction work)
Jones' Pier FIND Grant Estimate
Revised to Include North Dock Replacement
Project Elements
Estimated Cost
FIND Cost
County Cost
Re-deck/repair main dock
$46,650
$7,500
$39,150
Install boatlift for marine patrol
$9,449
$4,000
$5,449
Remove & replace dilapidated
$15,880*
$1,000
$14,880*
S.F. north dock
Install kiosk/educational signage
$5,000
$2,500
$2,500
Total
$76,979*
$15,000
$61,979*
*$10,880 additional cost to replace north single-family dock
12/29/2014
ala -A• 4
FIND Grant Funding
• Current grant FIND funding amount capped at $15,000
• Opportunity to "phase" project by applying for a "2"d
phase" grant for delayed elements for FY 2015-16
• Pluses(+): Phasing of certain elements (e.g., north dock
replacement, boat lift) would allow for more FIND grant
match opportunity
• Minuses(-): Delay in overall project; FIND funding for 2nd
phase not guaranteed.
Staff Recommendation
• Staff recommends that the Board:
. Approve the contract (and Change Order #1 for dock
replacement) with Summerlin's Marine Construction,
LLC; and
. Proceed with all elements of the Jones' Pier dock
repairs (as one phase) under the current FIND grant,
with County costs funded with environmental land
bond funds.
12/29/2014
.3A -A- 5
131
County Attorney's Matters - B.C.C. 11.18.14
Office of
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
Vt.--
DATE: November 6, 2014
SUBJECT: City of Vero Beach Electric Utility Update
BACKGROUND.
This memorandum is provided as an update on the City of Vero Beach electric utility ,issue. As you are
aware, Indian River County (the "County") is involved in two legal proceedings concerning the City of
Vero Beach electric utility.
First, the County filed a Petition for a Declaratory Statement (the "Petition") from the Florida Public
Service Commission. It is the County's position in the Petition, that without the franchise, the City of
Vero Beach will no longer have the legal authority to occupy or utilize the rights-of-way within the
unincorporated areas of the County once the franchise expires. The overarching issue in the Petition is
that the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") needs to be able to properly plan and prepare for a
successor electric service provider to serve the unincorporated areas currently being served by the City of
Vero Beach. The hearing on the Petition before the Public Service Commission is scheduled for Tuesday,
November 25`h, at 9:30 am. Floyd Self, our outside counsel, and I will attend the Public Service
Commission hearing in Tallahassee. The agenda and staff report for this hearing were not available when
this memorandum was prepared, but will be provided to the Board prior to and explained at the November
18, 2014 Board meeting.
Additionally, the County is involved with the Town of Indian River Shores and the City of Vero Beach in
the Florida Governmental Conflict Resolution process as set forth in Chapter 164 of the Florida Statutes.
At the joint public meeting held on October 28, 2014, all of the parties agreed to move forward with
mediation. The parties have tentatively scheduled December 17, 2014 as the date for the mediation. The
parties have also tentatively agreed to choose Carlos Alvarez as the mediator.
Approved for November 18, 2014 BCC Meeting
County Attorney's Matters
COUNTY ATTORNEY
F.UnomryJLdriGE ERIL;B CCAgrrdo AirmosiElrcn;c Uo1 y Updv..doc
Indian River Co.
Approved
Date
Admin.-.
4/3//t
Co. Atty.
tr
OP.
l`� :!
Budget
i 1
II o/'
Department
0
`--111
Risk Management
--
---
283
136
Office of Arrorney 's Mailers I I/ 18/ 14
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold., County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attomey
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Chris Mora, Public Works Director
FROM: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney l
DATE: October 29, 2014
SUBJECT: Extension of the License Agreement for Jones Pier
The Jones Pier property is a 16.5 acre tract of land adjacent to the Indian River Lagoon off
of Jungle Trail. The property is improved with a single family home, out buildings and
docks along the Lagoon. The County purchased the property in 2008 from the Jones
family and allowed Mr. and Mrs. Jones to remain on the property for the remainder of their
lives. Both Mr. and Mrs. Jones passed away a few years ago.
In January 2012, the County entered into a License Agreement with Brad Fojtik of the
Indian River County Sheriff's Department for Sergeant Fojtik to reside in the home in
exchange for providing law enforcement presence, mowing the lawn and maintaining the
property. The License Agreement has, been a mutual benefit to the parties and the
attached License Renewal and Extension will extend the License Agreement until January
2017. Staff has no objection to the extension of the License Agreement. As the Jones
Pier parcel was purchased in part with funds from the Florida Communities Trust, the trust
must agree to the Extension. There is a provision for the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection to sign off on the Extension since docks over Sovereign
Submerged lands are involved.
Funding. There is no direct funding impacted by this License Renewal and Extension
agreement.
Recommendation. Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached License Renewal and Extension between Indian River County and Brad Fojtik to
provide for the extension of the Agreement until January 2017.
Please contact me should you have any questions concerning this matter.
Buoue
COUNTY ATTORNEY
>.f .�. MiEFT1NG - REGULAR AGENDA
Date
/.Alt A7i.i i/ - iA -
284
•
•
LICENSE RENEWAL AND EXTENSION
THIS RENEWAL AND EXTENSION of License Agreement is enter into this day
of November, 2014 by and between Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida, whose address is 1801 27th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32060, hereinafter referred to as
"Licensor" and Brad Fojtik, a resident of Indian River County, hereinafter referred to as
"Licensee" and the parties agree as follows:
WHEREAS, Indian River County purchased a 16.5 acre tract of property adjacent to the
Indian River Lagoon known as the Jones Pier Parcel on September 19, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the property is improved with a single family house, out buildings and docks;
and
WHEREAS, Brad Fojtik and Indian River County entered into a License Agreement dated
January 17, 2012 whereby Mr. Fojtik would perform certain obligations in exchange for residing
in the house on the property; and
WHEREAS, the term of the License Agreement was for 1 year subject to renewal for an
additional 1 year period; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to renew and extend the license agreement for an additional
two years.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. The above statements are true and correct and incorporated by reference herein.
285
2. The parties agree to renew and extend that certain License Agreement dated January 17,
2012 for an additional three year period, to expire on January 16, 2017, nunc pro tunc
January 17, 2014.
3. Aside from the change of term as stated herein, the original License Agreement of
January 17, 2012 remains unchanged and in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this renewal and extension of
license agreement as of the date first written above.
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court
and Comptroller
By:
Deputy Clerk
Approve • as to form and
William K. DeBra.I
Deputy County Attorney
Reviewed and Approved:
By:
Brad Fojtik
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By:
, Chairman
BCC Approved:
ufficiency Approved:
By:
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Division of State Lands
rII�
r
seph £!. Baird
ounty Administrator
286
Office of
's Ala//en 1//18/1-1
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold., County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate PingoIt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Chris Mora, Public Works Director
FROM:
DATE: November 12, 2014
SUBJECT: Extension of Lease Agreement with Indian River Soccer Association
for Fairgrounds Soccer Facilities
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney0/-
In 1994, the Indian River Soccer Association (IRSA) entered into a lease agreement where
IRSA would develop and maintain soccer fields and facilities. The original lease called for
an annual payment of $200 per year for a term of 20 years for the 18.34 acres of land: An
additional 1.84 acres was added in 2000 and the annual rental payment was lowered to
$1.00 in 2010. IRSA has built all improvements on the property, with the exception of
the lighting, and provides for all maintenance on the site.
The attached Extension of Lease Agreement proposes another 20 year term to the lease
expiring November 2034. Staff has no objection to the proposed extension.
Funding. There is no direct funding impacted by this extension of the Agreement.
Recommendation. Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached Extension of Lease Agreement between Indian River County and Indian River
Soccer Association to provide for the extension of the Lease until November 13, 2034.
Staff further recommends the Board authorize the Chairman to execute the attached
resolution approving the lease extension as required by Florida Statutes §125.38.
Please contact me should you have any questions concerning this matter.
' YED FOR
MEETING - REGULAR AGENDA
`dT4 AT•
TORNEY
-:-.,;:::%:.•; :.L:T•
Ai%,::�;:,;''i
Date
Adri!ri.
!;t•
11!
Leoa!
�,r
Eudget
Li
OriZiffirata
mAI
D€pi.
.Ri::R Mgr.
‘4,.44..
/1' -/'
287
EXTENSION OF LEASE AGREEMENT
This Extension of Lease entered into by and between Indian River County, a
political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose address is 1801 27th Street, Vero
Beach, FL 32960, hereinafter referred to as "County" and Indian River Soccer
Association, Inc., a Florida non-profit corporation, whose address is P. O. Box 650611,
Vero Beach, FL 32965, hereinafter referred to as "IRSA",
WITNESSETH:
WHEREFORE, County is the owner of the real property described and depicted
on Exhibit A attached; and
WHEREAS, IRSA and the County entered into a Lease on November 15, 1994 for
use of a 16.5 acre parcel for development of soccer facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Lease was amended on January 25, 1995 to provide for a new
legal description; and
WHEREAS, the Lease was amended on February 22, 2000 to include an
additional 1.84 acres of property; and
WHEREAS, the Lease was further amended on June 10, 2010 to provide for a
reduction of the rental rate from $200 per year to $1 per year; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to renew the Lease agreement for an additional 20
years as contemplated in that Lease agreement,
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency is hereby acknowledged, the parties
agree as follows:
288
•
1. The above recitations are true and correct and incorporated by reference in to this
renewal.
2. The term of this lease shall be extended for an additional 20 years effective
November 15, 2014 to expire November 14, 2034.
3. All other aspects of the original Lease and the amendments thereto shall remain
unchanged and in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this instrument this day
of , 2014.
Witness
>QA)NAbc_31rwv,kaLtL
ess
•
INDIAN RIVER SOCCER
ASSOCIATION, INC.
By:
Print name:
Title: .'
HolA'
Pres_
EarvE
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
and Comptroller
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By: By:
Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and legal sufficiency
, Chairman
BCC Approved:
Approved:
\)) • 14304/1
J sep h Pl. Baird
Administrator
(ountY
289
8
.t In 0 N I L L.
---„,
0 _ 0 0
0
0_ . LJ _c
c ,.l
V) ro `.- p 0) O F- co 0
N C 0 Z c.) 4-
0 0 v 0 0 N 0 0
L 1- 7 r- C' ...-• rn N
O M O C/) Z, O v) cr
_.., U W
C O0- 0 0 0O
� ,0 O L O 0) N 0 ,C p0
,� ,,o p L r:..
c>CO " N O 4O X00
ON. -
0 ^ did (N O(�
d• „_, v. . - r'7
O W
—
N C a_ . 0
0� p L y p W..-.7_
\ C Z C w Z N v 0 a
0) 0 3 0 a)W4)o
UOo�L�o
�0w0)OO
48
0 ...; Q ,._ N 0-¢ 0 04d-
«, O O M v) .. Cn..� 9O.
0) .,_ W r.., c 0 0� 0 CO
03 0—
O ....'`•••
0 O N N N 7 L 0
L 3 C 0 0 vi
o O 0, L LNN
O 0 -d-• C p v- U
Nss 3--'o v) Ori v
0
.... O 0) C O N a ON.
LLU 4:045 L0
F- oN 1-- Up 1 -- vi
'-
0)
0
(1
Lying in Indian River County, Florida.
Zi UO OGs
0
U17 }e o3
N
.10'00*
.10.00*
0
LI 0'00*
.10'00*
.6.99
.a 1 '999
SZ
OM4'Z1333OS\ZC176 Mu 'OW] Ov3y
.:: n) 1
0) 0 o a) 0c c
0 O
Qi L E' oQ
U —
0 a... E
L v
c c .D
v - >• • 1E *E
co E U ; o
E U Q.) Li._
0 -- ` {` •
Uo 0 p 0 C•1L. C U =
o �v-0 Ew
0 0 OC•C O tt
to E 0.- 0
dC N rU 0 p 0,_
co:
v 3 0 ,Y N
0 0) 0) Li:
0 L L 0 a
a) >. . to E v o
L Z y L C..)
U
0) V) NLY •C
Es
Ds en
co 'V
L. c v v)il) a
U
--I 0 c .� 0
L 0 ci o
•••=e -•-•
O O
vI C 0 c O�pU
t 'V) C .y ....+ N 0)
0 to 0 Z ›. O >
U
d O v') 0 0 y
ZC uoi}oaS 17/ l 3S Gun
}SOM
(0
0)
1')
d"
Ili
0
• EXHIBIT
290
0MO'213330S\Zi't6 :311 •DMO ab3V
Zc uopas Jo 17/L3S Jo Z/LM Jo aun lso3
.52
,L r'L9Z ; .00ti
Z2 uopas t/ l 3S au!1 1SaM
e Section 32
s
O
V)
-0 a;r) v 1
t0— — c .c
) tN_E
✓ Q)
.9,r E' oQ
L E-00
O '- may • -C
OEZjo
E u a)w
�1
— 0• -o c .crr-
r a c o •-
o 3 Ew
2 4) p C O
Z
0
ff
U
0 @
U 0
IN Gil
intAi""
io `a
z 2
0
LL.z N�
i 2 ;
Eh
a
• 0
- N
M
J
X o
N 0
O
J � m
a: V)
O
E• a�
>>O
o
UU0
(nco
a)
to
it to
u) N
c
o-- 0
U c
B
0
N
a)
0
0
291
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
APPROVING A COMMUNITY INTEREST EXTENSION OF
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE INDIAN RIVER SOCCER
ASSOCIATION, INC., FOR COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY
NEAR THE FAIRGROUNDS
WHEREAS, the Indian River Soccer Association, Inc. ("IRSA"), and the Board of County
Commissioners entered into a Lease Agreement for County -owned property near the Fairgrounds on
November 15, 1994, for a term of 20 -years at a rate of $200.00 per year for use as a soccer facility;
and
WHEREAS, the rental rate was later reduce to $1.00 per year; and
WHEREAS, the IRSA requested that the Board of County Commissioners consider extending
the existing Lease Agreement for an additional 20 -years to continue their soccer program; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds that such a use of County Property
promotes the County interests and welfare; and
•
•
WHEREAS, the IRSA is a Florida non-profit corporation and a corporation organized
exclusively for charitable and educational purposes as set forth in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
1. In accordance with Florida Statutes §125.38, the Board finds that:
a. the Indian River Soccer Association, Inc. ("IRSA") has made proper application as
required for a lease of the Property;
b. the Property is not needed for County purposes;
c. The use of the property as a soccer facility promotes the County interests and
welfare;
2. The Board approves and authorizes the Chairman to execute an Extension of Lease
Agreement between the Board and the IRSA, for a term of 20 years at an annual rate of $1.00
per year for the property described in the attached Exhibit "A";
3. The Extension of Lease Agreement is entered into pursuant to the authority of Florida Statutes
§125.01 and §125.38.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner and seconded
by Commissioner , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Commissioner Wesley S. Davis
CommissionerJoseph E. Flescher
Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan
Commissioner Bob Solari
Commissioner Tim Zorc
1
292
RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -
The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 18th day of
November, 2014.
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Court and Comptroller BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By
By
Deputy Clerk , Chairman
Approved as to form and legal
sufficiency: f
0
J• V 1
William K. DeBraal
Deputy County Attorney
2
293
ul-Vi. �LIEIHX3
0
a
CCD
'A co 7 S
O O: 0
V O o 3
v CD
v?a •
C)
0=" no
c< c 3
o CD
'<
O
CD
C
O C• CD •
cD
r `�
N
(0
0)
O
O
C0
West Line SE 1/4 Section 32
N• O 0 N 0 0
n (D c •• -1
o v, -. -co m
�'0 `•G o cD
0 5
0 (D r� .4.0
0
O. CO rt
0 .+
CD T ? 0
r
1:, Crv, a.'
Cl
CD a.
a. N .w T
N _ 7r 7'
C (D 0 ti • N
a 7 0 C
7-. c-� 7• rt Tyr• C -D
S 0
O 0 3 in'0 O
a S 1
N -1 N CT-0CD 0 0 0.
(� 0) , c vl N
7"
— O CD o
'0 - 0 a
a.
0 o 7 m 0 O
•A- ••- C 7
v 7' 0
N CD 3 0 a ° CD 0
._r
0
O 0 3 0
S `G
O 0 — J.
�o�3
J.
0
3.0 -aN
7- o• r..
Ia - CD CDS
1
666.1 r
665.95'
400.0 T'
0 0
400.01'
Charles A. Cramer, hereby certify that I am a registered
ACAD DWG. FILE: 9432\SOCCER.DWG
400.01'
Yoe
400.01'
0
O
O
East Line Section 32
Lying in Indian River County, Florida.
3S...aui1 4140N
rn .?< g o m g. N T
in r"..O"O N 0 7co C 0
._.�
?NoO �Or'� D5p.CDO(�'
(r) (J) S S L0 0 rt 0* 7r`•
y N 0 0 _-•, .p, 3
O :SSNO cnc„ 0 . \O
--w ryi- = p 0 a
� CD O 7 r•-•-r•-•-o " ' (D
'' r+
O� .(ti O 9 - ..0 N -" :-.- o .0..,
C
a ID (0 -w
,- r" V a--1 S N fir*
,-r :,� fD f.D O (D 0 CD 0 C, fT1 a,
0 cD rn * 0
0 N a Z -6, 7 Z 7
• rmo CD2. o-
at
• 7 N
-0., rn \ 7' ▪ ?. o. r -r
4.-
.0.4'0 Cn4'-A W? tG 0
N V O
co 2;7- 0 O N-0,, 0)0
:4, 5.
▪ 0 r-•• a)
(D
07•� N (OD ^' CD O0 CD
0 CD S O
M
O
CO O rr C l C.+ O
XI
C � 0' O 70 * H N -�,
7 0
O N r.,. 7 -. _ C - T
(�D NNW S to 0 o 0
�� ��
-4.0CD- �' tv*(n
(D (n --� p LA 0 -., w
-"
0 0' '7 S o s '��
-1 ", I y cD (J 4
CD .-- -,.
411
ACAD DWG. PILE: 9432\SOCCER.DWG View "2" Plotted 2-7-00
0
0
CD
0
3 0p
0
-n
0..- Q
o
0
N
Cr) _
c, •
or_ o
o 0
co N
C
o Z • (n
?o
r-
N
(a
0
o
EJ
8 F) it
m z
> ma § N O
zi
P
C R 8
Pj c
2
0
z
(-7)'O0N0-D_
- - (D C -I
o a v o o
•-•-• -., 0
�Q`< 2 0 to 0
Q
() Q_ o O Oa j (moi,
0(D -... oD
Q_ (n -•
^" 0
-0 & (n a o 0 n
C •(CD 0 VI N(D
▪ Q 3 -'- .-.- C
70 u) -1
? • cD
oo3(,'0O 1
(n ? v
�. '<
v)-1 (n 0 —
F A.
0) ,.. c v°, j ((DD
(-C)0 p a A.
-
v0 Vero 0 d.<
.o a,.
� o_., 0:7
•r�..0 a3v a
V7. 0 a()-
Na3o- c0D0.Q
"1"/ (1).-4 f1 3.
o (b03fD
�+ - • '.< ....0
a ='n - 3
Q Q CD
0. N C a,' U1.
-0.
3.n co a Q co
I a' (D S. a
I
0
n 0 O
CD 0
(D R S
(D
1
West Line SE 1/4 Section 32
East Line of W1/2 of SE1/4 of Section 32
• 195
f
400'
\�
i 267.17'
667.17'
U
st
934.34' x 4K
z
CD
I
L____J
East Line of W1/2 of SE1/4 of Section 32
• 195
13
Office of Attor7rg's Mattern 11118114
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold., County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Chris Mora, Public Works Director '"�f v
FROM: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney`f JV
DATE: November 12, 2014
SUBJECT: Extension of the License Agreement for Ryall Tract
The Ryall Property was purchased by the County in 2006 with help from the Indian River
Land Trust. The 10.1 acre Ryall Tract is located at 7780 85th Street and is improved with a
single family house and detached shed. The house was renovated in 2012. The County
entered into a license agreement with William Luther, a Sheriffs Deputy with the Indian
River County Sheriffs Office whereby Mr. Luther could reside on the property and provide
a law enforcement presence for security reasons and in exchange, Mr. Luther would
maintain the house and property, keep approximately 1 acre mowed on the Ryall Tract and
a small strip on the adjacent former Shadowbrook Estates Tract.
Mr. Luther desires to continue under the License Agreement by extending it for two years
from the date of expiration of the initial License Agreement, under the same terms and
conditions. The License Agreement has been a mutual benefit to the parties and the
attached Renewal and Extension of License Agreement will extend the License Agreement
until June 2016. Staff has no objection to the extension of the License Agreement. As the
Ryall parcel was purchased in part with funds from the Florida Communities Trust, the trust
must agree to the Extension.
Funding. There is no direct funding impacted by this Renewal and Extension of License
Agreement.
Recommendation. Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached Renewal and Extension of License Agreement between Indian River County and
William Luther to provide for the extension of the Agreement until June 2016.
Please contact me should you have any questions concerning this matter.
-ROVED FOR ' -
t3.C.C. MEETING REGULANDA
:LN j v ATTORNEY
inaain fii7Y Ca
Approves
Dale
Admin.
rr-4k
;I 3 '1
Leg
r -a
'yr1111
I
I 1 .
gill
Budget
D€Vt.
•
•
RENEWAL AND EXTENSION OF LICENSE AGREEMENT
This Renewal and Extension of License Agreement is entered into this day
of November, 2014 by and between Indian River County, a political subdivision of the
State of Florida (Licensor) whose address is 1801 27th.Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960 and
William Luther, a resident of Indian River County, (Licensee) whose address is P.O. Box
1077, Vero Beach, FL 32960 and agree as follows:
WHEREAS, the Licensee is the owner of two tracts of land known as the Ryall and
Shadowbrook•properties outlined in gold and yellow dashed lines, respectively on Exhibit
A attached and incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, in 2012 and 2013 the Licensor refurbished a single family residence
on the white outlined portion on Exhibit A (attached) on thenorth side of County Road
510; and
WHEREAS, Licensor and Licensee entered into a License Agreement on June 18,
2013 whereby Mr. Luther would perform certain duties in exchange for residing in the
single family residence and detached shed located on the property; and
WHEREAS, the License Agreement has a term of one year subject to renewal for
an additional one year terms; and
WHEREAS, the parties are mutually satisfied with the terms of the License
Agreement and hereby agree to renew and extend the license agreement,
NOW WHEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as
follows:
1. The above recitals are true and correct and are adopted by reference herein.
297
s
•
2. The License Agreement dated June 18, 2013 is hereby renewed and extended
until June 17, 2016, nunc pro tunc.
3. The remaining terms and conditions of the License Agreement shall remain
unchanged.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Renewal and Extension
of License Agreement as of the day and year first written above.
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court
and Comptroller
By:
Deputy Clerk
Witness
Witness
01, Gil �11� .
a.nd y 4. i z'/,
Approved as to form a d Iega fficiency
1
it lam K. ieBraal
Deputy County Attorney
Reviewed and Approved by
Florida Communities Trust
By:
Its:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By:
, Chairman
BCC Approved:
By: /L1,-4
Williarrfluther
Approved:
•seph :. Baird
ounty Administrator
Approved as to
Form and Legality
By:
Department Attorney
298
Lawn Maintenance for
Ryan and Shadowbrook Tracts
0 100 200
400
rra..nrs..1.---iir *Rao
600
800
Feet
1.000
ShadottitintibICT
• •
•-• ti. -7?--,;
Pircei Boundiries
rInr.em.nt Path 11-10rnian.eWnr,-...nit4nevolnran.ane.51-01 $15,r1 Prnnn Orzeo.rtleV: Prnnn Pr.cana. I inanca Annacarnent rnvr1
299
nat.- AIA nt-111
County Attorney's Matters - B.C.C. 11.18.14
Oce of
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
DATE: November 12, 2014
SUBJECT: All Aboard Florida Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Future Actions
BACKGROUND
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
The proposed All Aboard Florida passenger rail project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
was released on Friday, September 19, 2014. At the October 21, 2014 Board of County Commissioners
("Board") meeting, the County Attorney's Office presented a preliminary assessment of the DEIS. The
preliminary assessment of the DEIS was that the DEIS was merely a superficial review of the alternatives
and the impacts and lacked a detailed analysis of the various categories of areas of study to be addressed
in an Environmental Impact Statement. The County Attorney's Office is now presenting a full detailed set
of comments to the Board for approval to be submitted to the Federal Railroad Administration. The
comments on the DEIS are due to the Federal Railroad Administration by December 3, 2014.
The County Attorney's Office has coordinated the review of the DEIS with outside counsel, Kevin Healy,
with the law firm of Bryan Cave LLP, outside consultant Jill Grimaldi, Principal Scientist, and her firm
CDM Smith, and the Community Development Department and the Public Works Department. The
County Attorney's Office has had strategy sessions with Stephen Ryan, with the law firm of McDermott
Will & Emery LLP, representing the group Citizens Against Rail Expansion (CARE FL), Ruth
Stanbridge, County Historian, and representatives from Martin County.
Approved for November 18, 2014 BCC Meeting
County Attorney's Matters
COUNTY ATTORNEY
F: AtmmryU'mla1GENERALUE C Cllgrnda AlrmosUll Aboard Florida Draft EIS Comments and Future Actiom.doc
300
Indian River Co.
Moved
Date
Admin.
IIIP
tt l31,:,
Co. A .
I:i� GSI�
I�I7.
'Budget
�`V'�2%
De.artment
L�=1
arntniiro .t,.
i8►'S
ii rzN
300
Board of County Commissioners
®November 12, 2014
Page Two
•
On May 6, 2014, the Board authorized the County Attorney's Office to obtain the assistance of outside
counsel with respect to the DEIS. At the time, the Board authorized $100,000 from the general fund to be
used in this effort. The review of the DEIS and the drafting of the presented comments took a significant
amount of time and thus the County Attorney's Office is requesting that the Board authorize a budget
amendment of roughly $40,000 to offset the additional fees and costs incurred in reviewing the DEIS and
preparing comments to the DEIS.
Future Actions
On October 7, 2014, the Board approved a resolution opposing the proposed All Aboard Florida passenger
rail project. On October 21, 2014, the Board requested the County Attorney's Office to present options
for future actions to stop the proposed All Aboard Florida passenger rail project and the estimated costs of
such actions. The County Attorney's Office has consulted with our outside counsel on this issue.
The first option is to perform a careful examination of the Board's legal rights and responsibilities with
respect to the proposed All Aboard Florida passenger rail project. The County Attorney's Office and
outside counsel and our consultants have been primarily focused on addressing the proposed All Aboard
Florida passenger rail project through the National Environmental Policy Act process. However there are
other issues that have been identified, including but not limited to the validity of the crossing agreements
and the Board's position with respect to granting All Aboard Florida — Operations, LLC third party
beneficiary, rights under the existing crossing agreements. Some of these issues touch on legal issues of
state law as opposed to federal law. Thus, the County Attorney's Office recommends that the Board hire
outside counsel specializing in Florida law. Once those issues have been thoroughly explored and vetted,
the Board will be in a better position to understand its rights and options going forward. The County
Attorney's Office would recommend that the Board authorize $25,000 for such legal counsel.
One other option available to the Board would be to consider filing a federal lawsuit to stop Phase I of the
proposed All Aboard Florida passenger rail project. Phase I is the Miami to West Palm Beach segment.
Before proceeding with this option, a number of issues would have to be considered (such as the statute of
limitations, standing and the viability of a claim based upon' the failure of the Federal Railroad
Administration to assess the cumulative impacts of all phases of the proposed All Aboard Florida
passenger rail project, among other things). Such federal litigation could cost Indian River County
between $500,000 and $1,000,000.
FUNDING
The funding for additional roughly $40,000 in fees and costs incurred in reviewing the DEIS and
preparing these comments will come from the general fund.
The funding for approximately $25,000 for outside counsel specializing in Florida law to study and
examine the additional state law issues would also come from the general fund.
RECOMMENDATION
The County Attorney's Office recommends that the Chair allow for public comment on this matter and
then have the Board vote to accept the proposed comments for submittal to the Federal Railroad
Administration. The County Attorney's Office further recommends that the Board authorize a budget
amendment to offset the additional costs of the review and comment on the DEIS. Finally, the County
Attorney's Office recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney's Office to hire outside
counsel specializing in Florida law to study and examine the additional options available to the Board.
F:AUnomryVirdalGFJ✓FRRILIB C C41gr,.ia Aicmw1.111 Aboard Florida D fi£/SCornmcnii and Fawn. Acrion.doc
301.
•
•
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida
Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation for the
All Aboard Florida, Orlando to Miami, Florida Intercity Passenger Rail Project
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida (the "Board") respectfully
submits these comments to the Federal Railroad Administration ("FRA") with regard to the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS"), and Section 4(f) Evaluation dated September 2014
prepared for All Aboard Florida, Orlando to Miami, Florida Intercity Passenger Rail Project (the
"Proposed Project"). The Proposed Project's sponsor, All Aboard Florida — Operations LLC
("AAF"), has applied for $1.875 billion dollars in federal funds through the Railroad Rehabilitation
and Improvement Financing ("RRIF") program, which is administered by the FRA.'
The DEIS was prepared to assist the FRA in satisfying its obligations with respect to the Proposed
Project under the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., and
applicable NEPA requirements, including the regulations adopted by the Council on Environmental
Quality ("CEQ"), appearing at 40 C.F.R. Parts 1500-1508, FRA's NEPA regulations appearing at 49
C.F.R. 5 260.35, FRA's "Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts" published at 64 Fed. Reg.
28545 (5/26/99) ("FRA NEPA Procedures"), and Order 5610.1C "Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts" issued by the United States Department of Transportation ("USDOT")
(9/18/1979) ("USDOT NEPA Procedures").
NEPA requires that. "to the fullest extent possible" an environmental impact statement ("EIS"): (i)
disclose and assess the impacts of major federal actions significantly affecting the environment; and
(ii) consider the reasonable mitigation measures and alternatives to such actions that would avoid or
minimize those impacts. See 42 U.S.C. § 4332; 40 C.F.R. 5 1502.1. The fundamental purpose of
these requirements is to ensure that federal decision -makers understand the short and long-term
-iinpacts of their actions, and how such impacts might be addressed, before they take action.
For the reasons discussed in detail below, the Board believes that the DEIS does not take a "hard
look" at the environmental impacts of the Proposed Project, and fails to provide FRA with the
information needed to satisfy its obligations under NEPA. In particular, the Board has identified a
number of potentially significant environmental impacts that were not adequately addressed in the
DEIS, and others that were not examined at all.
Moreover, the DEIS contains information intended to satisfy Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act ("Section 106"), which requires federal agencies to consider the effect of their
undertakings on historic resources, through a consultation process that requires that local
governments be invited to participate. FRA failed to follow this mandatory process by electing not
to invite most local governments, including Indian River County (the "County"), to participate. As a
result, the DEIS missed several historic resources within the County, and probably many others in
On March 15, 2013, AAF submitted two RRIF loan applications to FRA for a total of $1.875 billion.
Page 1
1824679 November 14, 2014
-301- lA- 1
localities that also were not invited to join in the Section 106 consultation. FRA cannot, therefore,
satisfy its Section 106 obligations based on the information presented in the DEIS.
Likewise, the Section 4(0 Evaluation prepared for the Proposed Project is fundamentally flawed.
That analysis is supposed to assist FRA in protecting publicly owned parklands, recreation areas, or
historic sites of national, State, or local significance. Under Section 4(f) of the Department of
Transportation Act of 1966, Pub. L. 89-670 (1966) (now codified at 49 U.S.C. § 303(c)), FRA is
prohibited from approving any project that would "use" a Section 4(f) resource unless it finds: (1)
there is no prudent and feasible alternative to using that resource; and (2) the program or project
includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the resource resulting from the use. 49 U.S.C. §
303(c); FRA NEPA Procedures § 12, 64 Fed. Reg. 28552. As discussed in the comments below, the
Board believes the Section 4(f) Evaluation fails to identify or assess the effects of the Proposed
Project on significant Section 4(f) resources, and does not provide FRA with a sound basis for
issuing findings under Section 4(f).
Similarly, the DEIS does not provide the analysis needed for a consistency determination under the
federal Coastal Zone Management Act ("CZMA"), 16 U.S.C. § 1451 et seq.
In light of the serious deficiencies the Board has identified in the DEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation,
the Board is deeply concerned that the Proposed Project has already advanced well beyond the
preliminary planning stage, and gives the appearance of becoming a fait accompli. FRA has allowed
AAF to segment the environmental review of the Miami to West Palm Beach component ("Phase
I") from other portions of the Proposed Project, and construction of Phase I has begun without a
cumulative analysis of the impacts of the Proposed Project as a whole. Moreover, according to
FRA's "On -Site Engineering Report — Part 2 for All Aboard Florida" (9/23/2014), engineering
plans for portions of the Proposed Project running through (at least) Brevard and Indian River
Counties are expected to be advanced to 90% by March 2015. Perhaps most alarming are
statements within the DEIS itself that FRA has already made key determinations with regard to the
Proposed Project at such an early point in the environmental review process that it did not even
have the benefit of NEPA documentation to inform its decision-making. For example, the DEIS
states "FRA has determined that the significant delays, costs, and risks associated with the use of
elevated structures make raising any of the corridor bridges not feasible." DEIS at 5-27.
The Board notes that NEPA prohibits federal agencies and applicants for federal agency approvals
or funding from taking actions that would limit the choice of alternatives or otherwise signal
premature approval of the application in advance of completion of the NEPA process. See FRA
NEPA Procedures § 7(c), 64 Fed. Reg. 28549; 49 C.F.R. § 260.35(e); 40 C.F.R. § 1506.1. Typically,
agencies within the USDOT use preliminary design work to prepare relevant NEPA documentation,
in recognition of the fact that advancing design beyond that stage could tip the agency towards a
commitment to a particular course of action without a fair and balanced consideration of reasonable
alternatives.
Sot_ A - Page 2
1824679 November 14, 2014
•
•
•
•
To summarize the problems identified in these comments, the DEIS is grossly inadequate and
precludes a meaningful analysis of the Proposed Project. The Board, therefore, requests that no
further action be taken by FRA to advance the Proposed Project, unless and until a supplemental
DEIS is prepared, and the subsequent requirements of NEPA, Section 4(f), Section 106 and the
CZMA are fully satisfied. See 40 C.F.R. § 1502.9(c); FRA NEPA Procedures § 13(e), 64 Fed. Reg.
28554.
Set forth below are the Board's comments on the DEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation. Also attached,
and incorporated into the Board's comments, are the technical comments prepared by CDM Smith,
the environmental consultant the Board retained to review the DEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation.
1. Alternatives: The Alternatives Analysis Provided in the DEIS is So Narrowly
Circumscribed by AAF's Financial Interests as to be Meaningless.
The alternatives analysis is supposed to be "the heart of the environmental impact statement." 40
C.F.R. § 1502.14. Accordingly, agencies are directed by the CEQ Regulations to "[r]igorously
explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives" that might avoid or minimize the
impacts disclosed in an EIS. Id. While every conceivable alternative need not be examined, a "range
of reasonable alternatives" meeting the purpose and need of the action must be considered. Id.'
One example provided by USDOT guidance of the sorts of alternatives to be considered are those
"related to different locations ... which would present different environmental impacts." USDOT
NEPA Procedures at 3.
Notwithstanding the significant impacts that operation of a high speed train along the Florida East
Coast Railroad ("FECR") corridor would have on the densely populated east coast of Florida, the
DEIS lacks a comparative environmental analysis of even one alternative route. Instead, it short
circuits the alternatives analysis by narrowly defining the "purpose and need" for the Proposed
Project based on AAF's preferences, and then screening out all the other available routes in a
"tiered" approach as failing to meet that sharply circumscribed purpose and need.
Thus, the DEIS states that "AAF identified its primary objective for the Proposed Project, which is
to provide an intercity rail service that is sustainable as a private enterprise." DEIS 2-10 (emphasis
added). "Sustainable," according to the document, means that operation of the rail service can
"meet revenue projections" and "operate at an acceptable profit level." Id.; DEIS at 3-1. Stepping off
from the objective of providing a profitable rail service, the DEIS then applied "AAF evaluation
criteria" including "six critical determining factors." Prominent among those factors were those
relating to project economics, including the ease with which AAF could acquire property, the ability
to "commence construction in the near term to control costs," and limiting the "costs of
2
Likewise, USDOT guidance states that an essential element of an alternatives analysis should be a "rigorous
exploration and an objective evaluation of the environmental impacts of all reasonable alternative actions,
particularly those that might enhance environmental quality or avoid some or all of the adverse environmental
effects." USDOT NEPA Procedures, Attachment 2 at 3.
3 O I- A — Page 3
1824679 November 14, 2014
development, including cost of land acquisitions, access, construction, and environmental
mitigation." Id. at 3-2. The document then applies such "critical determining factors" to other
available routes. Given the fact that AAF had already secured from its parent corporation the land
interests needed for the Proposed Project, and AAF put forward a wholly unrealistic build year of
2016, it is no surprise that the analysis came to the preordained conclusion that all the other
alternatives are so meritless as to not warrant substantive analysis in the DEIS.
By creating a screen that is tilted in one direction only, the DEIS side-stepped the fact that the
Florida High Speed Rail Authority in a 2003 alternatives evaluation entitled "Orlando -Miami Planning
Study" rated every other route as superior to the FECR corridor than would be used by the Proposed
Project. That study compares the FECR route to three other potentially available north -south
corridors in the following table:
Route
Travel Time
Capital Cost
Ridership / Revenue
Environmental
CSX
Fair
Good
Fair
Fair
I-95
Good
Fair
Good
Good
Turnpike
Good
Good
Fair
Good
FECR
Poor
Poor
Good
Poor
Orlando Miami Planning Study at 7.
Thus, under three of the four criteria applied in that study -- travel time (a factor cited as critical in
the DEIS on page 3-5), capital cost and environmental impacts -- the FECR corridor was rated at
rock bottom. It is only in terms of revenue that the Proposed Project tied with another alternative
and was rated favorably. Thus, if the DEIS were to look beyond the economic interests of AAF, the
sponsor of the Proposed Project, to salient issues such as environmental impacts, other routes
would certainly merit detailed consideration in the DEIS. However, those routes were ruled to be
off limits under self-serving criteria of AAF's own devising.
The truncated approach utilized in the DEIS does not conform to the requirements of NEPA for
one fundamental reason: it is not the project sponsor's purpose and need that should control the
alternatives analysis, but the agency's purpose and need in taking the action that is the subject of the
NEPA review. Thus, AAF's desire to turn a profit should not dictate the alternatives considered by
FRA in determining how it should expend federal rail funds. Guidance issued by CEQ states that
"[i]n determining the scope of alternatives to be considered, the emphasis is on what is `reasonable'
rather than on whether the proponent or applicant likes or is itself capable of carrying out a
particular alternative. Reasonable alternatives include those that are practical or feasible from the
3 O I A Page 4
1824679 November 14, 2014
•
•
•
technical and economic standpoint and using common sense, rather than simply desirable from the
standpoint of the applicant." CEQ, "Forty Most Asked Questions Concerning CEQ's NEPA Regulations"
Question 2a, 46 Fed. Reg. 18026, 18027 (3/23/1981).
The Board does not dispute that the economic objectives of the Proposed Project sponsor may be
taken into account by the agency in defining its purpose and need, and in identifying the alternatives
for consideration in an EIS. However, those interests should not be given such weight as to exclude
other relevant considerations. This is especially so with respect to high speed rail in Florida, where a
number of potentially viable options have been carefully studied in planning documents that have
been previously prepared in relation to other projects. According to the Orlando Miami Planning Study,
CSX, I-95 and the Florida Turnpike corridors present far fewer environmental impacts and a much
sounder basis for public investment than the FECR corridor. However, the referenced alternatives
were summarily dismissed in the DEIS without any sort of analysis considering whether the chosen
FECR alternative would cause the most negative impacts to: (a) the health and safety of the citizens
of the Treasure Coast of Florida, (b) the historical and archeological sites along the Treasure Coast
of Florida and (c) the fragile Indian River Lagoon.' FRA cannot simply ignore other legitimate
alternatives simply because AAF, the sponsor of the Proposed Project, would like it to do so.
2. Cumulative and Secondary Impacts: The DEIS Fails to Assess the Cumulative and
Secondary Impacts of the Proposed Project, in Combination with Reasonably
Foreseeable Future Actions.
Under NEPA, FRA is obligated to examine not only the direct and immediate effects of the
Proposed Project, but also its indirect or secondary impacts and its cumulative impacts, in combination
with those of other reasonably foreseeable actions. See CEQ's NEPA Regulations, 40 C.F.R. §§
1502.16, 1508.8; FRA NEPA Procedures, 64 Fed. Reg. 28550, 28554; USDOT NEPA Procedures,
Attachment 2 at 4; see also CEQ, "Considering Cumulative Effects under NEPA" at 11-21 (1/1997). With
respect to indirect effects, the CEQ regulations are clear that impacts that are caused by an action,
but "are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable" must be
thoroughly considered in an EIS. 40 C.F.R. § 1508.8. More particularly, the growth -inducing
impacts of a transportation project must be carefully examined. Id The CEQ regulations are
equally clear with respect to cumulative impacts, requiring that the effects of an action must be
"added to [those of] other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what
agency (Federal or non -Federal) or person undertakes such other actions." Id § 1508.7; see also id. §
3
The Indian River Lagoon is North America's most diverse, shallow -water estuary. It spans approximately 156
miles along Florida's east coast. The total estimated annual economic value of the Indian River Lagoon is $3.7
billion, supporting 15,000 full and part-time jobs and providing recreational opportunities for 11 million people
per year. The Proposed Project calls for building a new bridge over the St. Sebastian River. The St. Sebastian
River is located in Indian River County. It is one of the Indian River Lagoon's natural tributaries.
3oi-A- Page5
1824679 November 14, 2014
1508.27(b)(7). These principles have been applied by the courts in numerous cases to invalidate
EISs for failure to assess indirect and cumulative project impacts.
Inexplicably, the DEIS makes no serious attempt to address the indirect or cumulative impacts that
would result from the Proposed Project. For example, indirect or secondary impacts on land use are
passed over with the statement that "Nt]he project would not result in induced growth; no changes to
land use due to induced growth would occur." DEIS at 5-4. Although the DEIS mentions that the
Phase 1 Environmental Assessment ("EA") addressed "development in the vicinity of" the
proposed stations in West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale and Miami, id at 5-5, close examination of
the information provided in that document, in light of other statements made by AAF, make clear
that no meaningful attention has been paid to the secondary development associated with either
phase of the Proposed Project.
Thus, according to the DEIS, the EA indicated that "at West Palm Beach and Fort Lauderdale,
there will be 10,000 square feet of retail space within the station. At Miami, the Proposed Project
would include 30,000 square feet of retail within the station, and additional 75,000 square feet of
transit -oriented retail, 300,000 square feet of office space, 400 residential units, and a 200 -room
hotel." Id. at 5-5. Indeed, the Phase 1 EA does recite the same information, and includes a bare -
bones (and inadequate) analysis of the environmental impacts that would result from this
development. However, nowhere in either the DEIS or the EA is any meaningful information or
analysis provided concerning the additional development that would be induced by the Proposed
Project and this transit oriented development.
The obligation to address the potential effects of such induced development cannot be avoided on
the basis that it is speculative. In a "Preliminary Offering Memorandum" dated June 4, 2014, AAF
confirmed that there are current plans for construction going well beyond the ancillary development
identified in the DEIS and EA, and that sufficient information with respect to such planned
development is available for a thorough analysis of its impacts. In particular, that document
disclosed that: (i) AAF owns 21 acres in the areas surrounding the proposed stations; (ii) that it
anticipates demand for 3.5 million square feet of development on those parcels; and that it expects
to build 2 million square feet of that new development contemporaneously with the Proposed Project.
That initial development is to include 1.3 million square feet in Miami, and 345,000 square feet in
both Palm Beach and Fort Lauderdale. AAF also believes there is demand for subsequent future
development totaling 1.5 million square feet including a 1.1 million square foot "super tower" for
the area adjacent to the Miami station, and an additional 345,000 square feet of residential space in
Fort Lauderdale. Thus, the development disclosed in the EA is a fraction of the currently planned
and future development resulting from the Proposed Project. Given the specificity of AAF's
articulated intentions, sufficient information is available for a detailed environmental review of the
traffic, air pollution, construction, noise and neighborhood character impacts of this reasonably
foreseeable future development. The DEIS is deficient in that it failed to include such a review.
The DEIS is also lacking in its analysis of cumulative impacts. For example, it fails to address the
cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project together with those of the Tri -Rail Coastal Link Project,
301A- Page 6
1824679 November 14, 2014
•
•
•
e
another major initiative that is likely to have significant impacts along 85 miles of the FECR
corridor. Under that project, 25 or more commuter round trips will be added to the very same tracks
to be used for the Proposed Project. Those additional trains will serve 25,000 passengers each day,
at 20-25 new stations. The DEIS specifically excludes this important project and its overlapping
impacts from the environmental analysis, stating that it is in the "preliminary planning stage." DEIS
at 5-163. Attempting to justify this characterization, the document goes on to state that the "[t]he
Tri -Rail Coastal Link Study is being undertaken by FDOT, and is evaluating the use of the FECR
Corridor for the Tri -Rail service, which currently operates on the CSX -controlled railroad
right-of-way west of the FECR Corridor." Id. One would gather from these statements that the Tri -
Rail project is in the very early stages of planning, and that the information required for a cumulative
impacts analysis of such a speculative project is not available. But that characterization is wholly
inaccurate. An example of the degree to which the Tri -Rail Coastal Link Project has advanced is the
Letter Agreement dated April 25, 2014, between AAF and South Florida Regional Transportation
Authority ("SFRTA"), the sponsor of Tri -Rail Coastal Link Project, which provides the details for
the shared use of the rail corridor between the nvo entities for the provision of high speed and
commuter rail. See www.ircgov.com/Public_Notices/Rail/Tri-Rail-Non-Compete.pdf.
In addition, substantial Federal and State resources have been expended in the planning and
environmental review of the Tri -Rail Coastal Link project, and there is no informational impediment
to a cumulative environmental review. In particular, many studies have already been completed for
the Tri -Rail Coastal Link Project, including a Final Conceptual Alternatives Analysis and Environmental
Screening Study running for 387 pages issued in 2009; a 189 page Detailed Environmental Screenin, Report
issued in 2010; and a 168 page Final Alternatives Analysis Report issued in 2011. Thus, detailed
information has been compiled with respect to that project, its alternatives and environmental
impacts as a result of years of exacting analysis. Moreover, a final Preliminary Project Development Report
for the Tri -Rail Coastal Link was submitted to FRA's sister agency, the Federal Transit
Administration ("FTA"), in April 2014. Clearly, a project to which such an intense, federally
supported planning effort has been devoted is "reasonably foreseeable" within the meaning of
NEPA. In fact, the website for the Tri -Rail Coastal Link project (http://tri-
railcoastallink.com/frequently_asked_questions.html) states that its sponsors have "closely
collaborated" with the AAF team, and puts the estimated timeframe for completion of the Tri -Rail
Coastal Link project within the same timeframe that would reasonably be expected for the Proposed
Project, if it advances. It is also notable that AAF's June 4, 2014 "Preliminary Offering
Memorandum" indicates that use of the FECR corridor by Tri -Rail Coastal Link may cause delays to
construction of the Proposed Project, and lead to operational and safety risks that require careful
study in a cumulative environmental review.
It is well settled that when several proposals for related actions that will have cumulative or
synergistic environmental impacts upon a region are pending concurrently before an agency, their
environmental consequences must be considered together. The Tri -Rail Coastal Link project and
the Proposed Project are both pending before USDOT agencies, and the Proposed Project has been
specifically identified as being related to the Tri -Rail Coastal Link Project. See Tri -Rail Coastal Link's
30Page7
1824679 November 14, 2014
Preliminary Project Development Report at 1-14. Moreover, this case is not a circumstance where the Tri -
Rail Coastal Link project is so speculative as to preclude a meaningful cumulative impact analysis.
On the contrary, a wealth of detailed planning and environmental information has been available for
years, and that information should have been tapped in assessing the combined impacts of these
related projects and whether the Proposed Project, if approved, would adversely affect the operation
of the Tri -Rail Coastal Link. The DEIS is fundamentally flawed in that it failed to do so.
3. DEIS Assumptions: The DEIS is Based on an Unrealistic Build Year and Assesses
Critical Impacts Only on Opening Day, Thereby Failing to Analyze Projected Full
Operational Impacts
The analysis presented by the DEIS is founded upon fundamentally flawed assumptions that
provide no basis for an accurate projection of long-term impacts.
First, 2016 is not a proper baseline year for the analysis since that date is a mere two years from
today. Given that FRA. will be reviewing comments on the DEIS in December 2014, it is wholly
unrealistic to believe that all of the following items can be completed by 2016:
• concluding the NEPA review process;
• securing all permits and approvals, including those from the United States Army
Corps of Engineers, Federal Aviation Administration, United State Coastal Guard
("USCG"), Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA"), United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, National Marine Fishery Service, plus those from multiple state and local agencies;
• finalizing all design documents;
• letting all construction contracts;
• constructing:
o a new station in Orlando;
o a new vehicle maintenance facility;
o dozens of new overpasses, bridges, tunnels, ramps, and related infrastructure
and safety features;
o upgrading/expanding 170 highway -rail grade crossings, including designing
and installing safety infrastructure; and
o hundreds of miles of rail bed and new track; and
• performing diagnostic and system testing of all individual elements and system wide
operations for performance and safety.
Nothing in the DEIS gives any indication that extraordinary arrangements have been put into place
to accomplish the tasks required for completion of the Proposed Project within such a compressed
timetable. In fact, the document does not even call for, or analyze, after-hours work during the
construction period. In light of the impossibility of meeting a 2016 opening date, prior to issuing the
30/ - A- Page 8 •
1824679 November 14, 2014
•
•
DEIS, AAF publicly shifted the opening date to 2017 even though the DEIS was keyed to 2016. See
Orlando Business Journal, "3 Reasons Why All Aboard Florida in Orlando Was Delayed' (7/9/2014).
However, even 2017 seems like a pipedream, given the long list of items that must be satisfied and
the sheer magnitude of the construction that must be completed before the system could become
operational. See, e.g., id. (which notes that approval of new station at the Orlando Airport still has
many hurdles to overcome and would take three years to construct from final approval).
Utilization of an unrealistically early baseline year would result in the understatement of certain
critical impacts, including and possibly most notably, noise. The reason for this is that the
significance criteria set forth in the relevant guidance are based upon a sliding scale that is keyed to
ambient noise levels as they are expected to exist in the baseline year. See FRA's "High -Speed Ground
Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidance Manual' (the "FRA Noise Manual") at
Chapter 3 (12/2012); FTA's "Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment' at Chapter 3 (5/2006).
Under those criteria, the higher the noise levels are during the baseline year, the lower the
incremental increase need be to create a significant impact. Id As the DEIS indicates, freight and
vehicular traffic are expected to increase along the FECR corridor in the coming years, and other
projects (including but not limited to Tri -Rail Coastal Link) can be expected to come on-line in the
near future. Accordingly, existing ambient noise will increase and the noise increment that would
produce significant impacts will decrease as time goes on. Therefore, noise impacts may be
understated if an unrealistically early baseline year is utilized in the analysis. For these reasons, FRA
should require AAF to prepare and submit a well-grounded conceptual development schedule for
the Proposed Project that either justifies utilization of the 2016 baseline year or provides for a more
realistic timetable for completion. In the event a later baseline year is identified, the noise analysis
must be revised to reflect background conditions in that year.
In addition, as a result of the illusory 2016 build year the DEIS omitted any real discussion of
construction, including its duration, sequencing, staging, techniques and impacts, claiming that the
activities and impacts associated with building the Proposed Project would all be extremely short
term. As discussed in the comments below, the details regarding the construction of this massive
$1.875 billion dollar project, as well as the impacts that would be experienced during the period of
construction, need to be brought to light and analyzed under a realistic construction schedule.
There is a second fundamentally flawed assumption running through the DEIS analyses of noise,
vibration and navigation, in that they focus on operations of the Proposed Project as of an opening
day, rather than on operating conditions as they will be when the rail line is in full operation. Thus,
the DEIS assesses the effects of 16 round trips per day, which reflects the number of trips needed to
service passenger demand as of 2016. According to the All Aboard Florida Ridership Revenue Study
Summary Report prepared by the Louis Berger Group in September 2013 (the "LBG Study'), which is
attached as Appendix 3.3.F to the DEIS, approximately 1 million riders are expected as of that year.
However, the DEIS itself reports that ridership is expected to grow sharply in the first few years of
operation, and level off at 3.5 million passengers as of 2019.
301 A— Page 9
1824679 November 14, 2014
Moreover, what the DEIS does not mention is that the LBG Study predicts ridership levels for 2019
to range from a low of 3.5 million (in what is characterized as the "base case" which ignores
developments that are "subject to some uncertainty"), to 4 million (in the "business plan case,"
which takes into account AAF's plan to expand ridership), to a high of 5.1 million in the
"management case" (which accounts for more aggressive marketing strategies by AAF). Moreover,
even in the "business plan case" the study predicts ridership to rise to approximately 5.5 million by
2030. LBG Study at 4-4. Thus, based upon AAF's own study, ridership is expected to be more than 5
times the ridership expected when service begins in 2016.
Most of the operational impacts of rail projects — including but not limited to noise, vibration and
navigation delays at draw bridges — are caused by train pass -by incidents. Since the significance of
the impacts depends, in important part, upon the number of passbys, the adequacy of the analysis in
an EIS for a rail project depends upon the accuracy of the prediction of how many passbys will
occur. Under NEPA, an EIS must examine both the short-term impacts of a project, and also the
reasonably foreseeable effects of that project over the long-term. Accordingly, the DEIS should
have examined the anticipated effects of the Proposed Project not only upon the commencement of
service but also over the longer term horizon. There is nothing in the DEIS to indicate that 16
round trips per day would meet ridership demand over the long term, or was properly used as the
touchstone for the impacts analysis in the document.;
The Board does not dispute the appropriateness of including in the DEIS an analysis of short-term
operational impacts of the Proposed Project, utilizing a realistic commencement date baseline year.
However, it believes that a second baseline year of 2030 or later must also be assessed to capture the
long-term impacts of the Proposed Project, in combination with other projects expected to be on
line as of that time. This is particularly important because it can reasonably be anticipated that the
new two -track FECR corridor created by the Proposed Project will be much more heavily used at
that time for both passenger and freight traffic. The DEIS itself indicates that freight traffic is
expected to increase sharply upon completion of the Panama Canal improvements, DEIS at 5-17,
and other projects such as Tri -Rail Coastal Link can be reasonably expected to be operational a few
years after the Proposed Project comes on line. Since it fails to present such a "horizon year"
analysis the DEIS is woefully deficient in its assessment of the long-term cumulative operational
impacts of the Proposed Project on noise, vibration and other critical issues.
4
1824679
The DEIS itself makes no mention of traffic and transportation impacts in any years other than 2016 and 2019.
However, buried in Appendix 3.3 C, entitled "Grade Crossing Details," is a brief description of some limited
analyses performed for both 2016 and 2036. As discussed below, that analysis was not only obscured by its
placement in an appendix to the DEIS, it also revealed exceptionally significant impacts, the implications of
which should have been disclosed and thoroughly examined in the DEIS. It should be noted that the
discussion in that appendix indicates that there would be a range of 16-19 passbys per day. See, eg, DEIS App.
3.3C at 4-1.
301 — ,q —Page 10
November 14, 2014
4. Climate Change: The DEIS Fails to Satisfy FRA's Legal Obligation to Adequately
Analyze the Effects of Climate Change on the Proposed Project
The Proposed Project sponsors are seeking $1.875 billion in low interest federal loan funds to
facilitate construction of a high speed rail line in a corridor that lies completely within Florida's
coastal zone and skirts in and out of the existing flood plain along 128.5 miles of the Atlantic Coast
of Florida. Although the DEIS makes passing reference to the sorts of risks posed by climate
change in locating a major new transportation facility in that area, it provides no meaningful analysis
of such risks or the alternatives or mitigating measures that might minimize or avoid them.
Thus, the DEIS notes that "[t]ransportation systems [such as the Proposed Project] are vulnerable to
extreme weather and climate change effects such as ... sea level rise, and more intense storm events
..." DEIS at 5-71. More particularly, the document acknowledges that "[t]he N -S and. WPB -M
Corridors of the Project are vulnerable to climate change effects in the near future. Both of these
corridors are along the Florida coast and cross several coastal water bodies. Bridge structures,
particularly those with lower elevation, will have increased vulnerability over time, and potential
infrastructure damage may result from flooding, tidal damage and/or storms." Id. at 5-73.
Nevertheless, the DEIS offers only the most cursory examination of the vulnerability of the
Proposed Project to sea level rise or the more intense storm surges the document itself
acknowledges will occur in the near future. The DEIS subjects only two of the 18 bridge crossings
required for the N -S corridor to any sea level rise analysis at all, and with respect to those facilities it
simply compares their elevations to expected sea levels in 2030 and 2060. From this comparison,
the DEIS finds that the bottom chord of one of the bridges would be under water at high tide
during a 100 year storm in 2030, with no mention at all of impacts in 2060. Id. at 5-75. The vague
conclusion drawn from this lackluster analysis is that the "vulnerability [of the Proposed Project
bridges] will increase as sea level rises" and "there may be increasing periods of time where the train
is out of service during storm events." Id Nothing is said regarding the nature and extent of the
property damage that may be caused to the bridge structures, or whether other components of the
Proposed Project located within the substantially expanded future floodplain would also be at risk.
Moreover, not a word is mentioned as to whether and how public safety would be put at risk in
operating a high speed rail service within the corridor under such conditions, or mitigation
opportunities.
The truncated analysis presented in the DEIS with respect to this issue stands at odds with firmly
established federal policy on how climate change is to be accounted for in agency planning. In
President Obama's 2009 Executive Order ("E.O.") 13514 "Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy,
and Economic Performance," all federal agencies, including USDOT and FRA, were directed to establish
Climate Change Adaptation Plans. See 74 Fed. Reg. 52117, 52121, 52124 (10/8/2009). The
President subsequently instructed federal agencies to "ensure that climate risk -management
considerations are fully integrated into federal infrastructure ... planning" in his "Climate Action
Plan" issued in June 2013. Shortly thereafter, the President issued E.O. 13653, "Preparing the United
States for the Impacts of Climate Change," which required all federal agencies to "reform policies and
30i.p,- Page 11 •
1824679 November 14, 2014
Federal funding programs that may ... increase the vulnerability of natural or built systems,
economic sectors, natural resources, or communities to climate change related risks" and to
"integrate consideration of climate change into agency operations and overall mission objectives
...." E.O. 13653, Sections 2 and 5, 78 Fed. Reg. 66819, 66821 (11/6/2013).
USDOT complied with these directives by first issuing a Policy Statement in 2011, requiring
integration of climate change adaptation strategies "into [its] core policies, planning, practices and
programs." USDOT, "Police Statement on Climate Change Adaptation" at 2 (6/2011). This policy also
requires USDOT to use "best -available science" and apply "risk management methods and tools" in
assessing and planning for climate change. Id. USDOT then issued a Climate Adaptation Plan
which characterized the problem unique to transportation as follows:
Transportation infrastructure is inherently long-lived. Bridges,
tunnels, ports and runways may remain in service for decades, while
rights-of-way and specific facilities continue to be used for
transportation purposes for much longer. In addition to normal
deterioration, transportation infrastructure is subject to a range of
environmental risks over long time spans, including wildfire, flood,
landslide, geologic subsidence, rock falls, snow, ice, extreme
temperatures, earthquakes, storms, hurricanes and tornados.
Infrastructure designers and operators must decide the magnitude of
environmental stress that any particular project will be able to
withstand over its lifetime.
USDOT, "Climate Adaptation Plan: Ensuring Transportation Infrastructure and System Resilience" at 3
(5/2013).
To deal with this problem, USDOT found that "newly constructed infrastructure should be
designed and built in recognition of the best current understanding of future environmental risks. In
order for this to happen, understanding of projected climate changes would need to be incorporated
into infrastructure planning and design processes, across the many public and private builders and
operators of transportation infrastructure." Id. at 6. More particularly, the agency committed to
"take actions to ensure that Federal transportation investment decisions address potential climate
impacts in statewide and metropolitan transportation planning and project development processes as
appropriate in order to protect federal investments," id. at 5, and indicates that "FRA will consider
potential climate impacts and adaptation during rail planning and corridor program development."
Id at 15.
The short shrift paid by the DEIS to the climate change -related implications of siting a federally
funded high speed rail corridor in the coastal zone and flood plains of Florida falls far short of the
careful planning envisioned by the President, and the commitments made by USDOT. It also does
not conform to the requirement under NEPA that agencies consider thoroughly the "reasonably
foreseeable" short- and long-term environmental impacts of their actions. In the event these
50i (l1t _ Page 12
1824679 November 14, 2014
•
•
•
deficiencies are not corrected, billions of dollars in federal resources could be poured into a project
that would be under an ever-increasing threat from future sea level rise and storm surges, with no
serious attention paid to the ensuing consequences to public safety or the investment itself, and with
no consideration paid to the measures that could be taken to avoid them. Indeed, according to the
DEIS no action would be taken at all to assure that the Proposed Project is designed to withstand
the future risks of sea level rise. On the contrary, AAF has announced its intention to build
according to a construction design that would "maintain existing elevations where feasible," DEIS at
S-14; and has specifically rejected the USCG request that alternatives be considered to raise the
clearance beneath certain low bridges. Additionally, according to the DEIS, FRA has concluded that
it would not be feasible to raise the clearance beneath certain bridges due to the significant delay it
would cause to the Proposed Project, the overall costs and the risk associated with elevating the
structures. Id at 5-27.' One can only assume from this conclusion that the short-term success of the
Proposed Project is.being given greater weight than the overall safety of the public and of the federal
investment. Moreover, since other viable high speed routes were screened out of the analysis, no
consideration whatsoever has been given to alternatives, such as the utilization of the interior CSX
corridor for high speed rail, that would avoid such risks altogether. The effects of future sea level
rise and storm surges on the Proposed Project are "reasonably foreseeable" impacts, and the DEIS
was materially deficient in failing to address them.
5. Floodplains: Locating the Proposed Project in Floodplains Is Not Demonstrated to
be the Only Practicable Alternative.
The Proposed Project would result in the siting of long stretches of a multi -billion dollar high speed
rail line in Florida's currently mapped floodplains, which can be expected to expand as a result of
FEMA's ongoing "coastal flood risk study" for the East Coast of Central Florida. In addition, the
Proposed Project's encroachment on floodplains would only increase with time as sea level
continues to rise. FRA should not approve such a risky endeavor without first taking a hard look at
other practicable alternatives, as required by the directives discussed below.
The very real risks of floodplain encroachment to humans and infrastructure were first recognized
by President Carter in E.O. 11988, "Floodplain Management," which was intended to "avoid [the
federal government's] direct or indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a
practicable alternative." 42 Fed. Reg. 26951 (5/24/1977). This order requires federal agencies that
propose to support or allow floodplain development to first consider alternatives to such
development. Id at 26952. As mandated by E.O. 11988, USDOT issued its own floodplain
directive, which sets forth the department's policy with regard to floodplains. USDOT Order
5650.2 "Floodplain Management and Protection," (4/23/1979). Under that directive, all USDOT
agencies, including FRA, must take certain steps before supporting a project that would result in a
s
This determination appears to the Board to be premature, since the NEPA process has not yet been
completed. Moreover, there is no hard data presented in the DEIS to support the rationale for such a
determination.
3Ot'-Page 13
1824679 November 14, 2014
"significant encroachment" — a term that includes likely future damage to transportation
infrastructure in a floodplain that could be substantial in cost or extent. Id at 4, 8.
There can be no doubt that the Proposed Project would result in a "significant encroachment" on
floodplains. According to the DEIS, more than three quarters of the Proposed E -W corridor and
one third of the N -S corridor would traverse currently mapped floodplains.8 Thus, overall at least a
third of the total project area (or more than a thousand acres) would be located in floodplains.
For FRA to provide RRIF funding for the Proposed Project it must satisfy certain requirements
under USDOT Order 5650.2. First, it must ensure that the EIS "reflects consideration of
alternatives to avoid [a significant] encroachment." Id. at 8. Next, the responsible individual at FRA
must make a written finding that the proposed significant encroachment is the only practicable
alternative. Id Such a finding "requires a careful balancing and application of individual judgment"
which should "include the full range of environmental, social, economic, and engineering
considerations" where "special weight should be given to floodplain management concerns." Id In
addition, the finding must include a description of why the Proposed Project must be located in the
flood plain, including the alternatives considered and why they were not practicable. The finding
must also include a statement that the action conforms to applicable state and/or local floodplain
protection standards. Id'
The DEIS is entirely bereft of the information needed to satisfy FRA's obligations under E.O.
11988 or USDOT Order 5650.2. For example, due to the so-called "tiered" approach that AAF
employed to screen out any meaningful alternatives analysis, neither in the few scant pages dedicated
to floodplains nor anywhere else in the DEIS is there any detailed consideration of other possible
routes.8 Moreover, the DEIS does not so much as identify, and certainly does not discuss,
applicable state and/or local floodplain protection standards, so FRA would be wholly unable to
find that the Proposed Project conforms to such standards. Accordingly, approval of the Proposed
Project on the current record would run counter to the letter and spirit of a federal policy aimed at
ensuring that federal dollars are not spent on infrastructure projects most vulnerable to the risk of
flooding, unless there is no other practicable alternative.
6
7
8
1824679
These percentages are based on project area (corridor lengths and widths provided in DEIS Chapter 2) and the
project study area within the 100 -year flood plains identified in DEIS Table 4.3.4-1.
Similar requirements are reflected in FRA's own NEPA Procedures. See 64 Fed. Reg. 28555. Under those
procedures, the agency may only facilitate floodplains development if: (i) the head of the agency finds that the
only practicable alternative to the project is to site it in the floodplain; (ii) the agency designs or modifies the
project to minimize potential harm to or within the floodplain consistent with E.O. 11988, and (iii) the agency
prepares and circulates a notice containing an explanation of why the action is proposed to be located in the
floodplain. Id.
See the Board's Comment 1, above.
301- A.
Page 14
November 14, 2014
•
6. Construction Impacts: The Identification and Discussion of Construction Impacts is
Virtually Absent from the DEIS.
It is well established that a NEPA EIS must discuss and evaluate the construction impacts that
would result from a proposed action. See, e.g., FRA NEPA Procedures, 64 Fed. Reg. 28556 (an FRA
NEPA EIS "should identify and assess the impacts associated with the construction period of each
alternative" (emphasis added)); USDOT NEPA Procedures, Attachment 2 at 13.
Proceeding from the unrealistic premise that the Proposed Project would be constructed by 2016,
the DEIS provides only the most superficial description of the construction -related activities that are
anticipated, and little substantive assessment of the "temporary" construction period impacts those
activities would cause. Thus, no details whatsoever are provided concerning the schedule for the
work, the sequence of activities, the nature of those activities, the number and types of equipment
that would be used, the level of truck traffic that would be generated in delivering materials to and
disposing of waste from the work sites, the routes such trucks would take, road closures, detours,
staging and storage area locations, or other matters critical to a meaningful impacts analysis. As a
result, nothing of substance is discussed with respect to the impacts of construction activities on
surrounding land uses, traffic, emergency response, or other critical issues.
Thus, the DEIS brushes aside construction -related land use impacts with a few words about "short-
term construction easements on privately owned properties," and the assurance that
"pre -construction land use patterns would return once the construction period concludes." DEIS at
5-5. Not a word is mentioned about the nature and extent of the disruption that would be caused to
adjacent homes and businesses during the period that a massive infrastructure project is being
constructed through the heart of downtown and residential areas. Indeed, rather than addressing
the socioeconomic impacts of Proposed Project construction at all, the DEIS merely comes up with a
few numbers on the economic benefits and jobs that could be generated by the work. DEIS at 5-
130.
Likewise, the DEIS dismisses out of hand the traffic -related impacts of construction activities,
stating that "the Project would result in minor, short-term impacts to freight rail transportation,
regional highways and local vehicular traffic during construction." DEIS at 5-14. With respect to
freight traffic, the document reaches that conclusion based upon the assurance that "[n]ew track
construction ... would be performed according to best management practices" without specifying
what those BMPs might be or how they might avoid disruption to freight traffic. Id With respect to
vehicular traffic, the document mentions that there would be road closures, but states that
"typically," they would last no more than a week. No discussion appears at all as to whether there
are certain roads that would beclosed for a longer period; nor does the DEIS address whether
police, fire or EMS emergency response would be delayed as a result of the road closures (and if so,
what could be done to mitigate that impact). Moreover, no analysis is presented with respect to
whether construction -related truck traffic would cause significant congestion on the roadways
surrounding work sites and staging areas. Instead of disclosing construction period traffic impacts
and identifying the mitigation measures to address them, the DEIS simply waves the issue away with
30 .A Page 15 -
1824679 November 14, 2014
the assurance that "[p]roper planning and implementation and maintenance of mitigation measures
(e.g., maintenance of traffic plans) will be specified and required for construction." DEIS at 5-15.
Given the magnitude of the effort required to build the Proposed Project, and the failure of the
DEIS to include even a conceptual schedule backing up the contention that work would be
completed by 2016, one can only assume that Proposed Project construction would extend over a
period of many years. While the DEIS provides no information with respect to possible staging
areas, it must also be assumed that such areas would be major facilities that are intensely busy over
much if not all of that construction period. The potential environmental impacts associated with
such activities and facilities should not have been dismissed with platitudes. Rather, they should have
been carefully assessed, and specific mitigation measures should have been proposed to minimize
them to the extent practicable.
Predictably, the half-hearted analysis included in the DEIS yields only the most amorphous
mitigation measures. To provide a few examples, no mitigation at all is proposed to address the land
use, socioeconomic and community character impacts of extended construction activities and
prolonged conditions of disruption on affected commercial districts and residential areas; equally
lacking are mitigation measures addressing vehicular traffic impacts during the construction period;
transportation impacts on freight traffic are wished away with unspecified BMPs; and the only air
emissions mitigation identified in the document relates to dust control, with no meaningful measures
identified to address the effects of equipment and vehicular emissions of particulate matter of less
than 2.5 microns ("PM,5") or NO,. Such issues are dismissed with the statement that "[p]otential
emissions associated with construction equipment will be kept to a minimum as most equipment will
be driven to and kept at affected sites for the duration of construction activities." DEIS at 7-4.
While such a practice may help reduce emissions related to the transport of such equipment, left
unaddressed is the considerably more important issue of emissions from such equipment while
operating at the work site. That issue cannot be put to rest by describing construction -related air
impacts as "temporary," because the health-related standards issued by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency for the relevant pollutants are short term standards (i.e., 24 hours
for PM,5 and 1 hour for NO2).9 It is well established that diesel construction equipment emits PM2.5
and NO2 in quantities that may result in serious air quality and public health impacts.
For these reasons, the DEIS does not take the "hard look" at construction period impacts that
NEPA demands.
Although some analysis is presented in the DEIS with respect to Noise and Vibration impacts during
construction, that analysis is deficient for the reasons discussed in the Board's Comment 7.B below, and in the
attached comments prepared by CDM Smith.
3 0 / • 19 . Page 16
1824679
November 14, 2014
•
•
7. DEIS Impact Analyses: The DEIS Fails to Properly Evaluate Two of the Most
Potentially Significant Impact Areas to Local Communities: Transportation and
Noise and Vibration
A. Traffic: The DEIS Omits Mention of the Results of its Own Transportation
Appendix, Which Predicts Significant Impacts to Local Traffic Conditions Even
Though It Is Based on an Inadequate Analysis.
The N -S Corridor of the Proposed Project would cross 159 roadways at -grade through five counties
between Cocoa and West Palm Beach. DEIS at 4-15. The DEIS concludes — after only the briefest
discussion of localized traffic impacts - that increased train traffic will "result in minor increased
traffic delays at existing roadway crossings." Id at 5-11. But that conclusion is belied by the
information tucked away in an appendix to the DEIS entitled "Grade Crossing Details," which
consists of a report prepared by Amec Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc., in September 2013
entitled "Transportation and Railroad Crossing Analysis for the All Aboard Florida Passenger Rail
Project from Cocoa to \Vest Palm Beach, Florida" (the "Amec Report"). DEIS App. 3.3C. Even
though the Amec Report is rife with methodological errors and shortcomings, it presents a bleak
picture for local traffic conditions if the Proposed Project were to advance. For example, some
intersection approaches would experience delays of up to 45 minutes per hour, snarling local traffic,
impeding emergency vehicular movement and potentially causing other significant impacts to air
quality and the socioeconomic well-being of the affected communities.1° See DEIS App. 3.3C at 3-
22. One can only imagine how dark the picture really would be if the analyses were conducted
properly and reported accurately in the DEIS.
Close examination of the information presented in the Amec Report reveals that even based on a
skewed and incomplete evaluation, there would be very significant impacts to local traffic conditions
at the at -grade crossings along the N -S Corridor. For example, at the FECR grade crossing at Oslo
Road in Indian River County, the Amec Report estimates that in 2016 there would be a westbound
queue of 1299 feet every time a passenger or freight train passes by. Id. Notably, there is only 350
feet on Oslo Road between the FECR crossing and US 1. See id at 3-8. Thus, the vast majority of
vehicles would be backed up onto or beyond US 1, in queues that would extend hundreds of feet in
both the southbound and northbound directions. Moreover, US 1 southbound at Oslo Road has a
limited 150 foot right-hand turning lane and northbound US 1 at Oslo Road has two dedicated left -
turn lanes each measuring 325 feet, for a total length of 650 feet. Accordingly, a 1299 foot queue is
likely to consume the 350 feet on Oslo Road between the FECR crossing and US 1, the 150 foot
south bound dedicated US 1 right turn lane, and the north -bound left turn capacity on US 1. There
is no discussion about how this queue would function, and the Amec Report is devoid of any
discussion of impacts on the north and southbound US 1 lanes. In addition, the Amec Report
predicts that an additional year 2016 westbound queue of 3066 feet (for a passenger train passby,
3072 feet for a freight train passby) would form at the intersection of Oslo Road and US 1. As
10
For example, eastbound delays at the Oslo Road and US 1 intersection in Indian River County would be 700
second at least three or four times per hour in 2036. DEIS App. 3.3C at 3-22.
3o1 -A - Page 17
1824679 November 14, 2014
noted above, this intersection is 350 feet away from the Oslo Road and FECR crossing, but neither
the DEIS nor the Amec Report make any attempt to discuss how this intersection could operate
with a combined queue for both intersections that would extend almost 4400 feet.
These impacts are predicted to significantly worsen in 2036. For example, in that year the eastbound
queues that are predicted to form at the intersection of Oslo Road and US 1 each time either a
passenger or freight train passes by would extend more than 7000 feet -- well over a mile. Id. at 3-
22. Moreover, impacts of this magnitude would not be confined to Oslo Road, or the handful of
other intersections considered in the Amec Report. Rather, they can be expected up and down the
entire corridor, as trains come and go more than 50 times a day.
No hint of these significant traffic impacts appears in the body of the DEIS. In fact, the document
as written reports information for 2016 and 2019, and does not address potential traffic impacts in
2036 at all. See DEIS at 5-6 to 5-14. Likewise, the ripple effect of the long queues predicted on local
intersections — on the ability of police, fire and EMS vehicles to respond to emergencies; on traffic
safety; or on economic conditions in affected business districts is not addressed in the DEIS. And
nothing is said in the DEIS or its appendices about how such impacts could be mitigated or avoided.
Moreover, the analysis presented in the Amec Report is unsupported by technical data or modeling
results, and is deficient in several respects. Set forth below are a few examples of the deficiencies
that riddle the Amec Report.
• The number of intersections evaluated was an inadequate sample population.
The Amec Report examined just 6% of the at -grade intersections along the N -S Corridor (10
out of 159 at grade crossings, or 2 intersections for each of the five counties that would be
bisected by the N -S Corridor). DEIS App. 3.3C at 3-1. No justification was given for why
so few intersections were considered. Since every intersection is unique, a more reasonable
sample size should have been selected.
• Only half of each intersection was evaluated. The Amec Report only examined
eastbound and westbound movements through intersections, and failed to consider the
impacts to the north -south movements in the four-way intersections evaluated. This is an
egregious omission given that many of the intersections that would be affected by the
Proposed Project involve significant regional north/south arterial roadways and there is little
doubt that the predicted eastbound and westbound delays and queues would impact the
north/south intersection movements, and perhaps regional mobility in general. It is
standard protocol for a traffic impacts analysis to consider all movements in an intersection.
Without such a full intersection analysis, it is impossible to understand the true impacts of
the Proposed Project on local traffic.
• Wrong baseline used for impacts evaluation. The Amec Report failed to
generate "no action" traffic operations for 2016 or 2036. The impacts of the Proposed
Project should be assessed as compared to a no action condition. An appropriate no action
30/' A — Page 18
1824679 November 14, 2014
•
•
•
•
condition would be normal traffic operations plus freight movements as compared to
normal traffic operations, plus freight and passenger train operations. The increment that
would be derived by comparing such scenarios should have been generated for both 2016
and 2036. However, the Amec Report presents no comparison to a typical no action
condition. Instead, it used a "weighted average" approach, that discounted the impacts of
the Proposed Project by averaging the delay and queue lengths that would be created by the
Proposed Project with those from typical traffic operations and freight movements.
• No impacts discussion provided. The Amec Report contains no discussion of the
tables appearing at pages 3-1 to 3-26 within the report. Instead, it discusses the maximum
crossing closure time, choosing to ignore the predicted queues and delays that would result
from the closures.
• Only the PM Peak Hour Was Modeled. The Amec Report confined its analysis
to the PM peak hour. However, the AM peak hour (which would include school and
commuter traffic) or weekend midday peak hour could well represent a worst case scenario
for many intersections. All three peak hours should have been examined.
• Downtimes based on maximum speeds may be underestimated. The
downtime for each crossing was estimated based on passenger trains from the Proposed
Project traveling at maximum predicted speeds. It is unknown if the maximum predicted
speeds could be safely achieved and maintained along the entire length of the proposed N -S
Corridor, therefore a more realistic speed should have been used that would have resulted in
longer down times and a more conservative analysis.
• Impacts for freight and passenger trains similar. Even though the Amec Report
goes to great lengths to highlight that the proposed passenger trains will be shorter and
faster than freight trains, the delay and queue impacts are very similar for a passenger train
and a freight train crossing. This is not explained in the Amec Report.
The Proposed Project has the potential to disrupt traffic at intersections along the entire length of
the N -S Corridor between Cocoa and Miami. Notwithstanding the flaws in the Amec Report, that
study provides some sense of the magnitude of the traffic impacts that can be expected. The Board
urges FRA to undertake a careful study of those potential impacts, following standard analytical
methodologies, and the socioeconomic, public safety, and other impacts that could also be expected
to result. Those analyses should be presented in a supplemental draft environmental impacts
statement.
3D l' — Page 19
1824679 November 14, 2014
B. Noise and Vibration: The DEIS Failed to Follow FRA's Own Guidance in
Performing Noise and Vibration Impacts Analyses, And as a Result Underestimates
Potential Impacts.
The noise analysis appearing in the DEIS does not take the "hard look" that NEPA requires for a
major high speed rail project in the final stages of project planning. As noted above, the analysis
focuses solely on noise conditions in 2016, the year assumed for the commencement of operations,
and gives no consideration to conditions in later years. Moreover, even the 2016 analysis was wholly
inadequate. For example, no monitoring was performed of existing noise levels at sensitive
receptors affected by the Proposed Project, and no detailed assessment was provided as to how
noise levels in the vicinity of such sensitive receptors might change once high speed rail operations
begin. The general calculations presented in the document provide no specific indication of whether
and where significant noise impacts might occur, or what reasonably might be done to mitigate
them.
As noted in the Board's Comment 3 above, the FRA Noise Manual sets `forth the ground rules for
the assessment of noise impacts from FRA projects under NEPA. According to that document, a
"General Noise Assessment" of the sort appearing in the DEIS is to be performed "commensurate
with the level of detail of available data in the early stages of major investment planning and
environmental clearance." FRA Noise Manual at 4-4. In contrast, according to the FRA Noise
Manual:
[a] Detailed Noise Analysis is appropriate for assessing noise impacts
for high-speed train projects after the preferred alignment and
candidate high-speed train technologies have been selected. At this
point, the preliminary engineering has been initiated, and the
preparation of an environmental document (usually an
Environmental Impact Statement) has begun. Information required
to perform a Detailed Noise Analysis includes type of vehicle
equipment to be used, train schedules, speed profiles, plan and
profiles of guideways, locations of access roads, and landform
topography, including adjacent terrain and building features.
FRA Noise Manual at 5-1.
All such information should have been readily available at this point in the planning process for
Proposed Project, given the fact that AAF is planning to begin construction next year. Thus, instead
of the generalized calculations presented in the DEIS, under FRA's own manual the analysis should
have included:
• Identification of noise -sensitive receivers, which depend on the land use in the vicinity of
the proposed project.
30/- A — Page 20
1824679
November 14, 2014
•
• Estimation (based upon measurements taken at representative locations) of the existing
noise exposure at each noise sensitive receiver or cluster of receivers using the methods
presented set forth in the manual.
• Determination of the technology applicable to the project: steel -wheeled high-speed or
very high-speed electric (locomotive hauled or EMU), steel -wheeled fossil fuel, or
maglev.
• Determination of noise exposure in terms of "sound exposure level" ("SEL") under
reference operating conditions.
• Adjustment of the subsource reference SELs to the anticipated operating conditions of
the project (i.e., train consist and speed).
• Development of an SEL -versus -distance relationship for each subsource that includes
the effects of shielding along the path.
• Determination of total SEL at each receiver by combining the levels from all subsources.
• Assessment of noise impact at each receiver or cluster of receivers.
The DEIS compounds the deficiencies resulting from use of the wrong methodology by departing
from the approach one would expect to see in a DEIS, where project impacts are first identified and
all practicable mitigation is then identified to address them. See FRA Noise Manual at 6-36 ("In
general, mitigation options are•chosen from those below, and then portions of the project noise are
recomputed and reassessed to account for this mitigation."). Instead of following this
straightforward protocol, the DEIS builds mitigation into its impact analysis and notes that "159
grade crossings where severe, unmitigated impacts would occur" would be "eliminated" by a
commitment to install wayside horns, hereby concluding that "the Project would have no permanent
noise impacts" as a result of that commitment. DEIS at 5-46, 5-49. That conclusion is not only
based upon the use of faulty methodology. It also short-circuits FRA's obligation to consider
mitigation measures other than wayside horns to mitigate the severe impacts that were mentioned in
passing. According to the FRA Noise Manual, among the measures that should have been
considered are vehicle noise specifications, wheel treatments, vehicle treatments, vehicle body
design, guideway support, operational restrictions, path treatments, noise buffers and ground
absorption. These alternative and/or additional measures should have been considered by FRA.
8. Section 106 and Historic Resources: Localities were Excluded from the Section 106
Consultation and Significant Historic and Archeological Resources were Ignored by
the DEIS.
Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, P.L. 89-605, codified at 16 U.S.C. §
470 et seg. ("NHPA"), federal agencies must take into account the effect of their undertakings on
historic resources that are either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places (the "National Register"). The federal agency must do so in accordance with procedures
adopted by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (the "Advisory Council") appearing at 36
C.F.R. Part 800 (the "NHPA Regulations"), unless the agency substitutes the NEPA procedures for
those required under the NHPA. See 36 C.F.R. § 800.8(c). Here, FRA elected not to substitute
3o' -P.- Page 21
1824679
November 14, 2014
NEPA procedures for those of the Advisory Council. See DEIS, App. 4.4.5.A.2, ("M. Hassell stated
that FRA has decided not to use the substitution approach for streamlining the NEPA and NHPA
Section 106 consultation process.").11
The NHPA Regulations require a federal agency to engage in a consultation process to identify
historic properties potentially affected by the undertaking, assess its effects on those resources, and
seek ways to avoid or minimize any adverse effects that are identified. The NHPA Regulations state
clearly that "[a] representative of a local government with jurisdiction over an area in which the
effects of an undertaking may occur is entitled to participate as a consulting parry." 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(b)
(emphasis added). Accordingly, the regulations provide that the "[t]he [federal] agency shall invite
any local governments ..." to join in the consultation. Id § 800.3(f)(1) (emphasis added).
Notwithstanding such clear and explicit mandates, FRA did not invite the County to participate in
the Section 106 consultation for the Proposed Project. On the contrary, it appears that a conscious
decision was made to not invite the participation of the County and scores of other affected local
governments. Thus, the DEIS states that only "four Certified Local Governments (CLG) and two
local informants were ... contacted regarding information on locally designated historic resources."
DEIS at 4-125. The reason for this, according to the minutes of the March 28, 2013 meeting
between the State Historic Preservation Office ("SHPO") and AAF, is that SHPO "felt that ... due
to past consultations with affected communities (i.e., West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale, Miami)
additional separate meetings are unnecessary."12 DEIS, App. 4.4.5.A.1 at 2.
Thus, only a handful of "certified" local governments were invited to participate in the consultation,
leaving numerous other local jurisdictions (which — like Indian River County — are not certified) out
of the discussions. As noted in minutes for a July 8, 2013 SHPO-AAF meeting that included the
few consulting parties, including FRA, "[f]or the prior EA, county and local historic preservation
staff were invited" to participate in the consultation, but for this phase no such invitation would be
extended because the "project will not involve new station locations that would extend into historic
districts." DEIS, App. 4.4.5.A.2 at 1.
The exclusion of virtually all local authorities from the Section 106 consultation was wholly
improper. There is no basis in the NHPA regulations to limit participating local governments to
those that are "certified." 13 Moreover, it cannot be argued that the NEPA scoping process
11
12
13
The DEIS states on page 4-124 that "FRA is coordinating compliance with Section 106 with preparations of the
DEIS" (emphasis added). Under the NHPA Regulations, "coordination" is distinct from "substitution."
When the historic review is coordinated with the NEPA review, the Part 800 NHPA procedural requirements
must be satisfied, along with those under NEPA. When the federal agency seeks to streamline its review by
substituting NEPA procedures, those procedures are followed "in lieu" of those required under the NHPA
Regulations.
The NHPA Regulations require FRA to consult with SHPO and representatives of local government with
jurisdiction over an area in which the effects of the Proposed Project may occur. 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(c)(1), (3).
They do not contemplate cutting localities out of the process because SHPO advises that local consultation is
"unnecessary".
It should be noted that the NHPA regulations governing consultation do not even mention certified local
governments. 36 C.F.R. Part 800. By being "certified" a local government can play a more direct role in
nominating resources to the National Register and may be eligible to receive certain historic preservation funds,
301 ' A — Page 22
1824679 November 14, 2014
•
•
•
provided a hypothetical opportunity for local governments to provide input regarding the effects of
the Proposed Project on cultural resources, as scoping is no substitute for active participation in a
Section 106 consultation. It should be noted that Indian River County, like most localities without a
proposed station, were not directly notified about, or invited to participate in, the scoping process.
See DEIS, App. 8.1.B at App. B. FRA could not have expected localities to infer from the generic
scoping notice that their only opportunity to provide the information on potentially affected
resources, adverse effects and mitigation measures would be to attend and testify at the scoping
sessions. This is especially so because in Indian River County's case, such sessions were not even
convened in the county. The publication of a scoping notice does not satisfy FRA's regulatory
obligation to invite local authorities to join in a Section 106 consultation.
Moreover, FRA was not justified in excluding multiple local authorities from the consultation on the
basis that the Proposed Project will not affect cultural resources. On the contrary, one of the
primary reasons for including local authorities in the process is to assist in the identification of
resources that might otherwise be overlooked. That is exactly what happened here: in the absence
of input from informed local authorities, the parties failed to identify a number of significant cultural
resources or the effects that the Proposed Project would have on those resources. For example, no
mention is made in the DEIS of two significant archaeological sites in Indian River County:
The Vero Man site. This site is located along the Main Relief Canal (Van Valkenburg
Creek), where project work would be performed to upgrade an existing railroad
bridge, and to construct a second track. Archaeologists from Mercyhurst University,
the local Old Vero Ice Age Committee, and scientists from the University of Florida
have been working at this site over the past few years. Significant artifacts have been
uncovered during recent excavations that support the theory that this area was
important to a large number of extinct species and the Paleo-Indians that hunted
them. The timeline has been established at 12,000 to 14,000 years ago and may be
even older. The archaeological activities, research, and continued excavations are
providing valuable information about the earliest people to inhabit Florida. The
Vero Man site — Florida Master Site File ("FMSF") #8IR09 - has been determined to
be eligible for the National Register by the Florida SHPO. Evidence of the
presence of Paleo-Indians, extinct species, possibly hunting weapons, and an
authenticated prehistoric art etching may make this site a potential 'World Site."
The Gifford Bones Site. This site is located at the North Relief Canal/Houston
Creek, and is recorded as FMSF #8IR07 and #8IR08. FMSF #8IR07 is noted as
"inside of drainage ditch" where bones of ground sloth, camel, mastodon and other
animals were found. At FMSF #8IR08 a stemmed flint projectile point was `[d]ug
out of [the]top of ... brown sand in [the] new canal north of Gifford ...". Rouse
1824679
see 36 C.F.R. § 61.6(0, but whether a locality is certified has no bearing on the Section 106 process and clearly is
not a prerequisite to being invited to join in a Section 106 consultation.
3D!- Pt —Page 23
November 14, 2014
(1951) at 171. This narrow canal on both the west and east sides of the railroad
bridge and Old Dixie Highway Bridge has yielded fossilized bones for decades.
Since it did not identify these significant historical resources in the course of the Section 106
process, FRA failed to assess whether project construction would affect these resources by
disturbing paleo artifacts lying beneath the surface; whether vibration from increased freight and new
passenger operations could damage those artifacts; and whether the lateral expansion of active rail
operations would foreclose or hinder future artifact recovery efforts. Likewise, the DEIS failed to
address ways to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects on these resources.
In addition, the DEIS fails to identify two affected architectural resources within Indian River
County. Thus, nothing is said in the document about the Old Town Sebastian Historic District East
or Old Town Sebastian Historic District West. There are over 40 contributing sites or buildings in
these two districts, both of which are listed on the National Register. By failing to identify these
districts, the DEIS neglected to mention that the FECR corridor bisects them, or to account for the
contextual effects (such as noise, vibration, safety and visual impacts) that increased rail traffic
associated with the Proposed Project would have on them. Nor did it address the measures that
could be implemented to address those effects.
The omissions from the Section 106 Historic Resources analysis noted in these comments provide a
few examples of the deficiencies resulting from the exclusion of local authorities from the Section
106 consultation. It is highly likely that additional resources located within other jurisdictions along
the corridor were also overlooked as a result of the exclusionary consultation process that was
employed. For that reason, FRA should reinitiate the Section 106 consultation by extending
invitations to all affected local authorities and other parties entitled to participate under the NHPA
Regulations.
9. Section 4(0: The Section 4(f) Evaluation Failed to: Identify Significant Resources;
Evaluate How the Proposed Project Would Use Those Resources; Whether There are
Any Feasible and Prudent Alternatives To Those Uses; and Whether All Possible
Planning Has Been Taken to Minimize Harm.
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, prohibits USDOT agencies,
including FRA, from approving a project if it "uses" a Section 4(f) Resource" unless (i) there is no
prudent and feasible alternative to that use, and (ii) the project includes all possible planning to
minimize harm to the Section 4(f) Resource. Pub. L. 89-670 (1966) (now codified at 49 U.S.C.
303(c)). A project's "use" of a Section 4(f) Resource can either be direct, by physically impacting a
resource, or "constructive", when a project's proximity impacts are severe enough to impair a
14
1824679
Section 4(0 protects the following resources: publicly owned land of a public park, recreation area, or wildlife
and waterfowl refuge of national, State, or local significance, or land of an historic site of national, State, or
local significance (as determined by the Federal, State, or local officials having jurisdiction over the park, area,
refuge or site). 49 U.S.C. § 303(c).
30 • A - Page 24
November 14, 2014
•
•
Section 4(f) Resource. Regulations codified at 23 C.F.R. Part 77413 and the FRA NEPA Guidance
establish the process for FRA's compliance with Section 4(f).
As discussed in the Board's Section 106/Historic Resources Comment above, FRA failed to consult
with local governments in the Section 106 process, and as a result, failed to identify in the DEIS
significant historic resources listed on the National Register. These historic resources are protected
Section 4(f) Resources, and the potential for the Proposed Project to "use" them must be assessed
in the Section 4(f) Evaluation. See 23 C.F.R. § 774.11((e), (f). In particular, the Section 4(f)
Evaluation must assess whether there are prudent and feasible alternatives to any use of these
resources, and ensure that the Proposed Project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to
them. Without correcting these substantial omissions -- and addressing any and all other Section
4(f) Resources that were overlooked in the analyses performed thus far -- FRA may not approve the
Section 4(f) Evaluation.
10. Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency: The DEIS does not Provide a Basis for
Determining Consistency with the Florida Coastal Zone Management Program.
The Florida Coastal Management Program ("FCMP"), codified in Chapter 380, Part II of the
Florida Statutes, has been approved by the U.S. Department of Commerce pursuant to the Federal
Coastal Zone Management Act ("CZMA"), 16 U.S.C. § 1451 et seq., in 1982. 7 Fed. Reg. 47056 (Oct.
22, 1982). As a result, under the CZMA all federal activities affecting a coastal use or resource in
Florida, including the provision of RRIF funding, must be consistent with the FCMP "to the
maximum extent practicable." Id.; 16 U.S.C. §§ 1456(c)(1)(A), (c)(2); 15 C.F.R. § 930.50. The Florida
Department of Environmental Protection ("FDEP") is responsible for evaluating whether federal
activities are consistent with the FCMP, and must either concur or object to a consistency
certification submitted for the Proposed Project. 15 C.F.R. §§ 930.62, 930.63. While FRA may
intend for FDEP to rely on the information provided in the DEIS in making this determination, it is
so lacking in substance as to preclude FDEP from relying upon it.
There is no meaningful discussion in the DEIS of whether and how the Proposed Project is
consistent with the 24 statutory programs that comprise the FCMP. Instead, the document presents
a "Draft Consistency Determination" consisting of Table 5.2.5-1, DEIS at 5-65, that includes a
column with only the most cursory discussion of consistency. One example well illustrates this
point. The FCMP identifies Chapter 267, Historical Resources as an "enforceable policy" for
purposes of federal consistency. That statute declares that "[t]he rich and unique heritage of historic
properties in this state, representing more than 10,000 years of human presence, is an important
legacy to be valued and preserved for present and future generations." Accordingly, state agencies
are directed to avoid taking or assisting in any action that would substantially alter in a way that
15 While the Section 4(O Regulations are promulgated by FHWA and FTA, FRA has recognized them in the
DEIS as being applicable to the Proposed Project. See, e.g., DEIS at 6-3.
3D1—fi^Page 25
1824679 November 14, 2014
would adversely affect the character, form, integrity, or other qualities which contribute to [t]he
historical, architectural, or archaeological value of [a historic] property" unless there is "no feasible
and prudent alternative" and timely steps are taken either to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects, or
to undertake an appropriate archaeological salvage excavation ...." F.S. Sec. 267.061. Table 5.2.5-1
dismisses any concerns with respect to this policy with the statement that "[b]ased on the
information available, the Project would have no adverse effect on archaeological sites along the N -S
corridor." DEIS at 5-68. However, as discussed in the Board's Section 106/Historic Resources
Comment above, the cultural resources analysis presented in the DEIS was prepared without any
meaningful consultation with local authorities, and entirely missed several significant historic
resources in Indian River County alone. Since the conclusion set forth in Table 5.2.5-1 is not
backed up by the facts, it provides no basis for a determination that the Proposed Project is
consistent with this enforceable policy. The treatment of other enforceable policies in Table 5.2.5-1
is equally conclusory and unsubstantiated. As a result, the consistency analysis presented in the
DEIS cannot serve as a basis for a determination of consistency with the FCMP.
11. Consistency with Scoping: The Analyses Committed to in the Scoping Report are
Absent from the DEIS
In order to assure that the scope of a DEIS covers all matters of environmental concern identified
by an agency in light of comments made by the public, the CEQ regulations clearly require that
"[d]raft environmental impact statements ... be prepared in accordance with the scope decided
upon in the scoping process." 40 C.F.R. § 1502.9(a). Contrary to this mandate, the DEIS deviates
in critical respects from commitments made by FRA in the scoping report issued on June 28, 2013,
(Attachment 8.1.B to the DEIS, the "Scoping Report").
For example, with respect to alternatives the Scoping Report indicates that "[t]he EIS will consider
additional/alternative stations, including locating stations closer to city/government center[s]. This
may include stations in Cocoa/Port Canaveral, Fort Pierce, Melbourne, Port Canaveral, Stuart, St.
Lucie, and other cities along the Proposed Project corridor. The EIS will also consider alternative rail
alignment locations west of the current corridor, including parallel to the Florida Turnpike." Scoping Report at 18
(emphasis added). Notwithstanding these commitments, the DEIS offers no substantive analysis of
either topic. The Board assumes that by promising consideration of alternative routes FRA intended
to include in the DEIS something more than the application of AAF's profit -based criteria to screen
all alternative routes out of substantive environmental review. Yet as discussed above, such a
substantive analysis was omitted from the DEIS. Moreover, no real consideration at all was paid to
additional stations along the N -S corridor.
In addition, the Scoping Report commits that `[t]he EIS will assess the primary and secondary (or
induced) social and economic impacts of the Proposed Project, which may include relocating
residences and businesses, changes in business patterns, employment, local school enrollment,
community infrastructure, property values, and tax valuation/revenues. Both local and regional social
3o1- - Page26 .
1824679
November 14, 2014
•
and economic impacts will be analysed." Scoping Report at 20 (emphasis added). Nevertheless, as
discussed in the Board's Comment 6, above, the DEIS failed to include any analysis whatsoever of
the localised impacts that construction and operation of the Proposed Project would have on the
socioeconomic conditions in affected commercial and residential areas. This is a glaring omission in
light of: (i) the disruption that will be caused by construction activities associated with a major
infrastructure project cutting through vibrant downtown areas and residential neighborhoods; (ii) the
permanent barrier that would be created by operation of a highly active rail line separating
commercial and residential neighborhoods; and (iii) the potential socioeconomic impacts of traffic
congestion on the roadways proximate to the grade crossings.
Another commitment in the Scoping Report is that "[t]he EIS will consider cumulative impacts of
all resources, to assess the impacts of the Project in conjunction with other rail projects." Scoping
Report at 21. Yet as discussed in the Board's Comment 2, above, contrary to that commitment the
DEIS explicitly rejects consideration of the cumulative impacts of the Tri -Rail Coastal Link project,
notwithstanding the availability of the information needed to do so.
The above examples illustrate how far the DEIS strayed from the scope FRA promised to prepare at
the conclusion of the scoping process. The Board urges the agency to now keep those
commitments in a supplemental DEIS.
1824679
3 Page 27
November 14, 2014
goD4
amu]rici
Memorandum
To: Mr. Chris Mora
From: Ms. Jill Grimaldi, BCES
Date: November 14, 2014
Subject: All Aboard Florida
On September 19, 2014, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) released the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) for the All Aboard Florida (AAF) high-speed rail project's Phase 2 (West Palm
Beach to Orlando segment). FRA is serving as the lead Federal Agency for the review of the project. An
Environmental Assessment (EA), presumably using similar methodology, was completed for the Miami
to West Palm Beach segment (Phase 1) of the project in 2012. The FRA issued a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for Phase 1. A supplemental EA is under review (concurrently with the DEIS) for the
revised location of a maintenance facility. The supplemental EA has no bearing on the DEIS review.
CDM Smith has conducted a thorough review of the DEIS. It should be noted that CDM Smith's review
comments focus solely on the information presented in the DEIS that pertains to the portion of the
Proposed Project within Indian River County's boundaries (including impacts on municipalities). The
detailed summary is provided as Attachment 1 to this memorandum.
After completing the review of the DEIS, CDM Smith has concluded that the evaluation has significant
deficiencies when compared to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, which
outlines the requirements for an Environmental Impact Statement. The following presents a summary of
the deficiencies. Additional discussion on each item is presented in Attachment 1.
Conclusions
Upon review of the DEIS, CDM Smith concludes that the document is incomplete and lacking in the following
primary areas:
1. No impacts outside the FECR ROW were included.
2. As presented, the alternatives analysis appears to be insufficient.
3.• Noise and vibration impacts assessment is not complete.
a. Vibration data is lacking.
b. General methodologies were used instead of the detailed assessment called for under the
FRA manual.
301. A.47
Memonndum.docx
•
Mr. Chris Mora
November 14, 2014
Page 2
c. Noise levels are underestimated when compared to the existing conditions data collected by
CDM Smith.
d. Future condition predicts a near doubling of noise levels.
4. Construction/temporary impacts are not addressed (other than minimal construction noise data).
5. Traffic evaluation is insufficient.
a. Number of crossings evaluated is not adequate.
b. Very significant queuing impacts will result from the Project that were not properly
disclosed.
c. Traffic projections not based on actual traffic counts kept by Indian River County (updated
annually).
d. AM peak not included.
e. Delay and queuing calculations are unclear.
f. RTC model results do not include impacts to at -grade crossings or the results of multiple
trains at rail crossings.
g. No mention of future greenway plans (for bicycle and pedestrian use).
h. No data given on the projected emergency vehicle impacts for at -grade crossings; no
indication of the local emergency routes that were input into the RTC model to render a
solution on possible delay impacts.
6. Wetlands analysis is incomplete. Evaluation must include potential impacts resulting from
improvements made at crossings outside of the existing ROW.
7. Threatened and Endangered Species analysis is incomplete. Evaluation must include potential
impacts resulting from improvements made at crossings outside of the existing ROW.
8. EJ requirement for community outreach is insufficient; specifically, outreach to disadvantaged
communities was not adequate.
9. Regarding Coastal Zone Management, enforceable policies 553 and 597 were not addressed.
10. Cultural Resource evaluation is grossly lacking.
a. No mention was made of the historic districts or dozens of historic sites.
b. Local governments/groups/individuals as Section 106 Consulting Parties.
c. No archaeological survey appears to have been conducted for portions of the project APE.
d. No vibration analysis information provide as it pertains to cultural or archaeological sites.
In conclusion, CDM Smith believes that the evaluation included in the DEIS is incomplete and recommends
that a supplemental DEIS be required prior to issuance of a Record of Decision by the FRA.
Sot • iA •-19
Memorandum.doo
Mr. Chris Mora
November 14, 2014
Page 3
cc: Dylan Reingold
Kate Cotner
Jane Wheeler
301•A.30
Memorandum.doa
•
Executive Summary
Upon review of the DEIS, CDM Smith concludes that the document is incomplete and lacking in the
following primary areas:
1. No impacts outside the FECR ROW were included.
2. As presented, the alternatives analysis appears to be insufficient.
3. Noise and vibration impacts assessment is not complete.
a. Vibration data is lacking.
b. General methodologies were used instead of the detailed assessment called for under the
FRA manual.
c. Noise levels are underestimated when compared to the existing conditions data collected
by CDM Smith. ' -}
d. Future condition predicts a near doubling.of.noise lejv'els.
4. Construction/temporary impacts are not addressed (other than minimal construction noise data).
5. Traffic evaluation is insufficient.
•
a. Number of crossings evaluated is not adequate.
b. Very significant queuing impacts will result from -the -Proposed Project that were not
properly disclosed---.. ``
Traffic projections ctions of based on actual traffic counts kept byIndian River County(updated
�,P .1 z \,-\ P( P
annually)
d. AM peak not included. -"
e. Delay and q euing al uc Iations are uncle r.
�f. -RTC model resul st .do not includeimpacts to at -grade crossings or the results of multiple
aig}`traittail crossings.
g. No ment on` f future gree ay plans (for bicycle and pedestrian use).
\ h:_ No data given\ n the projected emergency vehicle impacts for at -grade crossings; no
indication of the local emergency routes that were input into the RTC model to render a
'solution on possible delay impacts.
6. Wetlands analysis is incomplete. Evaluation must include potential impacts resulting from
improvements made at crossings outside of the existing ROW.
c.
7. Threatened and Endangered Species analysis is incomplete. Evaluation must include potential
impacts resulting from improvements made at crossings outside of the existing ROW.
8. EJ requirement for community outreach is insufficient; specifically, outreach to disadvantaged
communities was not adequate.
9. Regarding Coastal Zone Management, enforceable policies 553 and 597 were not addressed.
Smith
SD l (\ • 31
ES -1
Executive Summary
10. Cultural Resource evaluation is grossly lacking.
a. No mention was made of the historic districts or dozens of historic sites.
b. Local governments/groups/individuals as Section 106 Consulting Parties.
c. No archaeological survey appears to have been conducted for portions of the Proposed
Project APE.
d. No vibration analysis information provide as it pertains to cultural or archaeological sites.
In conclusion, CDM Smith believes that the evaluation included in the DEIS is incomplete and recommends
that a supplemental DEIS be required prior to issuance of a Record of Decision by the FRA.
Smith
301 •.1 3�
ES -2
® Section 1
General Comments
1.1 Background
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was signed into law on January 1, 1970. NEPA establishes
"national environmental policy and goals for the protection, maintenance, and enhancement of the
environment and provides a process for implementing these goals within the federal agencies."
From the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA) NEPA website,"Title I of NEPA contains a
Declaration of National Environmental Policy which requires the federal government to use all practicable
means to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist -in productive harmony.
Section 102 requires federal agencies to incorporate environmental considerations'in their planning and
decision-making through a systematic interdisciplinary approach. Specifically, all federal agencies are to
prepare detailed statements assessing the environmental impact of and alternatives to major federal
•
actions significantly affecting the environment. These statements are'com monly referred to as
environmental impact statements (EIS)."
On September 19, 2014, the Federal Railroad ;'Administration (FRA) released the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) for the All Aboard Florida (AAF) high-speed rail.project's Phase 2 ("Proposed
Project"). FRA is serving as the lead Federal Agency for theeview of the Proposed Project. An
Environmental Assessment (EA), presumably using similar methodology, was completed for the Miami to
West Palm Beach segment (Phase`1) of the project in 2012. The FRA'issued a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for Phase. le
: A supplemental EA is under review (concurrently with the DEIS) for the revised
location of a maintenance.facility. The supplemental EA has no bearing on the DEIS review.
CDM Smith has conducted a thorough review of the DEIS. It should be noted that CDM Smith's review
comments focus solely on the information presented in the DEIS that pertains to the portion of the
Proposed Project within Indian River County's boundaries (including impacts on municipalities).
1.2 General Com'rnents
The DEIS limits the review of impacts to those activities being planned within the existing right-of-way
(ROW) for the Florida East Coast Railroad (FECR), when in fact, the more significant local impacts would fall
outside of the corridor at the individual roadway crossings (traffic control and signalization improvements)
and bridge crossings. In general, FECR maintains a 100 foot ROW throughout Indian River County. CDM
Smith was notified during the diagnostic field evaluation that intersection improvements would include the
addition of 100 foot long traffic separating medians on each side of the crossing to address safety
requirements for high speed rail projects. This adds up to 200 feet of additional impacts at each of the
intersections where the median installation is feasible for the given crossing geometry (exit gates/4-
quadrant gates will be used where medians cannot be accommodated). The addition of these medians, at
many of the crossings, will require road widening, filling of stormwater swales/ditches, relocation of
overhead and underground utilities and potential traffic impacts from shortened queue in turn lanes.
COM
3a ► • PA .3_3
1-1
Section 1 • General Comments
The diagnostic report provided via email by Indian River County staff outlines some of the intersection
improvements being proposed; however, this information is not presented in the DEIS. Therefore, the DEIS
should be considered incomplete due to the lack of information addressing impacts outside of the ROW.
The DEIS is also silent on the potential impacts from construction activities. The document does not
identify construction lay -down or staging areas, information on construction sequencing or duration, dust
control measures, or the potential noise and vibration impacts to archaeological or historical sites along
the corridor within the Area of Potential Effects (APE).
In addition to the missing construction and intersection improvement impacts, the following general
comments were noted during CDM Smith's review:
1. The presentation of the Miami to West Palm Beach segment (Phase 1) separate from the remaining
segments appears_
g to be a clear case of segmentation (i.e. Phase 1 was�:reYiewed and approved
independently of and ahead of Phase 2). For a project to he segmented under. NEPA, AAF would
have had to demonstrate "Independent Utility" in order for,,project components to be reviewed and
considered separately. CDM Smith is not convinced:- AAF has demonstrated Independent Utility,
and would request further documentation from FRA -that this process was undertaken:in accordance
1..•
with NEPA requirements.
2. AAF applied for federal funds from FRA through the Railroad'Rehabilitation and Improvement
Financing (RRIF) program. Compliancemith the NEPA is a prerequisite for approval of the RRIF loan
application. CDM Smith also reviewed the RRIF.Ioan application for the purpose of confirming
consistency between the documents.
3. The Proposed Project as'analyzed in the DEIS is assumed tok r elude 5 additional passenger train sets;
16 round-trip trips132 one-way trips). The DEIS does not account for the increase in freight traffic
that is noted in:th'e`RRIF loan application or the potential for increased passenger rail traffic over
time.
4. The UU.S'Coa'st Guard (USCG) cooperating agency acceptance and jurisdiction determination are
included but the US.Army Corps'of Engineers (USACE) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
tlocuments are not included
5. The EIS "draws conclusions throughout without adequate justification. For example, the document
concludes that no significant localized traffic impacts would result from operation of the Proposed
Project ho ever, Appendix 3.3 C indicates that queues stretching for more than a mile would occur
at least 4 times hour,at certain area intersections. Such impacts, which could occur all along the
corridor of the Proposed Project, were not appropriately addressed.
1.3 Indirect and Secondary Impacts
The DEIS concludes that there will be "no induced growth" as a result of the Proposed Project; however,
there are direct statements to the contrary within the DEIS. For example, Table 5.2.5-1 states that, "The
project would provide linkages between regional and statewide multi -modal transportation networks and
promote commercial development within the vicinity of transit systems" and "The Project would have an
indirect beneficial effect on future business opportunities and would likely promote tourism in the region."
Section 5.1.2.3 states "The three proposed stations for the WPB -M Corridor (in West Palm Beach, Fort
Smil0th
301 • I" 3�1
1-2
•
•
•
Lauderdale and Miami) may result in secondary effects such as creating potential for development and
redevelopment outside the development directly associated with the stations. This additional development
may also create impacts such as induced traffic generated by those developments." This statement
contradicts Section 5.2.1.3, which states "The areas surrounding the proposed stations are already
developed; the Project is not anticipated to result in induced growth or development that could generate
additional emissions of criteria pollutants, and would not result in indirect or secondary effects to air
quality."
1.3 Permitting and Regulatory Reviews
The DEIS fails to include documentation that USACE and FAA agreed to act as.cooperating agencies for
purposes of reviewing the Proposed Project. The NEPA-required cover page of the DEIS lists USACE, USCG
and FAA be cooperating agencies. A "cooperating agency" is an agency that has jurisdiction by law or
special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved in a proposal (or a reasonable
alternative)and will typically will have some responsibilities for.the `analysis related to its jurisdiction or
special expertise (See 40 CFR 1501.6 and 40 CFR 1508.5). Page 1-5 of the DEIS indicates,that USACE was
asked to participate as a cooperating agency and USACE'agreed, thee is a similar statement regarding
FAA's involvement on page 1-6. No cooperating agency documentation was provided for either the USACE
or the FAA.
An EIS should include detailed statements concerning the environmental impacts of the proposed project;
not bypass this obligation to other permitting,processes. On October 7;2014, the USACE issued a notice
stating that, "The applicant has estimated that • the north/south component of the proposed railway would
occur within the existing FECR ROW and would only require minor impacts to waters of the United States
(wetlands and surface waters) at various locations alongahe corridor: The Corps has initially determined
these minor improvements could be verified in accordance with the Corps' Nationwide Permit (NWP)
program. Verification by NWP would not require further_public coordination." The notice further stated
•
that USACE will use the final. EIS as the NEPA documentfor issuance of the NWP.
Additional discussions with theUSACE Project -Manager indicated that authority for review of the proposed
bridge improvements and replacements along the North-South (N -S) segment would be delegated to the
USCG, in accordance withSection 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Section 9 states that a USACE permit
may still.be required pursuarit-to Section'404 of the Clean Water Act if the construction of a bridge over a
navigable waterway requires the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States.
Without preliminary design plans for the Proposed Project, it is difficult to evaluate the extent of required
dredge and fill activities, and therefore to what extent USACE involvement is required.
In addition to USACE and USCG authority, local permits will be required for the proposed bridge
replacements and expansions. The Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD) maintains the
North, Main and South Relief Canals. The referenced canals are listed in Appendix 5.3.6-B6 of the DEIS (ESA
Section 7 Consultation 20140129) to be upgraded (not replaced). CDM Smith spoke with the
superintendent of the IRFWCD, who indicated that there has been no contact or coordination to date
between the AAF project team and IRFWCD regarding permit or maintenance requirements. IRFWCD
further indicated that.the existing support for the North Relief Canal Bridge is in a state of disrepair with
significant washouts and undermining being observed on the southern support.
smith
1-3
Section 2
Affected Environment and Environmental
Consequences
The majority of the existing environmental conditions and impacts are summarized in Sections 4 and 5 of
the DEIS, and CDM Smith's review of those two sections is presented below.:
2.1 Traffic and Transportation Impacts
2.1.1 Railroad Crossings Selected
The DEIS failed to consider a representative sample of railroad'crossings in Indian River County and thus
the impact has not adequately been analyzed or addressed; Two out of 30 crossings in Indian River County
were selected based on the largest 2012 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) on roads crossing -the rail line.
Oslo Road had a 2012 AADT of 14,400 and 19th Place an AADT of 11,500: Although these roads have the
largest AADT, they may not necessarily have the longest delay queue -caused by train activity. Two out
of 30 intersections represents an inadequate sample size.
2.1.2 Traffic Projections
The DEIS failed to follow FDOT guidance by not' conducting actual intersection turning movement counts
and not conducting an analysis using those actualccountsThe DEIS,estimated peak hour intersection traffic
at the two Indian River County: crossings by applying a K^(daily traffic occurring in the peak hour) and D
./....-- "�,
(directional distribution) factor to the°AADT values. AAF then applied a turning movement volume
distribution (left, through,'and right) tc the PM peak hour traffic to estimate intersection traffic. The DEIS
failed to calculate AM peak`h t,, 1-
completely�This methodology, according to the Railroad
Crossing Analysis report for All Aboard:Florida; is found:in the 2009 Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT) Quality/Level of:Service Handbook. CDM Smith's concern with this methodology is that the
estimated:peak hour intersection traff c volumes could be significantly different than actual traffic, and
that the:differences are compounded when a`growth rate is applied. It would be more appropriate to
conduct actual intersection turning movement counts and conduct analysis using those actual counts (see
FDOT 2014 Project Traffic Forecasting Handbook Ch.6, Section 6.5 paragraph).
Year 2016 and 2036;traffic projections were based on a one percent annual growth rate. The report states
this was based on historical traffic data and is conservative because much of the corridor has seen negative
growth over the last seve' al years. It would be more appropriate to utilize the regional Travel Demand
Model to project future traffic conditions.
2.1.3 Delay and Queuing Analysis
The DEIS does not properly analyze the delay and queuing calculations. Table 3-10 in the rail crossing
report presents some confusing information. First, the automobile delay and queue calculations caused by
a passenger and freight train are almost the same, but CDM Smith understands that a freight train is much
longer and will create a longer "gate down" condition. Second, CDM Smith is not sure how the delay and
queue calculations are done. At Oslo Road and US 1 the eastbound delay and queue at the intersection is
Smith
30�.�:�•3l�
2-1
•
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
much longer than at the railroad crossing. For example, the year 2036 eastbound delay at the intersection
is projected to be 656.2 seconds (10 minutes 56 seconds) (passenger train) versus 87.5 seconds at the
railroad crossing. It seems that eastbound traffic would be delayed a similar amount of time whether it is
due to the rail gate down condition or the traffic signal at US 1 being preempted by the train. Furthermore,
the northbound left and southbound right turn delays and queues for traffic turning from US 1 onto Oslo
Road are not shown. It is assumed that the northbound and southbound through movements on US 1 will
have a green indication while a train is crossing Oslo Road, but all other movements at the US 1 and Oslo
Road intersection oriented towards westbound Oslo Road will be prohibited. This could be substantial and
create safety problems at the intersection. For example, the northbound US 1 dual left turn lane will likely
reach its capacity of 26 vehicles or approximately 650 feet while a train is crossing Oslo Road such that
excess vehicles are blocking the inside through lane. As the left turn lane demand increases, motorists may
maneuver unsafely in and out of it as they attempt to travel westbound. Additionally, the southbound US 1
right turn lane at Oslo Road is approximately 150 feet long and can -store approximately six vehicles. While
•
a train is crossing Oslo Road, this right turn lane will likely reach -its capacity. Finally; it is not clear where
the westbound projected queue at the Oslo Road and US 1 intersection would be. For example, at that
intersection, the westbound queue is projected to be 4,099 feet in 2036. At the FEC railroad crossing the
westbound queue is projected to be 1,594 feet. If the4,099 foot queuewould consume `the US 1 lanes
feeding westbound Oslo Road, the impact on US 1 would' be significant. •
As the results appear flawed, the FRA should review the Synchro•output to determine assumptions and
more details about their methodology. It is not clear where or if the consultant got the actual traffic signal
splits and offsets (traffic signal cycle lengths and timing).
The DEIS fails to give an adequate delay and queuing analysis for two trains crossing simultaneously The
results of the delay analysis shown,in_Table 3-10 and 3,11 seem to.represent one train crossing. CDM Smith
understands that two train's could cross a road consecutively and that would lengthen the delay and queue.
In effect, back-to-back trains crossing would compound the impact even more because queues from the
first train would not have a chance to dissipate before the second train arrived.
CDM Smith believes that FRA must reexamine'tthe'appropriateness of the weighted average shown in these
tables. The weighted average of delayt•queue, and LOS does not provide meaningful information.
The DEIS failed to provide any mitigation for the long delays created by the rail crossing delays. The
mitigation could include improvements to US 1 or the perpendicular crossing streets in the form of
additional turn lanes, additional.•through lanes, or improved traffic signal equipment. Other potential
mitigation could include improvements to the overall street network to relieve congestion caused by train
crossings, or grade separating some of the railroad crossing to provide relief.
2.1.4 Local Traffic Impacts
The frequency projections of freight and passenger trains along the N -S Corridor identified in the DEIS
would be anticipated to cause delays at one or multiple at -grade crossings simultaneously through Indian
River County, however the DEIS states that there may be minor increased traffic delays at existing at -grade
crossings. The report also states there may be delays to trains on a "shared use" environment (both
passenger and freight service) which will be controlled by the Train Dispatcher as shown on pages 3-4 and
3-5. There is mention of installing additional passing tracks and from our understanding there are no
existing passing tracks within Indian River County. With both the frequency projections of freight and
passenger trains along the N -S Corridor it is safe to assume delays could increase at one or multiple at -
2 -2
301• A37
Sm th
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
grade crossings simultaneously through Indian River county. The train speeds as shown on Tables 5.1.3-1 &
5.1.2-4 for both passenger and freight appear to assume the speeds will be constant throughout the N -S
Corridor and/or counties. This assumes all the existing and proposed track length through the counties can
accommodate the stated speed and that no trains will require crossing over to the adjacent track or
stopping within Indian River County.
The DEIS fails to use the proper model for impacts to at -grade crossings or the results of multiple trains at
rail crossings and fails to adequately address mitigation for such impacts. The DEIS does state using Rail
Traffic Controller (RTC) model is an acceptable method to predict train movements; however, the report
stated results of this model for bridge closures over navigable waterways but;not for impacts to at -grade
crossings or the results of multiple trains at rail crossings The software will -provide time -table and track
occupancy results and animation (see www.berkelvsimlulation.com) and take into account speed. The
report does mention the addition of passing tracks and or universal. crossover's;;(pg 3-37) to accommodate
trains passing each other; however, there are no indications where these may "occur. The DEIS does not
present design plans to identify passing options. The DEIS does; state there will be'adverse environmental
effects to at -grade crossings and that each crossing will be'reviewed and mitigation measures installed to
f4. ,,
reduce these impacts (DEIS S-8). Again there are no design. plans showing these mitigation measures or
what the impact will be to the local authorities for the capial'investment or additional maintenance costs.
In addition, it is anticipated that there will be possible footprint;ncreaes`to the existing roadway at
intersections and possible additional traffictpre-emption signal heads.
2.1.5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Impacts
The DEIS overlooks impacts on bicycle and pedestrian traffic -Many of the railroad crossings are located in
heavily populated and densely developed areas that generate a substantial amount of bicycle and
-47
pedestrian traffic. The impact to thisgrowing segment of the traveling population has not been addressed.
The DEIS does state (section 3.3.1) that" pedestrian at -grade crossings would be upgraded to enhance
safety." The DEIS does not address additional risks to pedestrians crossing the tracks outside of grade
crossings as a result of increased freight and new passenger rail traffic traveling at high speeds on two
tracks. There are no future projections of greenways stated or statements that discussions have been made
to local Transportation/Metropolitan Planning Organizations about their projections for bicycle/pedestrian
volumesand about their,future plans for greenways.
2.1.6 Emergency Vehicle -Mobility
Without the appropriate data, the DEIS does not adequately address the impact on emergency response
vehicles. Indian River County hasa significant number of hospitals and fire stations that will be impacted by
additional railroad crossing blockages. Fire truck and ambulance movements are anticipated to be more
inhibited when trains are,: moving through the grade crossings due to increase rail freight and passenger
trains. As stated earlier, the DEIS does state the applicant used an RTC model (see section 4.3.4 on what
the software will provide) for projected train movements; however, there is no data given on the projected
impacts to at -grade crossings. In addition, there was no indication the local emergency routes were input
into the RTC model to render a solution on possible delay impacts.
2.2 Noise and Vibration Impacts
The DEIS failed to include an in-depth assessment of the noise and vibration impacts caused by the
Proposed Project. High Speed Ground Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
Smith
301
A•3g
2-3
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
(DOT/FRA/ORD-12/15, September, 2012) provides the basic guidance and procedures for the assessment
of potential noise and vibration impacts from proposed high-speed ground transportation projects. This
manual is intended for projects with train speeds of 90 to 250 mph. The manual is similar to the FTA Transit
Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment manual (which is intended for projects with train speeds up to 90
mph). An important characteristic of the noise from high-speed trains that is absent from the DEIS noise
analysis is analysis of the onset rate of the sound signature. Onset rate is the average rate of change of
increasing sound pressure level in decibels per second during a single noise event. The rapid approach of a
high-speed train is accompanied by a sudden increase in noise for a receiver near the tracks. Based on the
absence of discussion of onset rate and use of the FTA manual figure showing typical A -weighted maximum
sound levels instead of the FRA manual showing typical A -weighted levels of high-speed train sources,
indicates that the noise analysis relies more on the FTA manual than the more pertinent FRA high-speed
train noise manual.
The DEIS Tacks calculation details and quantitative support for its impact assessment.as required by the
Federal Railroad Administration manual. In general, the impact assessments are lacking calculation details and
quantitative support. The Proposed Project is well beyond the+initial planning stages. Therefore, these
calculations and support documentation should be required as part of the DEIS analysis.
j
The DEIS fails to include an evaluation of noise and vibration' imct
paslon subterranean archaeological sites
and vertical historical sites along the N -S Corridor. The FRA manual references Section 106 and states with
regard to historic and archaeological sites, "Special protection provided by law. Section 4(f) of the DOT Act
•
and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act come into play -frequently during the
environmental review of transit projects. Section-4(f)`prot cts historic site's and publicly -owned parks,
recreation areas and wildlife refuges. Section 106 protects' historic and archaeological resources." The DEIS
does not include a complete list of the subterranean archaeological sites and vertical historical sites along
the N -S Corridor. It therefore does not evaluate the Proposed Project's noise and vibration impacts on the
subterranean archaeological sites and`vertical historical sites along the N -S Corridor.
Moreover, AAF made no attempt to collect representative noise data at a representative sampling of
ti .
intersections along the corridor; as is required by Section 106 of the NHPA.
Specifically, CDM Smith noted the following deficiencies:
1. The DEIS relied on an inaccurate methodology for determining existing noise levels. The FRA manual
recommends that noise beconsidered in terms of divergence, absorption/diffusion and/or shielding at
a distance of SO feet from the source. Existing noise levels at 50 feet were not monitored in the field,
but rather estimated based on the FTA Guidance Manual based on population density or proximity to
an interstate highway, airport, or an existing rail line. No figures are presented to show the existing
ambient noise levels in the Project Study Area derived from these different estimated noise levels.
Existing ambient noise levels would be helpful in comparing existing and future build impacts at
sensitive land uses and historic properties. Measurements of existing ambient noise levels, especially
at sensitive land uses and historic properties, should have been used as the combination of various
transportation and urban noise sources can be complex. See Appendix B of the FRA manual which
discusses options for determination of existing noise levels ranging from full measurement (more
accurate) to tabular lookup (less accurate).
2-4
30 i•N 3°1
arrooth
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
a. Outdoor measurements were collected by CDM Smith using a Type 1 SoundPro DL sound level
meter in October 2014. The noise meter was placed 5 feet above the ground level. Noise levels
were measured at each location and the equivalent steady-state sound level (Leq) was collected for
each site logged in one minute intervals. One minute data log is important to determine any
aberrant noise events at each site. Noise levels were measured at six locations within the Project
Study Area, as shown in Table 2-1. The purpose of the ambient noise level measurement was to
quantify the existing acoustic environment and provide a baseline for assessing the impact of
future noise levels on the receptors in the vicinity of the proposed action resulting from the
Proposed Project. No documentation of field measurements collected by AAF were presented in
the DEIS.
Table 2-1 October 2014 Noise Data Collected by CDM Smith
Crossing Location
Measured (various
Lmax
time
Leq
periods) '_
Lmin , : ; ,,
; .Arnbient "
Leq ,
Train
' Event
Leq •,,,
Train
Horn
Lmax
Sebastian Roseland Rd
107
79
,f; ``48 .
. 71
, `88
``,k:.
107
Sebastian Schumann Dr
104
74
,:c,+, 42
64
x:88:'
,. 104
Vero Beach 45th St
101
71t
*s'.', 47
j 64
831,-;-.17`.
`. 101
Vero Beach 23rd St
105
78
."; 52
,_ _ 64
86
105
Vero Beach 4th St
98
76
v":'53
i' ' ...68
86
98
Vero Beach Highland Dr
106
80
X52;;
67
89
106
b. People generally perceive a 10 A weeghteddecibel (dBA) incre
ae in a noise level as a doubling of
loudness. For example, a 70-dBA sound'will be perceived by an average person as twice as loud as
a 60-dBA sound. People generally cannot -detect differences of 1 dBA to 2 dBA. Differences of 3
dBA can be detected by most people with average hearing abilities. A 5-dBA change would likely
be perceived by most people'under normalclistening conditions.
•
c. The DEIS underestimates the noise impacts from the Proposed Project. Table 5.2.2-9 of the DEIS,
indicates that the Proposed Project would result:in daytime noise levels (Leq) ranging from 62.1 to
63.9 dBA close to at- gradecrossings (average 62.5 dBA) and ranging from 61.4 to 63.5 dBA along
the -mainline, tracks. The 2014. ambient noise levels (Leq) collected by CDM Smith in the field ranged
from 61 to 71 dBA and 83 to 89 dBA during a train event for the existing condition. These values
a're higher than the= projected background conditions used in the DEIS. The DEIS does not address
different noise sources and combining of noise sources such as traffic noise, freight noise, and
passenger train noise to calculate the increase in the noise levels from the Proposed Project which
results in underestimation of noise levels from the project.
d. The Ld„ ranged'from 62.2 to 64.1 at -grade crossings and 61.6 to 63.6 along the mainline. The future
noise levels listed in Table 5.2.2-10 shows the existing Ldn noise levels are 75 dBA with the project
noise at 64 dBA in Indian River County. Comparing existing Lin from the existing levels of 62.2 to
64.1 to future levels of 75 dBA, there is a 10 dBA increase which equates to doubling of loudness.
2. The DEIS fails to include existing vibration levels in the Project Study Area to compare to future
vibration levels. Similarly, generic vibration levels at various distances are only shown for rubber -tired
vehicles traveling at 30 miles per hour (mph), light rail traveling at 50 mph, and heavy rail traveling at
50 mph. As suggested by the DEIS, the vibration source in the E -W Corridor is SR 528, where vehicles in
the Project Study Area will be traveling at speeds exceeding 30 mph. According to a later reference on
CORN
Srnith
301.•,I(.• 4D.
2-5
•
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
page 5-43, freight trains observed for the Amtrak EA had speeds ranging from 30 to 49 mph. No figures
are presented to show the existing vibration levels in the Project Study Area that were used to
compare against the future vibration levels.
3. The estimated noise levels for SR528 presented in the DEIS are based on an incorrect classification. The
DEIS shows that FRA used FTA noise levels for interstate highways to estimate noise levels near SR 528;
however, SR 528 is a state road, not an interstate highway.
4. The DEIS fails to give a detailed explanation of the noise levels associated with both idling locomotives
and moving locomotives. The DEIS mentions noise from idling locomotivesand moving trains;
however, it does not explain what these noise levels are and how the rLdfrom moving fromoving and idling trains
at the VMF were calculated to be 68.8 dBA at 50 feet.
5. The DEIS fails to provide a basis for its declared correction factors for the.Proposed Project. On page 5-
41, the DEIS states that there is a correction factor for passenger -trains of 4' dBA. Moreover, on page 5-
50, the DEIS states that there is a correction factor for passenger trains of 10 VdB): These figures,
however, are referenced for passenger trains on elevated tracks. No basis is provided for these factors.
6. The DEIS did not adequately account for the noise and vibrations. of the construction equipment or the
noise and vibrations that occur when you use two pieces'of eq ipment simultaneously. Construction
noise is evaluated for the two loudest pieces of equipmenClt,is not clear whether it was assumed that
both pieces of equipment will be operating -concurrently. Numerous pieces of equipment operating
concurrently may contribute substantially to the:oerall construction noise, even if the individual
equipment may not be as loud as the two selected equipment. The 41S -should have described the
other typical '
ypical construction equipment and the,number of various equipment operating simultaneously,
and based the analysis;on"the combined noiseifromithat equipment.
7. The DEIS fails to address the increase in future traffic noise along the Proposed Project corridor. The
DEIS references existing noise from SR 528 and other roadways as the dominant existing noise source;
however, the increase of traffic alongthese.corridors that will occur by the time the Proposed Project
is in full: operation (future condition) is not documented. In the DEIS, the total future noise level is
calculated by adding the Proposeed,Project noise level to the existing highway noise level, failing to
account for the fact that. population growth will result in increased traffic noise in the Project Study
Area in the horizon year when the Proposed Project is fully operational. Increases in future traffic noise
along Project Study Area travel corridors are not addressed in the DEIS. See the FRA manual, Chapter 3,
Noise Impact Criteria, which discusses relationship of project noise impacts to ambient noise levels
(the higher the ambient noise level, the lower the noise level increase before onset of impact).The
document also does not discuss the freight and passenger rail growth and long term impacts.
8. The DEIS fails to analyze the increase in freight traffic in the alternatives analysis. The DEIS analyzes the
increase in freight operation for the No -Action Alternative only. The change in freight operation should
have been addressed for the Project Alternatives, as required by NEPA for an EIS.
9. The DEIS failed to discuss the quantitative effects of speed and type of locomotive on the noise and
vibration levels. The DEIS indicates that noise and vibration levels were calculated for different train
speeds. The document should have discussed the effect of the referenced speed and type of
locomotive (i.e., freight vs. high speed passenger train) on noise and vibration levels, such as
calculating high speed train onset rate (startle effect) and aerodynamic noise (see FRA Manual).
2-6
CDLYI
Smith
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
10. The DEIS did not properly analyze the noise and vibration impacts to land uses, historical
structures or archeological resources that are within 600 feet of the Proposed Project's Rail
Corridor. Page 4-37 of the DEIS specifically states that the Project Study Area for vibration extends
approximately 600 feet from the rail corridor; however, on page 4-122, the DEIS deviates from the
600 feet boundary and presented a vibration analysis for archaeological resources that was limited
to the footprint of subsurface activities within the existing approximately 100 -foot wide FECR
ROW for the N -S Corridor.
11. The DEIS fails to disclose the total number of land uses that are sensitive to noise or vibration (a.k.a.
sensitive receptors) currently being affected by existing noise levels. In Section 5.2.2.2, numbers of
impacted sensitive receptors are presented for various project components. AAF should discuss the
total number of sensitive receptors and ones that may already be, impacted without the Proposed
Project in the Affected Environment section (refer to FRA Manual).
12. The DEIS fails to adequately describe the noise and vibrationrriitigation. Section
AAF will implement mitigation measures as part of the project design; however,
mitigation would be, or what its effectiveness would be in addressing significant
13. The DEIS fails to include a documented mitigation analysis,Moderate:and Severe impacts are identified
in the DEIS, however, mitigation analysis is not documente`d,Noise barrier analysis or horn noise
assessment using the FTA and FRA noise assessment manuals isynot included in the DEIS. The FRA
\::
manual for high-speed rail projects is designed to: complement the FTA manual. The High -Speed
Ground Transportation Noise Spreadsheet Model has been developed in conjunction with the FRA
•
manual for calculating noise from high-speed•rail projects:,;
72.4 indicates that
it.is_unclear what that
impacts
2.3 Air Impacts •
The DEIS did not use the correct methodology to analyze the increase in vehicular emissions caused by the
Proposed Project. The Methodology section on page 5-34.of the DEIS states that for vehicular emissions
modeling, "all vehicles were assumed to be gasoiine;burning vehicles." The assumption is not used by the
Federal Highway Administration (FHVIIA) and is not U.S. EPA -recommended methodology for NEPA
analyses [U.S. EPA, "PolicyGuidance on theUse of MOVES2014 for State Implementation Plan
Development, Transportation.Conformi y;.and Other Purposes" (EPA -420—B-14-008, July 2014)]. The DEIS
should analyze.the vehicular emissions using the latest version of the U.S. EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions
Simulator (MOVES); MOVES2014 [Note that the older version, MOVES2010, is also acceptable. (79 FR
60343)]. The FRA should have obtained MOVES2014 input files from the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection or FDOT for Florida vehicle fleet distributions, by geographic area, and run these
to obtain accurate, up-to-date, and defensible emissions inventories for a representative mix of vehicle
types and ages.
The DEIS fails to examine the negative localized impacts of air emission rates due to the Proposed Project.
Tables 5.2-1 and 5.2.2 show the overall regional net benefit in annual mass air emissions due to the
induced modal switch from passenger cars to train use. The text suggests that this benefit is not uniformly
distributed across the state. The Miami to West Palm section of the project will receive most of the benefit,
because that is where train stations are available to travelers; however, it is likely that Indian River County
will suffer detriment because the Proposed Project will INCREASE annual mass air emission rates in its area.
This is because Indian River County will have no train stations to remove on -road vehicle trips, but will have
Smith
2-7
•
•
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
increased emissions from passenger trains, induced additional freight trains, and greater idling at at -grade
crossings. The Proposed Project's air emissions impacts specific to Indian River County should be modeled
and disclosed. The public should have complete information about impacts the Proposed Project will cause
in some portions of the state so that other portions of the state can receive benefits.
The DEIS fails to address the Proposed Project impacts to the localized air quality. Potentially significant
localized impacts would be expected to be associated with maintenance yards, terminals, and park -to -ride
lots., The Proposed Project plans to have third -rail siding at three locations in Indian River County .If the
purpose of the third track siding is to hold idling freight trains while the high-speed passenger trains passes,
the DEIS should include modeling for these emissions, especially diesel particulate matter emissions. The
DEIS should also address potential effects to sensitive receptors nearest these locations.
The intersection carbon monoxide analysis has been generalized from the`2012 Phase 1 studies. An up-to-
date analysis with the latest traffic and emissions data is recommended to determine if a microscale
dispersion models should be run for carbon monoxide concentrations'at the worst case at -grade crossing
in Indian River County (FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A). An analysis for the ne ;one-hour nitrogen
dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)'should be included. Although quantitative
modeling is not required by FHWA Technical Advisor -VI- 6640.8A, this'new stringent NAAQS:is a possible
issue at congested intersections.
Section 5.2.1.4 Construction -Period Impacts evaluation Tacks the detail required for an adequate DEIS.
Among other things, the analysis should include a.discussion of the length of the construction period along
each segment, identification of areas where contaminated. soils would be,disturbed (and specific mitigation
measures), identification of construction stain and staging areas and their activities; description of and commitment
to specific dust control measures; and an evaluation of.exposu e•to diesel particulate matter emissions
�, •r l' •.
from construction equipment (FHWA. Technical Advisory T 6640.8A).
Regarding DEIS Section 7:2.3 - Mitigation Measures, Ail. Quality, the discussion of mitigation for fugitive
dust control is generic, and there is no ;mention of mitigation for diesel particulate matter emissions.
Mitigation discussion is required under 40 CFR 1502.16(h). The section should identify the Best
Management. Practices that would be employed at staging areas and at construction sites. CDM Smith
•
recommends also that AAF commit to use of construction equipment meeting U.S. EPA Tier 4 emissions
standards, or to retrofitting equipment not meeting these standards with diesel particulate matter filters.
2.4 Coastal Zone Management
The DEIS speaks to the applicable coastal zone management statutes (Table 5.2.5-1) and concludes that the
Proposed Project is consistent, but there is very little back-up for this conclusion. Additionally, Table 5.2.5-1
omits applicable, enforceable policies 553 (Building and Construction Standards) and 597 (Aquaculture). As
in the rest of the DEIS, the assumption is made that all work will occur within the existing FECR corridor,
which does not take into account intersection improvements, staging, noise barriers, stormwater
management, etc.
The following excerpts from Table 5.2.5-1 are examples of unsupported statements:
2-8
1. "Chapter 163, Part 11 Growth Policy; County and Municipal Planning; Land Development Regulation:
The Proposed Project would be consistent with local, regional, and state comprehensive plans.
301-$4 `t 3
Smith
Section 2 o Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
Consistency with these plans has been included in the purpose and need criteria matrix used to
develop the Action Alternatives."
Comment: The DEIS fails to adequately address the Proposed Project's consistency with Indian River
County's local Coastal Zone Element Plan. Under the Florida Coastal Management Program Guide,
Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes is an enforceable policy incorporated in the federally -approved
FCMP. Chapter 163.3194 provides the legal status of comprehensive plans that have been adopted
in conformity with the Coastal Zone Management Act. Therefore, Proposed Project must be
consistent with the Indian River County 2030 Comprehensive Plan. There is no information provided
in the DEIS specifying how the Proposed Project is consistent with this Comprehensive Plan Also, the
only planning consistency criterion used in the alternatives screening is "Consistency with plans of
r.:
transportation agencies and landowners." There is no reference:to consistency with local plans in
the discussion of purpose and need or alternatives.
2. "Chapter 252 Emergency Management: The Proposed Project would includethe development of a
passenger rail system within an existing rail corridor and along an existing highway,ROW. The E -W
Corridor would be located outside of the defined; storm surge zones and hurricaneevacuation areas
for Brevard and Orange counties. Within the N `S'Corridor the rail line would be located within
Florida Division of Emergency Management -defined storm surge zones; however the development
would occur entirely within the FECR Corridor and would be consistent with the existing
transportation uses. While the proposed rail system would 'encourage regional connection as well as
growth in the vicinityof the su ns e
pporting"stations, growth would`be;focused in previously developed
areas and would be consistent with existing commercial and industrial land uses. Consequently, the
Proposed Project would not affect the state's vulnerability to natural disasters and would not affect
r.w
emergency response grid revacuation procedures: Further the°Proposed Project would be consistent
with the emergency preparedness policies within the East Central Florida and Treasure Coast
SRPPs."
i,
Comment: The DEIS does not present any, information regarding how the Proposed Project will
affect emergency response and evacuation procedures. Under the Florida Coastal Management
Program Guide'Chapter 252; --Florida Statutes is an enforceable policy incorporated in the federally -
approved FCMP. Thestatement that -the Proposed Project would encourage growth contradicts
other statements throughout the I,EIS that the Proposed Project will not result in induced
growth/development. Furthermore, the conclusion that because growth would occur in developed
areas, vulnerability to natural disasters would not be affected is not true. Increased development,
even in developed areacan certainly affect emergency response and evacuation procedures by
increasing response.tinies and making evacuation more difficult.
3. "Chapter 259 Land Acquisition for Conservation or Recreation: The Proposed Project would likely
result in beneficial impacts; compensatory mitigation would be required including the potential
acquisition of environmentally endangered lands. Impacts to delineated wetlands would require
mitigation as required by Section 404 Individual Permits. Consequently, while the implementation of
the Proposed Project would remove wetlands from the N -S and E -W Corridors, compensatory
mitigation would include the potential acquisition of environmentally sensitive habitat types."
Comment: The DEIS does not acknowledge the potential negative impacts to Indian River County
that could result from mitigation activities and Toss of environmentally sensitive lands. There is no
Smith
2-9
•
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
explanation of what compensatory mitigation and/or acquisition of environmentally sensitive
habitat types is envisioned elsewhere in the DEIS (should be included under "Mitigation Measures
and Project Commitments" in Section 7). Furthermore, it's not accurate to say that the Proposed
Project would result in beneficial impacts. The Proposed Project would result in negative impacts,
thereby requiring mitigation.
4. "Chapter 288 Commercial Development and Capital Improvements: The Proposed Project would
have an indirect beneficial effect on future business opportunities and would likely promote tourism
in the region."
Comment: Again, this statement in the DEIS contradicts other statements in the DEIS that there will
be no induced growth/development.
5. In addition to the unsupported statements, the DEIS states that the Clearinghouse determined that
a positive consistency determination from a "similar project'~would be val d for the Proposed
Project (see below from Section 5.2.5): -
"As stated in the 2013 FONSI for the WPB -M Corridor, the Florida State Clearinghouse has reviewed
the South Florida East Coast Corridor Transit Analysis; a. similar project to the Phasei to the WPB M
Corridor described in the 2012 EA. The South Florida project Was determined to be consistent with
the FCMP, and the State Clearinghouse_ determined that this'consistency determination would be
valid for the AAF project because the`AAF Project Study Area is fully encompassed within the South
Florida East Coast Corridor Transit Analysis area which was found.to be.consistent in 2006 and there
have been no relevant changes in the CZMA or FCMP criteria that would affect that determination."
Comment: The Florida State Clearinghouse made a consistency determination without input from all
of the Florida Coastal Management Plan agencies. In Florida, under Section 380.23, Florida
Statutes, a project can only be found consistentlf all commenting agencies (under the FCMP agency
umbrella) with relevant statutory'responsibilities'concur. In this case, the FCMP agencies were not
given an opportunity tocomm`ent on theproject 'by the Florida State Clearinghouse. Rather the
Florida State •Clearinghouse.made the determination without agency input. Per the Florida State
Clearinghouse manual (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/secretary/oip/manual/manual.htm), the
Clearinghouse sendssthe document or application to OIP for coordination of DEP review. The
appropriate DEP division or district=contacts distribute the project to appropriate division bureaus
and satellite offices. Based on the information provided in the DEIS, this process was never
conducted. Additionally, the South Florida East Coast Corridor Transit Analysis is cited as similar to
Phase 1, so the consistency determination for this project would not be valid for Phase 11 of AAF.
2.5 Environmental Justice (EJ)
The DEIS overlooks the negative impacts to minority and low income communities in those areas of the
Proposed Project that do not have proposed stops. The E1 analysis indicates, under Indirect and Secondary
Impacts, that the Proposed Project would have a beneficial effect on minority and low income populations
in Orlando, West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale and Miami by providing an alternative transportation option
that would improve access and mobility between Orlando, West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale and Miami.
There however is no discussion of what type of beneficial effect the Proposed Project would have upon
other E1 populations along the rail line. This is also connected to early comments received on the Proposed
2-10
3ol•N.y5—
Smith
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
Project concerning areas without a station that would be adversely affected, but would not receive any
economic or social benefits.
Additionally, AAF failed to conducted significant public outreach to affected minority communities located
along the FECR corridor. AAF received a comment during early scoping for the Proposed Project to include
significant public outreach to minority communities that are located along the FECR Corridor; however,
there is no discussion within the DEIS of such an outreach occurring within Indian River County. Indian
River County has confirmed with Freddie L. Woolfork, an Executive Board Member of the Gifford
Progressive Community League, that AAF held a meeting at the Gifford Youth Activity Center for local
citizens. The required meeting, however, was described as a "generic, shortened version of a previous
(non -Gifford -specific) public meeting." There was no specific information pertaining to the impacts the
Proposed Project would have on the Gifford community. In fact, Mr. Woolfork described the meeting with
AAF as more of a discussion to let [the Gifford Community) know thatthere would be a new passenger
in Florida and that there would be 32 round tripsper day ��:
project going throughj�ndian River County at 120
MPH and that it is a great economic benefit to all of Florida .. Itis,th r fore obvlousthat AAF held a
t. , >a
meeting in the Gifford Community to satisfy a NEPA requirement without any intention;of taking into
consideration the comments, concerns and issues brought forth by those local residents.
2.6 Natural Resources Impacts \,
CDM Smith notes the following comments/concerns with regards to natural resources impacts:
The DEIS does not fully address the environmental impactsto':the natural:resources located within Indian
River County. For example, Sectiorils 7.2.6 and 7.2.10 state that"the relative mitigation activities will be
identified in the various permit requirements (once issued), rather than identifying the impacts and stating
q `51.y
what the mitigation activities will entail: NEPA requires"that the environmental impacts be addressed in the
DEIS, and not deferred to`the:permitting process. Moreover, on pages 4-54 and 7-8, the DEIS states that
the USACE permitting process\will rely on the DEIS as the required NEPA document to complete the Section
404(b) (1) analysis It is therefore necessary that the issues be sufficiently addressed within DEIS document.
Thus the analysis of the;impacts is inadequate.
N.
2.6.2 Water Resources \ :,..
2.6.1 General Comment
The following are examples from the DEIS demonstrating the lack of sufficient information necessary to
adequately address impacts to water resources:
Section 5 of the DEIS says stormwater Best Management Practices will be installed but gives no
specifics on what type of Best Management Practices they intend to use or the location.
Page 3-35 of the DEIS states that the Proposed Project will include installing a third rail at various
locations (3 within Indian River County). On page 5-79 of the DEIS, it states "The Project would
include improvements to the existing mainline and reconstruction of the second tracks on the
existing track beds. Constructing the Project in the N -S Corridor would not create new impervious
surface."
- The DEIS does not take into account that there will be new impervious surface due to road
construction outside the existing corridor. For example, The DEIS fails to address the
EW
smith
3o1. -yu
2-11
•
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
environmental impacts of the new impervious surfaces that AAF is required to install outside the
existing corridor to qualify as a sealed corridor. On page 5-79, the DEIS states that constructing the
Proposed Project in the N -S corridor will not create new impervious surfaces. This statement is
contradicted in several areas throughout the DEIS. Page 3-33 of the DEIS states that the existing
railroad system was built and is maintained to FRA Class IV track standards. On page 3-36, the
DEIS states that the Proposed Project intends to operate at a speed of up to 110 miles per
hour, which, according to the Railroad -Highway Grade Crossing Handbook —Revised Second
Edition (2007), would require track improvements to achieve Class VI standards. Specifically,
Class VI tracks (high speed rail) requires a sealed corridor, which includes the installation of a
100 foot median on each side of the road crossing (where feasible;.4-quadrant gates can be
used as an alternative if crossing geometry does not supporttheinstallation of the
median)(see Section 3 of the above -referenced handbook), These necessary improvements
will cause new impervious surfaces that fall outside of the'FECR ROW. -The DEIS should
address the additional impacts from these impervious: surfaces.
2.6.3 Construction
The DEIS does not address staging or equipment Iaydown"locations or temporary/permanent impacts on
the natural environment. Under NEPA, the DEIS is required to address'both construction and post -
construction impacts of the proposed action. See Federal Regiter,(volume 64, No. 101 dated May 26,
1999). This has not been done.
2.6.4 Mitigation
The DEIS fails to identify specific mitigation measures for�theadverse effects the Proposed Project will
cause on the natural environment. For example, page T-10 of the DEIS states: "AAF will obtain an
appropriate Section 404 permit from-USACE prior to construction, and implement mitigation as required by
the wetland permit conditions." NEPA 'requires that the specific impact be identified and corresponding
•
planned mitigation presented.
The DEIS appears to claim the benefits of mitigatio'n'in several instances, without specifically describing the
mitigation. activity. Under. NEPA, theeimpacts must be analyzed first before mitigation can be considered.
According to Table 5,2,5-1�regarding land acquisition for conservation and recreation: "The Project would
likely result in beneficial impacts; compensatory mitigation would be required including the potential
•
acquisition of;environmentally'endangered lands. Impacts to delineated wetlands would require mitigation
as required by Section 404 Individual Permits. Consequently, while the implementation of the Project
would remove wetlands from the N -S and E -W Corridors, compensatory mitigation would include the
potential acquisition of environmentally sensitive habitat types." There is no explanation of what
compensatory mitigation and/or acquisition of environmentally sensitive habitat types would be required
in the DEIS. Furthermore, it's not accurate to say that the Proposed Project would result in beneficial
impacts. The Proposed Project would result in negative impacts, thereby requiring mitigation. That
mitigation should have been addressed and described in detail in the DEIS.
2.7 Wetland Impacts
The wetlands discussion in Sections 4 and 5 of the DEIS is inadequate. No figures showing wetland
locations relative to the Proposed Project area appear in the DEIS text or appendices. The DEIS does,
however, include approximate acreages for impacts. IRFWCD staff has indicated that they do not believe
2-12
Section 2 • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
that inclusion of the banks of the North, Main or South Relief canals as wetlands is appropriate.
Background information is required to confirm the accuracy of these estimates.
The following are specific examples from Sections 4 and 5 of the DEIS deficiencies:
1. There is a statement in Section 4.3 that "Wetlands were identified and characterized for areas in
which the Project would require ground disturbing activities." Those areas should be specifically
identified and include all planned activities (roads, utilities, noise barriers and other mitigation, etc.)
as well as staging and equipment Iaydown locations.
2. Section 4 states that field delineations were conducted for the FECR corridor but there are no
figures showing wetland boundaries for that corridor. The text references the land use figures in
Appendix 4.1.1-A, which do not show wetlands. The only wetlands figures in the appendices are for
the E -W corridor.,
3. USACE jurisdictional determination should be includedlin'tle.,DEIS/EIS. •
r.
2.8 Threatened rand Endangered Speciesampacts
The limited geographic scope of the DEIS prevents CDM Smith;from fully: analyzing the impact of the
Proposed Project on threatened and endangered species. As is noted consistently throughout CDM Smith's
review of the DEIS, impacts to threatened and endangered species .are addressed only within the railroad
ROW. The USACE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National, Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
determinations that the Proposed Project will have no adverse effect on threatened and endangered
species are based on the assumption that all w rk will oc urwithin the exiting ROW (reference Sep. 18,
2013 letter from USACE to the,National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; September 24, 2013
letter from USACE to USFWS; Oct. 28 letter from NMFS to USACE;;'AMEC notes from Sep. 6, 2013 meeting
with USFWS, USACE and:NMFS). The determination needs to take into account any activity outside the
ROW. AAF needs to present information; about these activities to the agencies and include their feedback
in the DEIS.
Pil
Smith
so. I • a' ul.
2-13
Section 3
Section 4(f) Evaluation and Cultural Resources
As properly stated in Section 6 of the DEIS, Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Act
of 1966 requires DOT agencies to avoid using certain public resources when undertaking transportation
projects unless there is no prudent alternative and all necessary action is taken to minimize harm. Section
4(0 resources include publicly owned parks, recreation areas, wildlife and/or waterfowl refuges and
historical properties of National, State or local significance.
The DEIS includes Section 4(f) comments in both Section 5 and Sec on.6; however, there are
inconsistencies between the two sections. For example, Section 5 does not include historical properties (it
should), while Section 6 does. Section 6 refers only to the St. Se asti n River Bridge within Indian River
County.
3.1 Cultural Resources
Upon review of the Cultural Resources section of the DEIS itapp'ears•th t he Section 106 process
implemented can best be characterized as minimalistic. FRA's decision that "...consultation with local
entities was not required for Phase II," is perplexmg.due to the overaII. ize and nature of the Proposed
Project which can affect such a vast array of ressources,(DEIS 4 124). \.::•.;:
\'i.:
In the NHS Section 106 minutes contained in the appendixof'the DEIS,.it is clear that the SHPO advised AAF
to use the 106 process; however, SPO also determ ne 'that AAF'tiid of need to fully engage local
/l \\ ( 1..y
governments/groups/individuals as Section 106 Consulting Parties.to fulfill the NEPA public input
requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). This is simply not appropriate. CDM Smith
feels strongly that this approach\does not properly allow the local communities an opportunity to voice
their concerns in a forum that is adequat to.th ie
-he resources within the Project Study Area.
The DEIS in regards to the identification, evaluation effect determinations of historic properties is
again minimal in its coni nt with notable absences of known National Register listed and determined
eligible resources. Several known archaeological sites that fall within the Proposed Project APE appear to
not have been,surveyed and evaluated for National Register eligibility and effects. At the very least they
are not properly addressed. In addition, it is not clear if an adequate archaeological survey was conducted
for portions of the Proposed Project APE. No subsurface testing was done in the N -S FECR Corridor per a
letter dated Oct 31, 2013.
According to the DEIS, the FECR, a National Register Historic District, falls within the Proposed Project APE
and has contributing resources adversely affected (St. Sebastian Bridge), yet the DEIS states that this same
district has a no adverse effect determination as a result of the Proposed Project. If a district loses a
contributing resource, then the district itself experiences an adverse effect. It is also apparent that not all
known historic resources were identified and evaluated within the Proposed Project APE as several
National Register Historic Districts are absent from the discussion within the DEIS.
Smith
3-1
Section 3 • Section 4(f) Evaluation and Cultural Resources
The DEIS either completely omitted or inadequately addressed numerous historical and archeological sites
in Indian River County.
Two other areas of concern relating to cultural resources are:
1. The DEIS does not indicate that vibration studies were conducted in relation to historic structures
and archaeological sites.
2. The DEIS does not examine the construction impacts in relation to historic or archaeological
resources (overall construction activities and staging areas are not addressed).
While the development of the Proposed Project's APE and methodology appear -to have been developed
with the input of SHPO, the DEIS's lack of information, and omission of important resources that clearly fall
within the Proposed Project's APE are very concerning and raise the:question,,whether the methodology
was properly executed. Couple this with the substitutive process used that minimally consulted with local
entities results in a DEIS that is lacking in these critical areas.
CDM Smith has worked closely with the Indian River County Historian,and other local resources to identify
a substantial number of properties missing from the DEIS that.appeae on either the State of Florida's
Master Site File system or in the National Register of Historic Places: As stated above, Section 4(f) requires
that consideration be given to "historic properties of National, 'Stateror local significance." Aside from those
properties listed on the NRHP, there are a significant number of properties alongside the corridor that that
are of local significance and importance.
CDM Smith believes that the Cultural Resources"evaluation included in the DEIS is incomplete and
recommendsthat a supplemental DEIS be requiredkprior to iss aneeof a Record of Decision by the FRA.
3-2
3u)-A'SD
CDRA
Smith
te,2,ecc'-d
Page 24
ao �{
Date
Item # 13 . t
By
C' Deputy Clerk
`, `, (a Pte)
(1951) at page 171. This narrow canal on both the west and east sides of the railroad
bridge and OId Dixie Highway Bridge has yielded fossilized bones for decades.
Since it did not identify these significant historical resources in the course of the Section 106
process, FRA failed to assess whether project construction would affect these resources by
disturbing paleo artifacts Tying beneath the surface; whether vibration from increased freight and
new passenger operations could damage these artifacts; and whether the lateral expansion of
active rail operations would foreclose or hinder future artifact recovery efforts. Likewise, the DEIS
failed to address ways to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects on these resources.
County- Thus, nothing is said in the document about the OId Town Sebastian Historic District East
or Old Town Sebastian Historic District West. There are over 40 contributing sites or buildings in
these two districts, both of which are listed on the National Register. By failing to identify these
districts Districts, the DEIS neglected to mention that the FECR corridor bisects them, or to account
for the contextual effects (such as noise, vibration, safety and visual impacts) that increased rail
traffic associated with the Proposed Project would have on them. Nor did it address the measures
that could be implemented to address those effects.
Kate — my recommendation is to add one of the paragraphs below (after the
paragraph talking about the two Districts) to show other additional NP in
the County but with listing them. — Ruth
In addition, the DEIS fails to identify other affected architectural/historical resources and
archaeological sites in or immediately adjacent to the N -S corridor in Indian River County including
a farmstead with barns and individual homes and businesses potentially eligible or already listed
on the National Register.
Or
In addition, the DEIS fails to identify the three affected architectural /historical resources
mentioned on page 4-129 which are not identified by name, or by their specific FMSF#s, or even
where they are located. There were no defining Table or Cultural Resources Assessment Report
(CRAC) attached to this DEIS. Not acknowledged and not discussed were other historical resources
in or immediately adjacent to the N -S corridor that are potentially eligible or listed on the National
Register.
301.6.1
Page 3-2
The DEIS either completely omitted or inadequately addressed numerous historical and archaeological
sites in Indian River County. These sites beginning with an archaeological site in or immediately adjacent
to the south side of the St. Sebastian Bridge were not acknowledged or discussed in the DEIS: Other
historical properties include individual National Register buildings along Old Dixie Highway and a House
Museum and Farmstead, part of a 100 -acre conservation preserve. This unique property is also listed on
the National Register and was not acknowledged or discussed.
Kate — the underlined portion is my suggestion to complete the paragraph with
"examples" of missed cultural resources without giving out a list. - Ruth
30 \ • a •;),
Dylan Reingold, County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
Attorney's Matters - B.C.C. 11-18-2014
Office of
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
13F
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners �/
FROM: Dylan Reingold, County Attorney t
DATE: November 6, 2014
SUBJECT: Indian River County Committees — Member Reappointments
BACKGROUND.
On September 13, 2011, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Resolution 2011-072, which appointed
the County Attorney's Office to monitor member terms of certain committees.
Specifically, the resolution requires that (1) on approximately October 15 of each year, the County Attorney's
Office shall contact all board appointed committee members whose terms will expire in the following January,
and determine whether those members want to be considered for reappointment, and (2) at the last Board
meeting in November of each year, the County Attorney's Office shall present to the Board a list of all
committee members requesting reappointment — at which time the Board will reappoint members from the
list as it deems appropriate. Thereafter, on approximately December 1st of each year, a list of committee
vacancies will be created and posted on the County website, and the Board will make appointments to fill the
vacancies no later than the following January 15tH
The County Attorney's Office has contacted committee members whose term will expire in January 2015.
Attached to this memorandum is a list of those members who have requested reappointment. The Board should
now review the list and make such reappointments as it deems appropriate.
APPROVED FOR NOVEMBER 18, 2014
B.C.C. MEETING — ATTORNEY'S MATTERS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
F.MrwmevtC'hrisina'COML1flITFESC nerd AlanerslBCCAgenda Afemos1/I/0/6 Reappoinrmrnts-midNov mig.d
Indian River Co.
Administrator
County Attorney
Budget
Department
Risk Manager
Ap • roved
'j'
Date
302
•
Board of County Commissioners
November 6, 2014
Page Two
It should be noted that in addition to those committee members not seeking reappointment, there are many
existing vacancies. Thus, the list of vacancies which will have to be filled by January 15, 2015 will be
substantial. A list of the anticipated vacancies is attached for informational purposes.
RECOMMENDATION.
The County Attorney recommends that the Board consider the attached list of committee members requesting
reappointment, and reappoint such members as the Board deems appropriate.
ATTACHMENT(S).
1. List of Committee Members Requesting Reappointment
2. List of Anticipated Committee Vacancies (Informational Purposes Only)
DTR: cm
F:lAnonieyIChristinalCOM14177EE51Genera! MattersOCC Agenda Memosl M1016 Reappoimments-mid Nov mig.docx
303
•
•
COMMITTEE REAPPOINTMENTS
(Terms expire in January 2015)
1. AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
2 Year Terms — No Residency Requirement
o Julianne Price (Actively Engaged as an Advocate for Low-income Persons in
Connection with Affordable House)
o. David Myers, II (Actively Engaged as a For -Profit Provider of Affordable Housing)
o Andy Bowler (Actively Engaged as a Not -for -Profit Provider of Affordable Housing)
o Maria Caldarone (Actively Serves on the Local Planning Agency)
2. AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
2 Year Terms — County Residency Requirement
o Sean E. Sexton (Cattle Industry Representative)
o David Howard (Horticulture Industry)
3. BEACH AND SHORE PRESERVATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
2 Year Terms — County Residency Requirement —
o Mark Tripson (BCC Appointee)
o David Barney (BCC Appointee)
o William Ferrell (BCC Appointee)
4. CHILDREN'S SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
4 Year Terms — County Residency Requirement
o Judy Jones (Dist 2)
o Michele Falls (Dist 4)
o Kip Jacoby (Member -at -Large)
5. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
3 Year Terms — County Residency Requirement
o Joseph A. Petrulak (Subcontractor)
o Karl L. Zimmerman (Realtor)
M4aarneS+C7sistinakaltAl17TEESCeneeal Alattees'Reappr & Vacancies Z0141141015 Re -appointments Req.docx
304
Committee Reappointments for 2015
Page Two
6. CONSTRUCTION BOA RD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS
3 Year Terms — No Residency Requirement
o Duane M. Weise (Code Administrator)
7. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
4 Year Terms — County Residency Requirement
o James Funk (Local Manufacturing)
o Linda S. Gonzalez (member -at -Large)
o Mike Lafferty (Real Estate)
8. ENTERPRISE ZONE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
4 Year Terms — No Residency Requirement
• o Penny Chandler (Chamber of Commerce)
•
9. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL HEARING BOARD
4 Year Terms — County Residency and Registered Voter Requirements
o Dr. Philip R. Glade (Medical Doctor)
o Richard D. Cahoy (Member -at -Large)
10. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
4 Year Terms — County Residency Requirement
o Jonathan F. Day (Dist 4)
11. PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL
4 Year Terms — No Residency Requirement
*NO REAPPOINTMENTS*
F?lauamer1ChrislinclCOAIIfgTFEi)GeneralAlcuers'Reapps & 1 ncancies 20141141015 Re-appuinrnems Req.doa
305
Committee Reappointments for 2015
Page Three
12. TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
4 Year Terms — Electors of County
o Jennifer Bates (Owner/Operator Tourist Accommodations)
o Keith Kite (Owner/Operator Tourist Accommodations)
o Karen Mechling (Interest In Tourist Development, not an Owner/Operator)
13. ZONING ADJUSTMENT BOARD
4 Year Terms — No Residency Requirement
*NO REAPPOINTMENTS*
F nAnwnrrlChrisrinakCWAIIT EEVGenernl .Mnlers\Reapp3 h l'acancles 20141141015 Re-appuirumenll Req.dxz
306
•
INFORMATIONAL ONLY
COMMITTEE VACANCIES — BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
(Terms expire in January 2015, unless noted as existing vacancy)
• AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE — 2 year term, unless
otherwise noted
o Citizen actively engaged in residential home building industry in
connection with affordable housing
o Citizen who represents employers within the jurisdiction
• AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - 2 year term, unless otherwise
noted
o Associated Industry
• CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD — 3 year term, unless otherwise noted
o Architect (existing vacancy)
• CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS — 3 year term,
unless otherwise noted
o Electrical Contractor
o Architect
o Fire Safety Inspector
• ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNSEL — 4 year term, unless otherwise noted
o Representative from the Local Industry
o Representative from the Citrus Industry
• ENTERPRISE ZONE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY— 4 year term, unless otherwise
noted
o Member at Large
• ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL HEARING BOARD — 4 year term, unless
otherwise noted
o Lawyer (duly licensed to practice law in the State of Florida),
recommended to the Board by the County Bar Association (unexpired
term ending Jan. 2017)
F`. lanneneriChsis im1C0.1f1ffITEES (eneral Afmnrs'Renprs & I'ocnncies 20/41141013 Vacancies Ua.dxr
307
•
•
Committee Vacancies for 2015
Page Two
• PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION — 4 year term, unless otherwise noted
o Flescher/District 2
• PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL — 4 year term, unless otherwise
noted
o Representative from county/state jobs program or other community
groups who work with offenders and victims (existing vacancy)
• ZONING ADJUSTMENT BOARD — 3 year term, unless otherwise noted
o Flescher/District 2
o O'Bryan/District 4
o Solari/District 5
F.WmrnevChrisrinalC0.16117TFFSCxnnul AlaversWeapps & Incomes 20141141013 Vacancies Lisl.d .r
308
ITEM 14.A.1
November 18, 2014
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: November 12, 2014
SUBJECT: Update on the 10th Annual Firefighters Chili Cook Off
FROM: Peter D. O'Bryan,
Commissioner District 4
I would like to update the Committee on the 10th Annual Firefighters Chili Cook
Off
309
•
•
November 18, 2014
ITEM 14.B.1
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: November 4, 2014
SUBJECT: Name Dedication
FROM: Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner, District 1
Blue Cypress Lake Park is located at 7400 Blue Cypress Lake Road, approximately 23
miles west of 1-95. Indian River County is the owner and operator of Blue Cypress Lake
Park located on Blue Cypress Lake.
Joneal Middleton, a resident of Vero Beach of over 50 years, successfully supervised,
managed, maintained and operated Middleton's Fish Camp as the only fish camp on
Blue Cypress Lake, in the Blue Cypress Lake Park. Middleton's Fish Camp is a full
service Bait & Tackle Shop and offers gas and oil for boaters, a nice boat ramp, cabins
and trailers since 1979.
Mr. Middleton passed away on Saturday, October 18, 2014 and as a tribute to his
offerings at Blue Cypress Lake, 1 kindly request your consideration for the Board to
authorize granting a name dedication to the Blue Cypress Park.
Attached: Resolution No. 2011-042
Parcel ID map
40 WSD:mlp
310
RESOLUTION NO. 2011 - 042
S A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES, GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS
AND FEES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF COMMEMORATIVE WORKS
•
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commission finds it to be in the best interest of the
County to establish a consistent policy to review all applications to plant dedication trees and
install commemorative benches (collectively "Commemorative Works") at Indian River County
facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commission seeks to enhance the beautification of
County facilities while encouraging the public to honor the County's most distinguished citizens
for their significant contributions to the Local community; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to establish: (1) procedures and general
criteria for the review of Commemorative Works applications; (2) fees that shall be paid by all
applicants for the procurement and installation of Commemorative Works.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida that:
SECTION 1. DEFINITION OF COMMEMORATIVE WORKS; PROCEDURES AND GENERAL
CRITERIA FOR THE REVIEW OF COMMEMORATIVE WORKS APPLICATIONS.
A. Definition of Commemorative Work
Commemorative Work shall be defined as dedicated tree or bench installed in recognition of
individuals, groups, or organizations.
B. Application for Installation of Commemorative Works
An application for dedication of a Commemorative Work, accompanied by the applicable
procurement and installation fees, shall be filed with the Director of Public Works. The
application shall identify the preferred location of the Commemorative Work and select the form
of a dedication tree or bench and whether a tree dedication plaque or bench engraving is desired.
The application shall be filed on the form prescribed by the County and may be obtained from
the County website, Department of Public Works, or Parks Division of the Department of
General Services.
C. Application Review by County Staff
All applications to install Commemorative Works shall be reviewed by the Public Works
Director or his designee together with County staff from the applicable County Department
charged with maintaining the facility. In evaluating a Commemorative Work application, the
Public Works Director or his designee shall make best efforts to accommodate the location
preferred by the applicant, however, the standard of review must emphasize the overall
1
311
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2011 - 042
beautification of the designated County facility and be consistent with the existing landscape
design and facility improvements.
D. Dedication Plaque Specifications
If a dedication plaque is desired by the applicant, the plaque shall be a cast bronze type with
raised letters and border, with a standard size of approximately five inches wide by seven inches
long (5" x 7") by two hundredth inches (.02") thick and installed at the base of the tree or affixed
to the bench. Variations in plaque dimensions may be approved by the Public Works Director or
his designee in order to maintain consistency with existing facility amenities.
E. Engraving of a Dedication Bench
If an engraved dedication bench is desired by the applicant, the application shall include the
desired language of an appropriate nature not to exceed 32 characters centered on a 6 foot bench
or 43 characters centered on an 8 foot bench. The content of the engraved message shall be
subject to approval by the Public Works Director or his designee as part of the application review
process.
F. Requests For Name Dedications or Nonconforming Commemorative Works
Special requests for name dedications or commemorative works outside of the policy may be
considered by Board of County Commission on a case by case basis. Only the Board of County
Commission is authorized to grant a name dedication or exception to this policy upon a showing
of special circumstance or good cause as presented and sponsored by a County Commissioner
holding office.
SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FEES FOR THE PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION OF
COMMEMORATIVE WORKS.
A. Costs & Fees:
The cost to the applicant to install a Commemorative Work and Dedication Plaque shall be based
on current cost to the County for the requested Commemorative Work. The costs and fees shall
include:
1. Procurement of Commemorative Work: Actual Cost
2. Dedication Plaque (Optional): Actual Cost
3. Bench Engraving (Optional): Actual Cost
4. Installation Fee $100
Payment of the Commemorative Work Procurement and Installation Fees shall be made at the
time the application is filed. The procurement fee shall be refunded to the applicant if the
application is not approved by the Public Works Director or his designee.
2
312
RESOLUTION NO. 2011 - 042
B. Use of Procurement and Installation Fees
The funds collected for the Procurement Fees shall be deposited into the County's General Fund
and applied to the Department incurring the procurement cost as a direct reimbursement for the
cost of procurement. The Installation Fees shall be deposited into the County's General Fund to
offset the labor cost associated with the installation of the Commemorative Work at the facilities
upon which they are displayed.
C. Replacement of Dedication Trees:
If a Dedication Tree dies within one year of its planting date, the County shall make one
replacement of such Dedication Tree only if sufficient funds are available. Any replacement
Dedication Tree shall meet the standard set forth by Section 1(C). Replacement of a Dedication
Tree by the County shall not include replacement of a damaged or destroyed Dedication Plaque
which may be funded by the Applicant to cover the actual cost at the time of replacement.
SECTION 3. ADOPTION
The foregoing resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner F1 escher
and Seconded by Commissioner Davis
Bob Solari, Chairman
Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman
Peter D. O'Bryan, Commissioner
Wesley S. Davis, Commissioner
Joseph E. Flescher, Commissioner
, and was voted upon as follows:
Ave
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
The Chairman there upon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 24day of
May, 2011.
•• #..' COM.•�••;v BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
•�• • ti
*;•• , yVNDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
*
•3:
•
ATTEST: Jeffrey K. Barton •••�99COtiN1�; +�f,•J
Clerk of Court
By
Deputy Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
BY:
3
Bob Solari, Chairman
313
•
•
Indian River County, Florida Property Appraiser - Printer Friendly Map Page 1 of 1
Print I I.i,i.h
Indian River County GIS
ParcellD
OwnerName
32360000000000000003.0 INDIAN RIVER 7400 BLUE CYPRESS LAKE RD VERO
COUNTY BEACH, FL 32966
Notes
PropertyAddress
http://www.ircpa.org/PrintMap.aspx
10/5/2012
314
is•Ain <.OXD
1
Print to view more clearly!
otty:0400 .4M
`• 4A " ▪ • •tP►.f" • i r<eganlc e41se4
'rNlOfO GirALIC 4.4 '
/1�Z14�GiH/,
• `'• ♦ 1�
4.
•
•c
3 •. •t ' . ,•, 4,"737.
ra•
A.V.
GrXiir.f .a. r:; .. i
��/ FH.
0 H
TJP,ktV AIM*
.
RoUSJJ 142141W ,M�'�
V
•
Wdlert°1165
.37x$C4' C,
`
.trateof
a..
rrs•Atonrt, ..r
w tiro,
;A+Mr // f�f��� ,�aa o i ,rat
^'-N^. _. _:.4.•. iL47=7; -rr-,,-11 -s..,, ,f . - • . , 4, #
-,,
•;': /�v JmQz� v' f IP -. r
: • 1 * 4::4CS1r•ir /O ••
t `},.t ab, 1t t !
NAVGYArS':.1, `, �i P.: r'• b.,• :�
W44- Amon.
t t t, ▪ f ./404$1 f'17 .iy{Id�Y
% tt *.. •
1
1 • . 4 ;• i k •6
'� J.� � p i f $
or,J fta esRSly •Irl e. fit } t t • .
erionP
1 b
r aon q• .r•. j r
1' cl1 it r, . XC O
w
CI
•• ;�: ,.a .. � v7,vytna.#Ia�Iff lJir n. AC d"a 4; i} d1 6P�Ylt�iY./J N�`A9�s7�i��
tl
1• �tt k
arp •*a44"••aspkfr1St�4tr1o4r
ro via
.tnr. - Memo, OW .Q0b1.n1[7'• 6/7$AW/MS 'ACC
a . . 41•111/1.nate nr nor r tn•nor
• wr.PV.4Y: 44
wr
44 'RA.mt
t'aAPI/ R1 /iv"
https://3e288ada-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/middlet... 11/4/2014 315
® November 18, 2014
ITEM 14.B.2
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: November 12, 2014
SUBJECT: Mental Health Court
FROM: Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner, District 1
At the BCC meeting on November 4, 2014, Sheriff Loar and Judge Cox provided details
on a proposal for a Mental Health Court.
I kindly request your consideration for a discussion regarding the creation and funding
of a Mental Health Court.
Attached: Estimate of Initial Costs/Budget
WSD:mlp
316
11/12/2014
•
•
1 317
AGENCY REQUEST FOR FUNDING FROM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
FISCAL YEAR 2014/2015
A. Program Cover Page
Agency: Mental Health Court PrografTielephone: 772-226-3235
Contact Person: Judge Cox/Sheriff Loar Fax: 772-770-5335
Title: E -Mail: dloar@iresheriff . org/
Address: 2000 - 16th Ave #383 coxc@circuitl9 . org
Website Address:
Program Title:
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Mental Health Court/Diversion
I certify that information contained in this application accurately reflects the activities of this agency and
that the expenditures or portions thereof for which County funds are being requested are not reimbursed
by any other source.
Signature
Sheriff Loar/Judge Cox
Print name and title
Brief description of the Program for which funding is requested:
A mental health court that diverts criminal defendants
suffering from a mental illness to community services
in lieu of incarceration
Summary Report
Amount requested from Indian River County for 2014/2015:
Total Proposed Program budget for 2014/2015:
Percent of total Program budget:
Current Funding (2013/2014)
Dollar increase / (decrease) in request:
Percent increase / decrease in request:
$ 100,0'00
$100,000
50
0
If request increased 5% or more, briefly explain why:
tk 2_015 —
� � t Zo V
The Organization's Board of Directors has approved this application on (date):
Name of President/Chair of the Board
Name of Exec. Director/CEO
Signature
Signature
3i �_ ►�.1
B Organizational Capability
1. Description of the countywide purpose the funds will be used for:
Public safety, enhance the lives of those suffering from
mental illness, connect mentally ill with community services,
divert inmates from jail beds to the community, lower
recidivism rates for mentally .ill criminals
2. Listing of specific programs your agency offers to our community.
Drug and Veteran's Courts
31TA.a-
Financials
TOTAL PROGRAM BUDGET
AGENCY/PROGRAMNAME: Mental Health Court/Diversion Program
3)1.A •3.
FY 12/13
10/1/12 TO .
9/30/13
FY 13/14
10/1/13 TO
2/29/14
FY 13114
03/01/14 TO
9/30114'
TOTAL. FY
2013!2014.
FY 2014!2015
10/1/14 TO
9/30/15
REVENUES
ACTUAL.
ACTUAL 5
MONTHS
EST. (7)
MONTHS
PROPOSED
• BUDGET
1. Contributions
2, Special events
3. Legacies/Bequests
4. Supplemental fundraising "
5. United Way of IRC
5a. United Way of Martin Co.
5b. United Way of St. Lucie Co.
6, Membership dues
•
7. Program service fees
8. Profit on sales to public
9. Investment income
10. Other income
10a.
10b.
10c.
10d.
11. Reserve funds available for operating
12, TOTAL REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
r n
13. Salaries
` ` `
()v.}t `S---)
3 0 , 6 00
14. Employee benefits
\
8 , 262
15. Payroll taxes/Unemploy. Comp.
Tnr
16. Professional fees
•
17. Supplies
4 , 15 0
18. Telephone
8 0 0
19. Postage and shipping
20. Occupancy (Buildings and grds.) _
21. Utilities
Inc
22. Insurance
23. Rental and Maint. Equipment
Inc
24. Printing and publications
25. Travel and transportation
Inc
26. Staff/volunteer development
27. Specific assist, - individuals
28. Membership dues
29. Awards and grants
30. Payments to affiliated organizations
31. Miscellaneous expenses •
Inc
31a. Wraparound not covered
by
benefits/insurance
55,765
31 b.
31c.
32. TOTAL EXPENSES
3)1.A •3.
Pro Rata Startup
o •='• ,•01 . •
Operation/OfficeCosts
,.. --,...•
•,--dt
%-..'Ar,',
•,.-,'-±.'
•.....VY.
,L.-.,
ss.r..,5
..,-.1:6]
;t'o,
',::,,c.,9,-
-.•.-741.
.....,,,,-
....-•
..,
....,...
6-
,4,i5.;
E$,-,,
",..5-....t.,,,'
-,
. "-
_
•
.--,...-,
"
t;61..,,,,
.,,=;-•
F:-,.,•.',
'-...'-
,..
...' ,...,
.r.i-&
'';.‘”:
.-f.os
..-14
-4.-
...-',4
:sr, o.
--.•
',...C,c,.,';
iyi„9.-f.
4.pi-LI
E'01-6'
.•10
,Fi 0,
21,-,
',7,,,Pai
',..,4'
''----.Y-•••'
1.:-.
,VOs
5-'11'
2 ••
4'1°4
ks,,,,„
'4.1,
-
--,e,
.
-:.--/-8---.
•:,,c;-,.
x-..,,,,,
-_,,p.,..,
LI -4p
-,
q. --
t.7 -A
---:
s, -.:•-6r
•=0,-,4
IV;
•
!••••-,-s•
ff•,,,,•:
•,••••*,.•
P•-•''';
"1.-.17.-'
0
0
O
o
v.,
575.00.
t<o!
•
.z.:in.
1...2a.
...,P=',.
:..."..1"
`'_7,..•
4-1..f.
00.0005
0
0
tr;
v,
- ,
tk.-• •
r...q.
00'000S
o
Er;
-5-"A
i.-•,•,---1
.0.
.4'4.•,'
'..,..-•.'
0
0
- o
1,1
•,•-•
0
0
•-•.
VT
:-... 0 •
XQ:
! .. r•-•.•
Alm
,•••••••.:
•„,...,-,
:tte.
•,,-;•,
t...4.?.4
00.00ES
o
o
,,i
h
v.
•
.•Y-84
.40:.•
.:t.-4;-;•
kir:-
',-•
•Tel.,2%,
00.00£5
45,9:
-*N•37-
o
o
O
o
r•-•
o
o
tri
h
An
-`6.•
FO'
o
..0.,
^,1,--•
-1:•'.,-•
•••••iV:::
.
0
O
4A.
.
0
•r;
3,18.
c.,4/1•:
-.•,,,.
o
c
a•
In
r*".,
47.
00.0005
.:-.
..c.o,
Computer, Supplies, Office
....,
aJ
1,
fi
0
a
419.•
}--
•
0
0
kiag(0401W4
Client Services/Wraparound (those
=73-77.
••,•.,-•
..,-,
V.----;
.:f;1
1.I.,-,
••••-•.,••:
r:••'••.;,
.*ati.•
:1;f,-,•4.1
181
:--49?.,-
Ul,
,c...1.
*-1. 0.`:
•I.•0ri
„:;:•..•.•
1- -
n•-•
- -
--
3r811
7.-0,
00.•
'v. -7r,
..',,,
•,.•
,•:.
''.1
t--
'...;,'„4:811
k.,.'
.
•-•;.•0.-
',.•'co'
.i.v,',
"..--''''
If
"•-•
,-,
ra
.,,,Lrl
,,41,...
:..s. -n;
7T:;i,
12,••.:
,.ii..2•'•
fr,...-1•
:i,:47,-
..,-,1
'TO'
:f.,.5>.
•L,,c0
-,"..h•-•
k,o
rt'vi!..••i-••.=f,
3•'-i.TA,,
',.11,;
•,-,•••"••
ma
E'01-6'
.•10
,Fi 0,
21,-,
',7,,,Pai
',..,4'
''----.Y-•••'
1.:-.
,VOs
5-'11'
2 ••
4'1°4
ks,,,,„
'4.1,
-
--,e,
.
t.7 -A
---:
,I,c)
s',.761
-5-"A
....,*
45,9:
-`6.•
:••.,
..2•-•
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
'.:i•ia
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
'4t,o,
O
o
in
tn.
O
0,
oa
O
o
Er,
d
111
h
ci
01
..0
O
o
•.0
o
0
iv. •
'. 7:- V!..
-;•-•;c,
41
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
R04
O
0
O
Er•
O
0
ci
WI
O
Irl
O
0
O
0
.•,••-•
`-'
'''
;..P•i;
•,'14-3
,.'..
00 005'LS
5850.00
o
o
o
o
00
o
0
0
o
rort
,•••o!
O
o
O
In
O
til
O
0
O
0
Lr•
h..
..0
.0
0
0
0
00 ooL5
0
0
0
JO
0
0
0
0
0
0
,-...o.,
O
.-•
o
0-0
O
o
an
•-•.1
6
0
6
0
;'i'i
r•-•
.-
00
Ul
.0,,--
cr,
.0
••••
0
-
,-..•
•••
."°
kl. ^
tn.
,•,,
'1',',5•,',
V,•S
..'.4.7.41
51,215.00
0
0
$650.00
0
0
0
W., -.•
3,0
0
0
0
0
0
-!•-•0
o
o
o
o
0
0
0
5..T•N;
co
v,
•s-•
tn.
..c,
te,
•-•-•
E.,••
o
-
A.E2.
•.,4;'
o
o
00'0005.
o
o
o
o
0
Lri
0
O
0
O
0
c;
0
d
ci
-•
0
te-•
I,
o
.0
o
.0
o
•,-,
o
0,j
•
410
...r.
v,
vl.
-
•.n.
,,,...•-•
'P., 4,1•1
3.2
0
00.00LS
c•
0
0
5450.00
0
al
o
66
00,
o
o
o,
In
o
6
o,
..o
o
6
o
.0
0'0o
6
0
*•!';"6.,
f,cr•-,
,._
v,
v.,
v.,
v.,.
ni
..-:&•-`
k -a-,
oo
O
o,
o
o
o
o
0
..
5400.00
o
r"8"
tri
,:r
Er;
r...
O
o
OO
•..•-•
•.•-••
6
o
VC,:
-N;
lil.
0).
lel.
4./,
arl•
r4
i4.'il•c•
,.'..• lik
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
•-.': CI;
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
a36-
.7..•
an
S
VI
T-
VI.
.4•2
tn.
'4?
4./1
,-',•-',
4./1
2
v_.-
aso-
1.21.n.•
Medication Management
Prescriptions
Case Management
Drug Testing
incidentals, Transportation, et
•
Housing/In Patient Treatment :
-,.,..,-.
>,
a
...v..-...
'2.'4'....a.'
I-
••ifiti
•
cr)
01
0)
:to
01
;767
110.
'f'••!g'
0.
nrs-
0.
"g4r.;•-'
.0001
-'5 •
•-•FA.s;
••;:..1g
.ce;!
,Ffz•
5;:19•
•,•0
-
3 1 7 A
EMERGENCY ITEM 14.B.3.
November 18, 2014
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: November 17, 2014
SUBJECT: Facility Rental Fee
FROM: Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner District 1
I kindly request your consideration of a request to consider waiving the facility rental fee
for the Can Food Sculpture Contest, sponsored by the Sebastian Lions Club to be held
on Friday and Saturday, March 20-21, 2015 at the Indian River County Fairgrounds
Expo Exhibition Center.
3►7• 8. I.
•
•
BCC AGENDA
November 18, 2014
ITEM 14.D (1)
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: November 12, 2014
SUBJECT: Garden Club
FROM: Commissioner Bob Solari
The Garden Club of Indian River County has graciously offered to purchase and
plant six trees, three Live Oaks and three Maples, in the County's Martin Luther
King Park. The gift, however, is conditioned on the County's commitment to
water the trees on a regular basis until they are established. (Please see
attached).
I am hoping that the Commission will commit the County to a watering regime for
the trees and join me in thanking the Garden Club for its very generous offer.
Thank you.
318
•
tubof Indian River County, Inc.
2526 17th Avenue Phone 772-567-4602
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
November 8, 2014
To Whom It May Concern:
Established 1928
I‘is'w•.izardenciubofirc.org
The Garden Club of Indian River County requires the following before installation of landscaping
projects:
A low volume irrigation system will be installed to ensure continued growth of the planting
areas for a minimum of one year. Irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained in working order
and shall be designed so not to overlap water zones or to water impervious areas. Prior to activation,
the system is to be clean and free of substances harmful to the growth of the plantings. Water should
be free of staining agents and odor.
If an irrigation type of system, as listed above, is not available, a system must be in place to
provide three irrigations each week during the first few months after planting. Following the initial few
months of frequent irrigation, provide weekly irrigation until plantings are fully established. At each
irrigation, apply 2 to 3 gallons of water per inch trunk diameter (e.g. 2-6 gallons for a 2 -inch tree) over
the root ball only. Water twice per month in warm weather in spring, summer and fall and once or
twice per month in winter in the first three to five years. Between years five and seven, water once
every three weeks in warm weather and once every six weeks in winter. After this, the drought tolerant
desert trees should be able to survive on natural rainfall.
Thank you.
Cordially,
Connie Derman
Chair, Civic Committee
'tictnher of National Garden Clubs, Inc. and Florida Federation of Garden Clubs. Inc.
319
BCC AGENDA
November 18, 2014
ITEM 14.D (2)
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: November 12, 2014
SUBJECT: One Florida Resolution
FROM: Commissioner Bob Solari
The City Commission of the City of Miami has passed a resolution advocating the
separation of Florida into two states, creating the 51st state in the Union and
naming it "South Florida". According to the Miami resolution, Indian River County
would become part of the new state of "South Florida".
At the last BCC meeting the Commissioners expressed a desire to consider a
resolution in support of remaining part of the great state of Florida. I would ask
that the Commission look at the proposed attached language for such a
resolution, suggest any changes or additions, authorize the County Attorney to
put the language into the proper form for a resolution and authorize the Chairman
to sign it.
Thank you.
•
320
•
Resolution No.
A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida
asserting its desire that all 67 Counties presently in the great State of Florida, remain in
the State of Florida and that if the southern counties take the benighted path to
secession that Indian River County, Florida remain with the northern Counties of the
State as part of Florida.
Whereas, presently, the state of Florida consists of 67 counties in an area of
approximately 56 thousand square miles with a population of approximately 19,800,000
people: and
Whereas, one of the state of Florida's great strengths is its diversity in ethnicity,
background, geography from the Keys to the panhandle and cities large and small from
Tampa to Fellsmere: and
Whereas, few if any citizens from Indian River County have expressed any desire to
secede from the state of Florida: and
Whereas, the last time part of the south tried to secede it did not work out to well; and
Whereas, Indian River County is a low density county and if the south seceded would
more appropriately be part of the low density Florida rather than the high density south;
and
Whereas, many citizens of Indian River County moved from south Florida to what they
thought was a better way of life in Indian River County and may well be traumatized by
becoming part of a state of South Florida; and
Whereas, Indian River County is part of the St. John's River Water Management District
and therefore if the south seceded should remain part of Florida and not south Florida;
and
Whereas, the Board of Indian River County does not support the secession of any part of
Florida from the state of Florida.
NOW THEREFORE, BE I1' RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
Section 1. The Board of County Commissioners support keeping the state of Florida in
its present form, do not support the secession of any part of the state from the state of
Florida and should part of south Florida secede from the State of Florida, it is Indian
River County's intent to remain as part of Florida.
Section 2. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this resolution to the Mayor of Miami.
321
DISTRICT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
,
TO: Honorable Emergency Services District Board of Commissioners
THROUGH: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
THROUGH: John King, Fire Chief
Department of Emergency Service
FROM: Brian S. Burkeen, Assistant Chief
DATE: October 28, 2014
SUBJECT: Approval of FY 2014/15 EMS County Awards Grant: Purchase of
Capital/Operating Equipment Using Non -Matching EMS Grant Funds and
Grant Resolution
It is respectfully requested that the information contained herein be given formal consideration
by the Emergency Services Board of Commissioners at the next scheduled meeting.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The Department of Health, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services (EMS), is authorized by
Chapter 401, Part II, Florida Statutes, to distribute county grant funds. The funds are then made
available to eligible county governments to improve and expand their prehospital emergency
medical services. The grant program is an innovative process, which enables EMS agencies to
enhance EMS systems through the Board of County Commissioners.
It should be noted that the grant conditions require the County to ensure that the EMS grant
funds will not be used to supplant or replace any existing EMS budget allocations and the
resolution must include a statement to that effect. The grant conditions also require a separate
accounting of the EMS funds from allother funds. Historically, the County Awards Grant has
been used to purchase medical related equipment or equipment that will assist in the delivery of
the service.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The county grant funds are derived from surcharges on various traffic violations. Funding in the
amount of $ 25,048.00 has been allocated to Indian River County for FY 2014/15. The grant
funds will be utilized as indicated in the grant application for equipment and services to improve
and expand the Advanced/Basic Life Support EMS prehospital system. The equipment proposed
and justification for purchase in the expenditure plan is as follows:
322
® Scheduling Software:
Purchase inventory software module through New World Systems that will allow us to track all
Fire Rescue equipment and medical supplies along with all uniforms and gear issued to all Fire
personnel. By purchasing this software this will enhance our current record management system.
FUNDING:
No local funds are utilized in the execution of this grant. These grant dollars are from allocated
monies through surcharges on certain traffic violations.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the FY 2014/15 EMS Grant and resolution to purchase the
equipment and services as noted in the attachments. Staff further recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners authorize the chairman to execute the necessary documents to obtain
funds from the Department of Health in the amount of $ 25,048.00 and authorize budget
amendments as required to receive and expend the grant funds.
In order to comply with the requirements of this Grant, staff is seeking authorization for the
establishment of a unique accounting code designator for all County Awards Grant deposits,
disbursements, interests accrual and rollover of funds, as they are required to be maintained in a
separate fund or account for inspection by the State EMS Monitoring and Compliance Unit.
ATTACHMENTS:
Grant Form
Copy of Grant Application
Resolution
APPROVED FOR AGENDA
FOR: November 18, 2014
BY:
seph A,! Baird, County Administrator
Indian River County
Approved
Date
Administrator
el)
NA3//
JLegal i9
11-3-i1
Budget
le'
�I I f� �'
Risk Management
'
/0 j/ -11I
Department
N1 ILt•
it •a9' fi
1
323
GRANT NAME: EMS County Awards Grant GRANT # N/A
AMOUNT OF GRANT: $ 25,048.00
DEPARTMENT RECEIVING GRANT: Fire Rescue
CONTACT PERSON: Brian Burkeen
PHONE NUMBER: 772-226-3864
1. How long is the grant for? 1 year Starting Date: FY 2014/15
2. Does the grant require you to fund this function after the grant is over? Yes X No
3. Does the grant require a match? Yes X No
If yes, does the grant allow the match to be In Kind Services? (N/A) Yes No
4. Percentage of match N/A 0%
5. Grant snatch amount required $ N/A
6. Where are the matching funds coming from (i.e. In Kind Services; Reserve for. Contingency)? N?A
7. Does the grant cover capital costs or start-up costs?Yes X No
If no, how much do you think will be needed in capital costs or start up costs
(Attach a detail listing of costs)
8. Are you adding any additional positions utilizin the grant funds?
If yes, please list. If additional space is neededgplease attach a schedule.)
Yes
X No
Acct.
Description
Position
Position
Position
Position
Position
011.12
Regular Salaries
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
011.13
Other Salaries & Wages (PT)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
012.11
Social Security
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
012.12.
Retirement -Contributions
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
012.13
Insurance -Life & Health
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
012.14
Worker=s Compensation
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
012.17
S/Sec. Medicare Matching
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
TOTAL
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
9. What is the total cost of each position including benefits, cap'tal, start-up, auto expense, travel and operating?
Salary and Benefits
Operating Costs
Capital
Total Costs
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
10. What is the estimated cost of the grant to the county over five years? $
® Signature of Preparers
Date: November 4, 2014
324
Grant
Amount
Other Match Costs
Not Covered
Match
Total
First Year
$ N/A
$ N/A
$ N/A
$ N/A
Second Year
$ N/A
$N/A
$ N/A
$ N/A
Third Year
$ N/A
$ N/A
$ N/A
$ N/A
Fourth Year
$ N/A
$ N/A
$ NIA
$ N/A
Fifth Year.
$ N/A
$ N/A
$ N/A
$ N/A
® Signature of Preparers
Date: November 4, 2014
324
•
•
GRANT APPLICATION
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Bureau of Emergency Medical Services
Complete all items
ID. Code (The State Bureau of EMS will assign the ID Code — leave this blank) C
1. County Name: Indian River County
Business Address: 1801 27th Street Vero Beach Florida 32960
Telephone: (772) 226-3900
Federal Tax ID Number. (Nine Digit Number). VF 59 - 60006764
2. Certification: (The applicant signatory who has authority to sign contracts, grants,
and other legal documents for the county) I certify that all information and data in this
EMS county grant application and its attachments are true and correct. My signature
acknowledges and assures that the County shall comply fully with the conditions
outlined in the Florida EMS County Grant Application.
Signature:
Date:
Printed Name:
Position Title: Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
3. Contact Person: (The individual with direct knowledge of the project on a day-to-
day basis and has responsibility for the implementation of the grant activities. This
person is authorized to sign project reports and may request project changes. The
signer and the contact person may be the same.)
Name: Brian S. Burkeen
Position Title: Assistant Chief
Address: 4225 43rd Avenue Vero Beach Florida 32966
Telephone: (772) 226-3864 Fax Number: (772) 226-3868
E-mail Address: bburkeen@ircgov.com
4. Resolution: Attach a current resolution from the Board of County Commissioners
certifying the grant funds will improve and expand the county pre -hospital EMS system
and will not be used to supplant current levels of county expenditures.
5. Budget: Complete a budget page(s) for each organization to which you shall provide
funds.
List the organization(s) below. (Use additional pages if necessary)
Indian River County Fire Rescue
DH Form 1684, Rev. June 2002
325
•
•
BUDGET PAGE
A. Salaries and Benefits:
For each position title, provide the amount of salary per hour, FICA per hour, other
fringe benefits, and the total number of hours.
Amount
New World Systems Inventory System
$ 25,048.00
N/A
TOTAL
N/A
TOTAL Salaries
N/A
TOTAL FICA
N/A
Grand total Salaries and FICA
N/A
B. Expenses: These are travel costs and the usual, ordinary, and incidental expenditures
by an agency, such as, commodities and supplies of a consumable nature excluding
expenditures classified as operating capital outlay (see next category)
List the item and, if applicable, the quantity
Amount
New World Systems Inventory System
$ 25,048.00
N/A
TOTAL
N/A
C. Vehicles, equipment, and other operating capital outlay means equipment, fixtures, and
other tangible personal property of a non consumable and non expendable nature with a
normal expected life of one (1) year or more.
List the item and, if applicable, the quantity
Amount
New World Systems Inventory System
$ 25,048.00
TOTAL
$ 25,048.00
GRAND TOTAL
$ 25,048.00
DH Form 1684, Rev. June 2002
326
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
A RESOLUTION OF THE EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
APPLICATION FOR FUNDING COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
(EMS) GRANT AWARDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BUREAU OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES.
WHEREAS, The Florida Department of Health, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services announced that
applications for funding County Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Grant awards are now being accepted and a
grant application has been prepared for Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, an application for grant funds for fiscal year 2014/15 has been prepared by the County; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Chairman is authorized to sign and
execute the application for EMS grant funds certifying that monies from the EMS Grant Program For Counties will
improve and expand the County's pre -hospital EMS system and that the funds will not be used to supplant existing
County EMS budget allocations.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner
Who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner and, upon.being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Commissioner, Peter D. O'Bryan
Conunissioner, Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner Tim Zork
Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher
Commissioner Bob Solari
The Chairperson thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this day of
, 2014.
ATTEST:
Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of
Court and Comptroller
Approved as to form and legal
Assistant County Attorney
EMERGENCY SEVICES DISTRICT
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY: •
Chairman
327
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
EMS GRANT PROGRAM
REQUEST FOR GRANT FUND DISTRIBUTION
In accordance with the provisions of Section 401.113(2)(a), F. S., the undersigned
hereby requests an EMS grant fund distribution for the improvement and expansion of
pre -hospital EMS.
DOH Remit Payment To:
Name of Agency: Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
Mailing Address: 1800 27th Street Vero Beach Florida 32960
Federal Identification number VF 59-6000674
Authorized Official:
Signature Date
, Chairman Board of County Commissioners
Type Name and Title
Sign and retum this page with your application to:
Florida Department of Health
BEMS Grant Program
4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C18
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1738
Do not write below this line. For use by Bureau of Emergence Medical Services personnel only
Grant Amount For State To Pay: $ Grant ID: Code:
Approved By :
Signature of EMS Grant Officer Date
State Fiscal Year:
Organization Code E.O. OCA Obiect Code
64-25-60-00-000 N_ N2000 7
Federal Tax ID: VF
Grant Beginning Date: October 1, Grant Ending Date: September 30,
DH Form 1767P, Rev. June 2002
328
BUDGET PAGE
A. Salaries and Benefits:
For each position title, provide the amount of salary per hour, FICA per hour, other
fringe benefits, and the total number of hours.
Amount
N/A
TOTAL
N/A
TOTAL Salaries
N/A
TOTAL FICA
N/A
Grand total Salaries and FICA
N/A
B. Expenses: These are travel costs and the usual, ordinary, and incidental expenditures
by an agency, such as, commodities and supplies of a consumable nature excluding
expenditures classified as operating capital outlay (see next cateaorv).
v
List the item and, if applicable, the quantity
Amount
N/A
TOTAL
N/A
C. Vehicles, equipment, and other operating capital outlay means equipment, fixtures, and
other tangible personal property of a non consumable and non expendable nature with a
normal expected life of one (1) year or more.
List the item and, if applicable, the quantity
Amount
New World Systems Inventory System
$ 25,048.00
TOTAL
$ 25,048.00
GRAND TOTAL
$ 25,048.00
DH Form 1684, Rev. June 2002
•
329
156
Office of siFDD November 18. 0/4
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Dylan Reingold., County Attorney
William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: William K. DeBraal — Deputy County Attorney
THROUGH: Vincent Burke, Director of Utilities®
DATE: November 12, 2014
SUBJECT: Request for Lease Extension from MWI Corporation
MWI Corporation has been leasing property from the County at 7775 9th Street, S.W. (Oslo
410 Road) since 2001. The County purchased the approximately 20 -acre site from MWI back in
2001 for future expansion of the landfill. The purchase was made under the threat of eminent
domain. The County then entered into a.5 year lease agreement with MWI. There was no
option to renew the original lease. In December, 2006 the County and MWI negotiated an
amendment to the lease providing for another 5 -year term with five successive 1 -year
renewal terms. The amount of rent was set at $6,000.00 per month with an increase or
decrease in the rental rate equal to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment.
As the 5 -year lease was set to expire in December 2011, representatives from MWI
contacted staff and expressed their desire to enter into a longer lease term. Staff met with
MWI to discuss their request for a long term lease extension in July 2011. MWI was
interested in extending the current lease for a 15 year term. The Solid Waste Disposal
District made a presentation to the Board on August 16, 2011 concerning the MWI property
and the District's future plans for expansion. At that time, the Board offered to extend the
lease for five years and indicated a willingness to extend the term for a longer period should
MWI come forward with a site plan application to expand their facility. Some Board members
were reluctant to tie up 20 acres of property in close proximity to the landfill without definite
plans to expand. A copy of the minutes from the meeting of August 16, 2011 are attached.
• . . ;',/ ED FOR //-17-14
i.:.O. MEETING S PEe rEi� ._ Dis 7Riers 86 65 (swbb)
.COUNTY.-ACOLINTY ALYORNEYI
Approved
Date
Legal
Iuraget
Oe:pt.
i : f
330
•
•
•
Staff met again with representatives from MWI in February, 2012 to discuss the offer of a
five year lease with an opportunity to extend the lease for a longer term when MWI expands
their facility. At that time, MWI expressed an interest in purchasing 10 acres of the 20 acre
site outright rather than negotiate a lease extension. MWI executed a 6 month lease
extension in order to give both sides additional time to continue negotiations. The lease
extension expired in June 2012 and MWI has been operating under the terms of the lease
extension since that time. MWI has always been current in all of its payments.
Hoping to gain some security for its future here in Indian River County, MWI has offered to
enter into a 10 -year lease extension with a 2% annual increase in its rental payment. Staff
has no objection to the lease extension as there are no long range plans for landfill
expansion for the MWI site. Earlier this year a Department of Health inspection at the MWI
site revealed some environmental violations. MWI worked quickly with inspectors to remedy
all issues raised as a result of the inspection.
Funding: Currently, the annual lease revenue of $75,500 is deposited into
SWDD/Revenue/Rentals —Acct # 411034-347294.
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board approve the Agreement for Lease
Extension and authorize the Chairman to sign it on behalf of the Board. Staff further
recommends the Board consider selling all or a portion of the 20 acre parcel to MWI and
direct staff to continue discussions with MWI accordingly.
cc: Vincent Burke
Jason E. Brown
John Springer, MWI
331
•
•
AGREEMENT FOR LEASE EXTENSION
This Agreement for Lease Extension ("Amendment") entered into on the day of
, 2014, by Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District, a dependant special
district of Indian River County, whose address is 1801 27th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960
("Landlord"), and MWI Corporation, a Florida Corporation, ("Tenant") whose address is 201
North Federal Highway, 2"d Floor, Deerfield Beach, FL 33441.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, in 2001, the Landlord purchased from Tenant a 19.88 acre parcel of
property located at 7775 9th Street SW, Vero Beach, Florida). Purchase of the property was
made under the threat of eminent domain, as the Landlord was planning to expand its landfill and
solid waste disposal activities on or near Tenant's former property; and
WHEREAS, following the purchase of the property, (the Premises), the Landlord agreed
to lease -back the property to Tenant until December 31, 2006. The lease was renewed for an
additional five years until December 31, 2011; and
WHEREAS, before the sale and to this day, Tenant continues to use the property for the
manufacture and repair of pumps; and
WHEREAS, the Tenant continued to reside on the property under the existing lease
terms; and
WHEREAS, Tenant has requested a ten year extension to the lease and the County is not
planning to begin any type of landfill expansion within that time; and
WHEREAS, the County has no objection to extending its lease with Tenant for an
additional ten years.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms and promises stated herein,
and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the Landlord and Tenant agree as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are incorporated as if fully restated herein.
2. The term of that certain Lease and the Amendments there to is hereby extended and
amended to terminate on December 31, 2024.
3. The annual lease payment shall be $75,500.00 payable in monthly installments of
$6,291.67 due on the first workday of the month. The rent shall increase by two (2)
percent each year effective with the January 1, 2015 lease payment.
4. Except as amended herein, the terms and conditions of the Lease shall remain in full
force and effect. To the extent of any conflict between the terms of this Amendment
and the terms of the Lease, the terms of this Amendment shall control.
332
•
•
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement for Lease Extension is executed by the authorized
representatives of the parties, as of the day and year first above written.
MWI CORPORATION INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
BY:
(printed name) t p ?JP. , Chairman
Approved by the BCC:
ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court
k),J2L.M
And Comptroller
WITNESS: C 7 \ BY:
Deputy Clerk of Court
WITNES
Approved as to form and legal suffici
William K. DeBraal
Deputy County Attorney
seph A. Baird, County Administrator
333
s
15.B.3. APPROVAL OF BID AWARD FOR IRC BID No. 2011055,
FENCING IMPROVEMENTS AT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LANDFILL
RECYCLING CENTER
ON MOTION by Commissioner Flescher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Davis, the Board unanimously: (1)
approved the Bid Award to Stuart Fence Company as the
lowest most responsive and responsible bidder, meeting
the specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid; (2)
approved the sample agreement; and (3) authorized the
Chairman to execute said agreement after receipt and
approval of the required certificate of insurance and after
the County Attorney has approved the agreement as to
form and legal sufficiency, as recommended in the
memorandum of August 8, 2011.
AGREEMENT ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
15.B.4. REQUEST TO RENEW LEASE BY MWI CORPORATION
Commissioner Davis speculated on whether it was prudent to grant the request of MWI
Corporation to renew their lease on landfill property located on Oslo Road for fifteen years. He
added that the County's future was uncertain as to the status of the landfill and possible landfill
expansion, and fifteen years is a long time. He noted, too, that the subject area could be a
tremendous asset to economic development, and he was uncertain if this was the highest and best
use for the land.
August 16, 2011 2
334
•
Administrator Baird elaborated on MWI's proposed expansion plans, which included
constructing an additional building and hiring more staff.
Discussion continued, with input from Himanshu Mehta, Managing Director, Solid
Waste Disposal District, regarding MWI's future plans.
Administrator Baird recommended renewing the lease for 5 years, and reevaluating if and
when MWI comes forward with concrete plans.
Attorney Polackwich agreed that it made no sense to approve an extension for an
expansion that may not materialize.
Director of Utilities Erik Olson addressed Commissioner O'Bryan's query on what
happens at the conclusion of the fifteen -year lease period if MWI is granted their request.
Chairman Solari suggesting authorizing a 5 -year lease with the flexibility for amendment
should circumstances dictate.
ON MOTION by Commissioner O'Bryan, SECONDED
by Commissioner Davis, the Board unanimously
authorized staff to authorize a 5 -year extension of the
lease with MWI Corporation, with the flexibility to do
something else should the applicant present more concrete
plans for expansion.
August 16, 2011 3
335