Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
11/2/1993
dh MINUTES IPFTACHED M BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1993 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1840 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Richard N. Bird, Chairman (Dist. 5) James E. Chandler, County Administrator John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman ( Dist. 4) Fran B. Adams ( Dist. 1) Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Carolyn K. Eggert ( Dist. 2 ) Kenneth R. Macht ( Dist. 3) Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board 9: 00 A. M. 1. CALL TO ORDER PAGE 2. INVOCATION - Rev. Robert Green, Asst. Pastor Community Church 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - James E. Chandler 4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Deletions: Items 8 and 11-B Additions: As Item 5 - Recognition of EMS national award As Item 13-D Grant Questions As Item 13-E FACo Legislative Conference S. PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Special Meeting of September 15, 1993 B. Regular Meeting of September 28, 1993 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Progress Report 6 Reimbursement invoice Third Year Planning Grant (1993) invoice #3 ( memorandum dated October 21, 1993 ) B. Cancellation of Outstanding Taxes Properties Purchased for County Use ( memorandum dated October 21, 1993 ) C. Release of Utility Liens ( memorandum dated October 26, 1993 ) D. Surplus Sale ( memorandum dated October 26, 1993 ) E. Award Bid #3125 / State Road 60 Commercial Node ( memorandum dated October 26, 1993 ) ® o �, � � BOOK 90 P'j"Ur , 8S9 OV - 2 1993) BOOK 00 PnF.800 1 7. CONSENT AGENDA (contd.): F. Award Bid #4019 / Raintree Water Main (memorandum dated October 27, 1993) G. Request for Signature on Section 8 Annual Contributions Contract Amendment - A3409E ( memorandum dated October 20, 1993 ) 8. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES Sheriff Gary Wheeler - Consideration of the Police Hiring Supplement Grant ( letter dated October 25, 1993 ) 9:05 a.m. 9. PUBLIC A. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS Associated General Contractors of American, Inc. Request to Be Heard Regarding Formation of Task Force to Review Costs of Force Account --Work Versus Contracting with Private Enterprise ( letter dated October 11, 1993 ) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS Susanne E. Irwin, Robert H. Irwin, and Peter Irwin Request to Rezone Approximately 7.5 Acres from RS -6 to RM -6 ( memorandum dated October 17, 1993 ) 10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS None 11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT None B. EMERGENCY SERVICES Approval of a Statewide Mutual Aid Agreement for Emergency/ Disaster Response/ Recovery ( memorandum dated October 19, 1993 ) C. GENERAL SERVICES None D. LEISURE SERVICES None E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET None - 11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (cont'd. ): . F. T PERSONNEL Staff Recommendations; Clayton Environmental Consultants ( memorandum dated October 25, 1993 ) G. PUBLIC WORKS Engineering Services for Various Projects ( memorandum dated October 27, 1993 ) H. UTILITIES 1. Master Plan Modification No. 1 by Brown and Caldwell for the South County Utility Service Area ( memorandum dated October 27, 1993 ) 2. South Region Wastewater Repump Station Transmission System - Wastewater Work Authorization No. 1 ( memorandum dated October 7, 1993 ) ( tabled from Meeting of 10/19/93) 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY Legislative Delegation ( memorandum dated October 27, 1993 ) 13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS A. CHAIRMAN RICHARD N. BIRD B. VICE CHAIRMAN JOHN W. TIPPIN C. COMMISSIONER FRAN B. ADAMS D. COMMISSIONER CAROLYN K. EGGERT E. COMMISSIONER KENNETH R. MRCHT NOV - ROOK 1993 J NOV = 2.1993 BOOK 90 `,A 892 14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT None B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT 1. Approval of Minutes - Meeting of 9/28/93 2. Composting Research/ Brown 6 -Caldwell ( memorandum dated October 21, 1993 ) 3. Gifford Landfill / Ground Water Monitoring Study ( memorandum dated October 19, 1993 ) 15. ADJOURNMENT ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO APPEAL ANY DECISION WHICH MAY BE MADE AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED. ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING MAY CONTACT THE COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COORDINATOR AT 567-8000 X 408 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF MEETING. November 2, 1993 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Regular Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, November 2, 1993, at 9:00 o'clock a.m. Present were Richard N. Bird, Chairman; John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman; Fran B. Adams; Carolyn K. Eggert; and Kenneth R. Macht. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the Meeting to order. Reverend Robert Green, Assistant Pastor of Community Church, gave the invocation, and Administrator Chandler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Chairman Bird requested the addition under Presentations of recognition of the national award received by Emergency Medical Services. Commissioner Eggert requested the addition of Item 13.D., Grant Questions. Commissioner Macht requested the addition of Item 13.E., FACo Legislative Conference. Chairman Bird requested the removal of Item 8, Sheriff's Request for Consideration of the Police Hiring Supplement Grant. Administrator Chandler requested the removal of Item 11.B., Approval of Statewide Mutual Aid Agreement for Emergency/Disaster Response/Recovery. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the additions and deletions listed above. PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS Chairman Bird read aloud the lead article on the front page of the November 1, 1993 issue of the Press Journal: -NOV -2 1993 ROOK 919 FA, Bn Fr N 0 V o 21991, Boa 90 FA�r -1 894 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 78th YEAR - NO.43 NOVEMBER 1,1893 34 PAGES, 4 SECTIONS 259 SOME COPY County's EMS Named Best In Nation n,Mj!ur ,1 Staff Wrriter Indian River County residents are served by the best emergency medical service in the nation. The county's emergency medical tech- nicians and paramedics were awarded the EMT/Paramedic Service of the Year Award at the National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics. Conference in St. Louis or Saturday. Last year, Indian River County took top honors at the state level for its emer- gency medical service. "This has been a goal of ours for the last five years, to be the best we can be," said Jim Judge, chief of emergency med- ical services. "The staff takes a lot of pride in what it does. If we won it for any- body, we won it for the community. It just so happens we got recognized along the way." Judge, who attended the awards cere- mony with County Medical Director Dr. Roger Nicosia and Operations Supervi- sor Lloyd Parker, said the county's EMS unit was awarded an 80 -pound bronze trophy depicting paramedics working on a patient. "It's a pretty darn prestigious award," said Ed Kuvlefky, a medic supervisor on duty Sunday. "A lot of work and effort went into it. It's nice to be recognized." - To qualify for the award, numerous let- ters of recommendation, including those E from Gov. Lawton Chiles and Los An- jeles Dodgers manager Tommy La- sorda, were submitted along with a detailed report of the system and local news clippings. �. "They (judges) liked so many things that we do. When we rescued the mana- tee, that caught their hearts," Judge said. :;The child safety program, the unit's in- teraction with the community and the unit's innovative chain.of command also drew positive attention, Judge said. ._ The county took over emergency medi- cal service from Indian River Memorial Hospital in February 1989 and has a paid staff of 45 with 30 volunteers. Since that time, EMS has answered nearly 50,000 calls without a single lawsuit or accident in which an EMT driver was faulted, according to Judge. What most surprised Judge at the con- vention was when an EMT from Alaska mentioned he knew of Indian River Coun-' -ty's programs. Emergency Services Director Doug Wright uncovered the sculptured trophy and, on behalf of the EMS staff and county volunteers, accepted the Board's commendations on attaining nation-wide recognition. He requested the Board to authorize the OMB Director to convey the $1000 cash award to the paramedics that accompanied the trophy to the Emergency Medical Services Foundation. The EMS Foundation, formed through the pro bono work of former Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett, is for the paramedics to further their education and recognize significant accomplishments. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously authorized the OMB Director to convey the $1000 cash award to the Emergency Medical Services Foundation. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 15, 1993. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 15, 1993, as written. The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 28, 1993. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 28, 1993, as written. CONSENT AGENDA A. Progress Report and Reimbursement Invoice - Third Year Planning Grant (1993) Invoice 13 The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 21, 1993: 3 NOV ® 21993 800K 90 PVT. 8,95- r NOV ®2 1993 B0®K 90 UGr.896 � TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DE NT HEAD CONCURRENCE 422 116bert7 M. ReAT P Community DevelopD Vctor FROM: Sasan Rohani S 'it Chief, Long-Range Planning DATE: October 21, 1993 RE: PROGRESS REPORT & REIMBURSEMENT INVOICE THIRD YEAR PLANNING GRANT (1993) INVOICE #3 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of November 2, 1993. r. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS It is required, as part -of the Transportation Disadvantaged (TD) Planning Grant contract between the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) as the Designated Official Planning Agency (DOPA) and the State of Florida Transportation Disadvantaged Commission (TDC), that periodic progress reports and reimbursement invoices be submitted. To comply with the TDC 's requirements, staff has prepared a progress report and invoice for the period from July 1, 1993 to September 30, 1993. For the third year planning grant (1993), the invoice and progress report represent the third submittal. This progress report and applicable finished products, such as the Local Coordinating Board (LCB) meeting minutes, by-laws, etc., are required to accompany all reimbursement invoices. Attached for your review is a copy of draft invoice #3 and the progress report. This report, along with the appropriate supporting documents, will be submitted to the TDC upon the Board of County Commissioners/DOPA approval. On October 21, 1993, the Transportation Disadvantaged Local Coordinating Board (TDLCB) reviewed and approved the attached progress report and invoice. At that time, the TDLCB recommended that the Board of County Commissioners, in its capacity as the Transportation Disadvantaged Program Designated Official Planning Agency (DOPA), approve the attached progress report and invoice and forward these to the TDC. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Attached is a copy of the progress report and invoice for the July 1, 1993 to September 30, 1993 period. Finished products such as the TDLCB meeting minutes, by-laws, and reports are required to accompany all reimbursement invoices. These materials will be submitted to the state along with the reimbursement invoice and the progress report. The BCC/DOPA's alternatives are either to approve the transmittal of the Progress Report and reimbursement invoice as submitted, to approve transmittal of the Progress Report and -invoice with 4 revisions, or to deny the transmittal of the Progress Report and reimbursement invoice to the state. . RECOMMENDATION The TDLCB and the staff recommend that the Board of County Commissioners/DOPA approve the Progress Report and reimbursement invoice #31 and direct staff to transmit the report.and the invoice to the State of Florida Transportation Disadvantaged Commission. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved the Progress Report and reimbursement invoice #3, and directed staff to transmit the report and the invoice to the State of Florida Transportation Disadvantaged Commission, as recommended by staff. B. Cancellation of Outstanding Taxes - Properties Purchased for County Use The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 21, 1993: DATE: October 21, 1993 TO: BOARD ~OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS k-0- 0Q. *!�, FROM: Lea R. Keller, CLA, County Attorney's Office THRU: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney RE: CANCELLATION OF OUTSTANDING TAXES PROPERTIES PURCHASED FOR COUNTY USE The County recently acquired some rights-of-way, and, pursuant to Section 196.28, Florida Statutes, the Board of County Commissioners is allowed to cancel and discharge any taxes owed on the portion of the 5 NOV ® 2 1993 eooK � NOV o 21993 BOOK 90 Fa,r. 88 property acquired for public purposes. Such cancellation must be done by resolution of the Board with a certified copy being forwarded to the Tax Collector. REQUESTED ACTION: Board authorize the Chairman to sign the attached resolutions cancelling taxes upon lands the County recently acquired. Attachments: 4 Resolutions - (1) GHA Grand Harbor, Ltd. (3) George A. Glenn et ux. R/W for 45st St NE corn. R/W for Cherry Lane (33rd St.) Indian River Blvd. (4) Helen M. Glenn (2) Stephen D. Sherwood et ux. R/W for Cherry Lane (33rd St.) R/W for Cherry Lane (33rd St.) ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously adopted Resolutions 93-187, 93-188, 93-189, and 93-190, Cancelling Delinquent Taxes on Publicly -Owned Property, as recommended by staff. 6 Re: R/W - Grand Harbor 45th St. NE corner of Indian River Blvd. RE,7 ' " ION NO. 93- 187 A RESOLUTION OF IDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CANCELLING CERA DELINQUENT TAXES UPON PUBLICLY -OWNED LAi.=)3, PURSUANT TO SECTION 196.28, FLORIDA STATUTES. WHEREAS, section 196.28, Florida Statutes, allows the Board of County Commissioners of each County to cancel and discharge any and all liens for taxes,. delinquent or current, held or owned by the county or the state, upon lands heretofore or hereafter conveyed to or acquired by any agency, governmental subdivision, or municipality of the state, or the United States, for road purposes, defense purposes, recreation, reforestation, or other public use= and WHEREAS, such cancellation must be by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners, duly adopted and entered upon its minutes properly describing such lands and setting forth the public use to which the same are or will be devoted= and WHEREAS, upon receipt of a certified copy of such resolution, proper officials of the county and of the state are authorized, empowered, and directed to make proper entries upon the records to accomplish such cancellation and to do all things necessary to carry out the provisions of section 196.28, F.S.f NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property described in O.R. Book 989, Page 1463 which was recently acquired by Indian River County for right of way purposes on 45th Street at the Northeast corner of Indian River Boulevard, are hereby cancelled, pursuant to the authority of section 196.28, F.S. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , and the motion was, seconded by Commissioner T i p p i n , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Carolyn R. Eggert Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this _ p day of Nnyember , 1993. Attests Jff ey B ton, Clerk e F. , 'I0 Attachments Deed - Grand Harbor, Ltd.. 7 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By &:�;01 Richard N. Bird Chairman �� m 1993 goo 90 FAcr �0 r WOV m BOOK 90 FA,F 900 Re: R/W - Cherry Lane (33rd St.) RESOLUTION NO. 93-__J$8 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CANCELLING CERTAIN DELINQUENT TAXES UPON PUBLICLY -OWNED LANDS, PURSUANT TO 6ECTION 196.28, FLORIDA STATUTES. WHEREAS, section 196.28, Florida Statutes, allows the Board of County Commissioners of each County to cancel and discharge any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, held or owned by the county or the state, upon lands heretofore or hereafter conveyed to or acquired by any agency, governmental subdivision, or municipality of the state, or the United States, for road purposes, defense purposes, recreation, reforestation, or other public use; and WHEREAS, such cancellation must be by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners, duly adopted and entered upon its minutes properly describing such lands and setting forth the public use to which the same are or will be devoted; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of a certified copy of such resolution, proper officials of the county and of the state are authorized, empowered, and directed to make proper entries upon the records to accomplish such cancellation and to do all things necessary to carry out the provisions of section 196.28, F.S.; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE • BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS QF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property described in O.R. Book 992, Page 707 which was recently acquired by Indian River County for right of way purposes on Cherry Lane (33rd Street) pursuant to the authority of section 196.28, F.S. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert and the motion was seconded by Commissioner T1DD1n , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 2 day of November , 1993. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA At ats 1 By Lr�' Richard N. Bird Jeff'`�eyA B/alrton", Chairman Attachment: Diked - Stephen D. Sherwood et ux. 8 Re: R/W - Cherry Lane (33rd St.) RESOLUTION NO. 93- 1 R 9 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CANCELLING CERTAIN DELINQUENT TAXES UPON PUBLICLY -OWNED LRrDS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 196.28, FLORIDA STATUTES. WHEREAS, section 196.28, Florida Statutes, allows the Board of County Commissioners of each County to cancel and discharge any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, held or owned by the county or the state, upon lands heretofore or hereafter conveyed to or acquired by any agency, governmental subdivision, or municipality of the state, or the United States, for road purposes, defense purposes, recreation, reforestation, or other public use; and WHEREAS, such cancellation must be by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners, duly adopted and entered upon its minutes properly describing such lands and setting forth the public use to which the same are or will be devoted; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of a certified copy of such resolution, proper officials of the county and of the state are authorized, empowered, and directed to make proper entries upon the records to accomplish such cancellation and to do all things necessary to carry out the provisions of section 196.28, F.S.; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property described in O.R. Book 992, Page 709 which was recently acquired by Indian River County for right of way purposes on Cherry Lane (33rd Street) pursuant to the authority of section 196.28, F.S. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , and the motion was- seconded by Commissioner Tippin , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert. Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 2 day of November , 1993. Attest: , Jeffry K. Bar on,llgrk eta �0?�• BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By ' 'Richard N. Bird Chairman Attachment: Deed - George A. Glenn et ux. 7 NOV m �� � 90004' g® FA F.901 NOV - 21993 BOOK X n 0 FACE 902 Re: R/W - Cherry Lane (33rd St.) RESOLUTION NO. 93- 190 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CANCELLING CERTAIN DELINQUENT TAXES UPON PUBLICLY -OWNED LANDS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 196.28, FLORIDA STATUTES. WHEREAS, section 196.28, Florida Statutes, allows the Board of County Commissioners of each County to cancel and discharge any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, held or owned by the county or the state, upon lands heretofore or hereafter conveyed to or acquired by any agency, governmental subdivision, or municipality of the state, or the United States, for road purposes, defense purposes, recreation, reforestation, or other public use; and WHEREAS, such cancellation must be by resolutioD of the Board of County Commissioners, duly adopted and entered upon its minutes properly describing such lands and setting forth the public use to which the same are or will be devoted] and WHEREAS, upon receipt of a certified copy of such resolution, proper officials of the county and of the state are authorized, empowered, and directed to make proper entries upon the records to accomplish such cancellation and to do all things necessary to carry out the provisions of section 196.28, F.S.; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property described in O.R. Book 992, Page 711 which was recently acquired by Indian River County for right of way purposes on Cherry Lane (33rd Street) pursuant to the authority of section 196.28, F.S. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner fggprt and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Tiepin , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 2 day of November , 1993.' Jeff eyK. � n, Jerk A! (1 C 7F7 urG �J { r Attachments Deed - Helen M. Glenn 10 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By ichard N. Bird Chairman C. Release of Utility Liens The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 26, 1993: TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Lea R. Keller, CIA, County Attorney's Office DATE: October 26, 1993 RE: RELEASE OF UTILITY LIENS The attached lien releases are in proper form for the Board of County Commissioners to authorize the Chairman to sign so that they can be recorded. The names and projects are: 1. Satisfactions of Impact Fee Extensions: ar FOSTER KHAN 2. A -1-A North Beach Water Project: LABRANCHE 3. Glendale Terrace Water Project: NEWCOMBE (2) YARRINGTON (2) MOORE WADSWORTH NAPIER HIPPIE RIGGIO MIEROP TOVEY PERFETTI WHALEN FITZPATRICK DE WITT LEFFLER (First Union) PATRICK 4. Kings Highway Water Project: HAYES S. Meadows Water Project: MELITI 6. Old Sugar Mill Water Project: EGAN 7. Phase I Water Project: BENNETT MRNN SHORTLE/HYLTON 8. Phase II Water Project: BAINBRIDGE FULLER GILLEN MOLLENKOPF TORCASO 9. Summerplace Water Project: TACA 11 NOV ® 21993 bou 90 FnE 9,3 BOOK ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved the releases of liens and satisfactions of impact fee extensions as listed in staff's memorandum. SAID RELEASES AND SATISFACTIONS ARE RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 90 Pnr. 994 -1 D. Surplus Property Sale The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 26, 1993: DATE: October 26, 1993 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director General Services FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manage SUBJ: Surplus Sale BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The following equipment (attached sheet) has been declared surplus to the needs of Indian River County. ANALYSIS: Staff recommends that authority be granted by the Board of County Commissioners to declare the above surplus and authorize its sale. 1. FUNDING: The monies received from this sale will be returned to the appropriate accounts. RECOMMENDATION: This will be placed on the Surplus Property Sale open to the public as per State Statutes. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved staff's recommendation that the property listed below be declared surplus and sold at a surplus property sale open to the public in accordance with State Statutes. 12 li am 0 0 ac 1 11 _ _ _ _ K_K_K_KK_K_K_K_K_KK_KKi6K_#_KKK_KKi_fK_�fifi6lFKlFiFifil�FifMit�f�i► - - - . - - _ ...._...- -- --. - ..I PROGRAM **FIXRPG037** K FIXED ASSETS BY LOCATION SELECTED_ * DATE 10/18/93 TIME 14$46141 K PURCHASING - GFA SURPLUS * PAGE 1 *********************K*************KK*K ASSET* SEQO CLASS DESCRIPTION/ DESCRIPTION/ LAST INV.DATE AQ. DATE HOW CHO DATE FUNCTION FLEET i MANUFACTURER YEAR COMMENT ASSET VALUE I.D. O ' *KK*****KKKKKKK*K*KK*KKKKK**KKKKKK****K*KK***KKKK*KK**KKK*K***K*K*KKKKKKKKK*K******KK**KKKKKKKK***K***KK*****K******KKK*KKK*K****KKK ' 1215 PURCHASING - OFA SURPLUS KKKKKKK*KKKKKK*KKKKKKKKKKKKKK*KKK*KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK*KKKK**KKK*KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK**K*KKKK*KKKKKK**KKK**KKK******KKKKKKK**KKKKKKKKK*KKKKK ': KK 001247-000000 REPRODUCTION / MICROFILM CAM. MICROFILM CAMERA 1/12/93 6/23/69 P 09/28/93 513 = KK FLO KODAK 1969 FRM 1770 4.292.96 16075 11 KK 001408-000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER IBM SELECTRIC 2 2/11/93 0/00/00 P 09/28/93 513 KK FLO IBM 1900 FRM 1040 621.00 1156774 12 ' KK 001411-000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER IBM SELECTRIC II 8/23/93 0/00/00 P 09/28/93 513.j KK FLO IBM 1900 FRM 1641 648.00 2554962 12" KK 002582-000000 TRUCKS /FIRE 1973 INT#L F/T CAB/CHASE 7/14/93 5/23/73 P 09/28/93 513 ,. ** FL9562 INTERNATIONAL 1973 FRM 1390 W/002582.000001 60868.00 14672CHA313311 22 KK 002582-000001 TRUCK/ UTIL.BODIES (SPEC) - (ALL)INTERNATIONAL TRUCK BODY 7/14/93 5/07/73 P 09/28/93 513 ,. KK FLO TURNER MACHINE 1973 .FRM 1390 W/002582.000000 40995.00 14672CHA31331 22 KK 002836-000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER IBM TYPEWRITER 1/07/93 10/06/76 P 09/28/93 513 KK FLO IBM 1976 FRM 1733 675.00 1688961 12 " F, w KK 003127-000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER IBM TYPEWRITER 2/11/93 12/13/79 P 09/28/93 513 KK FLO IBM 1978 FRM 1040 774.00 6001222 12 •` *K 003133-000000 TRUCKS / 1/2 TON 1979 FORD F100 7/14/93 12/20/78 P 09/28/93 513 K* FL9069 FORD 1979 FRM 1390 5P217#68 FlOHNDKO578 22 •' KK 003194-000000 TRUCKS / 1/2 TON 1979 DODGE D150 7/14/93 2/07/79 P 09/28/93 513 KK FLO127 DODGE 1979 FRM 1390 5#920.94 014JF95168347 22 KK 003209-000000 OFFICE E(;UIP./ TYPEWRITER IBM SELECTRIC 1/21/93 3/07/79 P 09/28/93 513 KK FLO IBM 1979 FRM 1110 810.00 4693682 12 ' KK 003442-000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER TYPEWRITER 5/07/93 11/15/79 P 09/28/93 513 ,. KK FLO IBM 1979 FRN 1340 810.00 6453509 12 KK 003443-000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER IBM TYPEWRITER 1/07/93 11/15/79 P 09/28/93 513 Y KK FLO IBM 1979 FRM 1720 810.00 6453517 -12'1 KK 003458-000000 HVY EQPT / ENDLOADER 1979 DIESEL BKHOE & E/L 7/14/93 2/06/80 P 09/28/93 513 KK FLO021 JCB 1979 FRM 1390 39#835.00 3DI36462 22 KK 003479-000000 TRUCKS / FLATBED 1980 OMC 7000 14 FT F/B 7/14/93 3/19/80 P 09/28/93 513 , ** FLO053 GMC TRUCK& COACH DIV 1980 FRM 1390 14#190.00 T17DBAV577375 22 KK 003538-000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER IBM CORRECTING SELECTRIC 5/20/93 7/15/80 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLO IBM CORP 1980 FRM 1540 864.00 4929172 12 ' KK 003602-000010 REPRODUCTION / COPIER (USED)1979 SAVIN 755 COPIER 2/23/93 12/10/91 P 09/28/93 513 , KK --- FLOSAVIN - ------. .. 1979 FRM 1220 -- - - - - - .00 --- -- 790517938 1 11 PROGRAM **FIXRP0037** * FIXED ASSETS BY LOCATION SELECTED DATE 10/18/93 TIME 14346141 * PURCHASING - OFA SURPLUS * PAGE 2 Mi4+Filii`4KMlF��#Nit*1fMlt'Mlf+i+.i�+lMiElfiF�N**I:+F1tliN+t •� e-0) ASSET* SEGO CLASS DESCRIPTION/ DESCRIPTION/ LAST INV.DATE AQ. DATE HOW CHO DATE FUNCTION FLEET i MANUFACTURER YEAR COMMENT ASSET VALUE I.D. i 1215 PURCHASING - GFA SURPLUS ** 003710-000000 TRUCKS / 1 TON 1981 DODGE 350 C/C F/BED 7/14/93 6/23/81 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLi181 CHRYSLER CORP 1991 FRM 1390 7.630.10 6WD34T2BS17048 22 " ** 003717-000000 HVY EQP / H/D TRACTORS 1981 CASE 1490 TRACTOR/MOW 7/14/93 8/28/81 P 09/26/93 513 + ** FLi185 CASE 1991 ERM 1390 _ 27,957.00 - 11181197 22 = ** 003836-000000 REPRODUCTION / COPIER COPIER GAVIN 870 1/21/93 8/13/81 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLi SAVIN 1991 FRM 1110 _ 4.751.00 240-100-681 _ .12 '.` ** 003907-000010 TRUCKS / 1/2 TON 1982 FORD F100 6/02/93 10/18/89 T 09/28/93 513 FLi192 FORD 1991 FRM 1420 10500.00 1FTCF1030CNA10309 22 ** 004329-000000 TRUCKS / 1 TON 1982 DODGE D350 CREWCAB/TOP 7/14/93 3/23/82 P 09/28/93 513 , ** FL#201 CHRYSLER MOTORS 1992 .FRM 1390 __ _ 9,654.90 .187KD36RSC8249262 *+� 004378-000001 TRUCKS / FLATBED 1979 FORD F700 C/C LUBE TRK 7/14/93 1/22/68 G 09/28/93 H 513 F, FL6131 FORD 1979 FRM 139Q 5,268.48 F70AVEC9833 22 .P ** 004419-000000 TRUCKS / DUMP 1982 FORD LNTS000 12-14 YD 7/14/93 5/12/82 P 09/28/93 513 d +!* FL0209 FORD MOTOR ¢OMPANY 1982 FRM 1390 41#315.58 IFDYWBOUOCVA411302 22 " ** 004697-000000 HVY EQPT/GRADER/EXCAVATOR 1963 GALION A500 GRADER 7/14/93 3/00/83 P 09/28/93 4 513 ., ** FL0226 GALION 3903 .FRM 1390 __. 65#939#17 3OW09944 Z2 " ** 004720-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT DISPLAY STATION 5/20/93 2/02/83 P 09/28/93 513 .. +�* FLi IBM 1983 FRM 1540 2#533#00 Y 8827 12 ** 004788-•000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER OLYMPIA ELECTRONIC TYPEWRITER 6/02/93 5/10/83 P 09/28/93 513 > !I* FLi OLYMPIA 1903 FRM 1420 749900 00486101 11 1 a. �• ** 004857-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT IBM DISPLAY STATION 1/13/93 10/28/83 P 09/28/93 513 m +fir FL# 3$M_. _ 198:1._ FRM 171Q .._ ..._ __.. __ _ _. - 2#100#00 59.493 11 L, ** 004861-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT IBM DISPLAY STATION 1/13/93 10/21/83 P 09/28/93 513'� ** FLi IDM 1903 FRM 171Q _ 2tlQ0.00 59955 11 " ** 004911-000000 TRUCKS / 1/2 TON 1984 DODGE D50 7/14/93 1/10/84 P 09/28/93 513 o +�* FL0244 DODGE 1904 FRM 1390 6,742.31 J97FP24DOEY700193 ** 007096-000000 AUTOMOBILE / 4 WHEEL DR. 1984 CHEV BLAZER 2/DR 8/30/93 8/14/84 P 09/28/93 513 .: +#* FL0261 OM 1984 FRM 1600 9#715.34 IGOCS1892ES228969 22 ** 007675-000000 TRUCKS / 1/2 TON 1985 DODGE D150 PICK UP TRK 4/23/93 5/09/85 P 09/30/93 513 ** FL4268 DODGE 1995 FRM 1360 6#8081,30 197FD14H%FG663477 22 '' t c, ** 008442-000000 OFFICE EQUIP./ TYPEWRITER CANON AP400 TYPEWRITER 1/07/93 12/31/85 P 09/28/93 513 _**_ FLi__ CANON. USA __— 1985 FRM 1753 ,_110!03-_ 82025643 1 1 1 0 PROGRAM **FIXRP0037** FIXED ASSETS BY LOCATION SELECTED * DATE 10/16/93 TIME 14146241 * PURCHASING - GFA SURPLUS * PAGE 3 , ASSET# SEGO CLASS DESCRIPTION/ DESCRIPTION/ LAST INV.DATE AQ, DATE HOW CHO DATE FUNCTION FLEET # MANUFACTURER YEAR COMMENT ASSET VALUE I.D. # ° 1215 PURCHASING - OFA SURPLUS ** 008568-000000 TRUCKS / DUMP 1986 OMC BRIGADIER 12-14 YD 7/14/93 5/12/86 P 09/28/93 513 , *+� FL#315 OM 1956 FRM 1390 43.988.00 1ODSOC4Y9GV527286 22 ' ** 008569-000000 TRUCKS / DUMP 1986 OMC BRIGADIER 12-14 YD 7/14/93 5/12/86 P 09/28/93 513 FL0316 GM 1986 FRM 1390 43,988.00 IGDSBC4Y00V527287 22 ** 008692-000000 OFFICE EQUIP / VALIDATOR NCR VALIDATOR TERMINAL 1/05/93 0/02/86 P 09/28/93 513 *+' FL# NCR CORP 1986 FRM 1520 2,595900 0115746805 12 ' ** 008693-000000 OFFICE EQUIP / VALIDATOR NCR VALIDATOR TERMINAL 1/05/93 0/02/86 P 09/28/93 513 *+� FL# NCR CORP 1986 FRM 1520 2#995.00 0115746806 12 ° ** 008805-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT MEMOREX 2191 CRT 1/13/93 9/09/86 P 09/28/93 513 , FL# MEMOREX 1996 FRM 1710 625.00 11734 11 ' ** 008929-000000 STORAGE CABINET/ FILE CAB. WOODEN 60 DRAWER CAT CARD CAB. 8/23/93 1/01/83 O 09/28/93 513 . +►�► FL# 1983 FRM 1641 2#100900 NONE 11 F-1 Ln ** 008943-000006 STORAGE CABINET/ FILE CAB. 30 DRAWER SHELF LIST CABINET 8/23/93 1/01/85 8 09/28/93 513 ** FL# 1985 FRM 1641 900 NONE it ** 008985-000006 FURNITURE / MISC. DOUBLE FACE READ/STUDY CARRELL 9/24/92 3/10/87 O 08/30/91 513 +�+► FL# 1986 .00 NONE 11 ** 006986-000006 FURNITURE / MISC. DOUBLE FACE READ/STUDY CARRELL 9/24/92 3/10/87 G 08/30/91 513 *+� FL# 1986 .00 NONE 11 ** 009035-000000 REPRODUCTION / COPIER GAVIN VR 35 COPIER 12/28/92 1/31/87 P 09/28/93 513 ** FL# GAVIN 1986 FRM 1700 2,745.00 8860403704 12 ** 009378-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT WYSE - WY50 VIDEO TERMINAL 1/13/93 9/30/87 P 09/28/93 513 ** FL# WYSE i 1997 FRM 1710 550.00 1067889 11 ** 009396-000000 EDP EQUIP./ MISC. NCR TELLER TERMINAL MOD 2262 1/05/93 9/30/87 P 09/28/93 513 ** FL# NCR 1900 FRM 1520 3,958.00 12 o +�* 009397-000000 EDP EQUIP./ MISC. NCR TELLER TERMINAL MOD 2262 1/05/93 9/30/87 P 09/28/93 513 ** FL# NCR 1900 FRM 1520 3,958.00 12 ** 009860-000000 STORAGE CABINET/ FILE CAB. 45 DRAWER CARD CATALOG 8/20/93 10/01/87 O 09/28/93 513 ** FL# GAYLORD BROTHERS 1900 FRM 1640 750.00 NONE 11 ** 009861-000006 STORAGE CABINET/ FILE CAB. 10 DRAWER CARD CATALOG 8/20/93 10/01/87 O 09/28/93 513 " FL# 1900 FRM 1640 900 NONE 11 I ** 009862-000006 STORAGE CABINET/ FILE CAB. 15 DRAWWR CARD CATALOG 8/20/93 10/07/87 G 09/28/93 513 ** FL# GAYLORD BROTHERS _1900 _ FRM 1640 --_ - __. _ _ .00 - _-NONE. 1 1 1 1 1 N a\ PROGRAM **FIXRPG037** * FIXED ASSETS BY LOCATION SELECTED * PURCHASING — OFA SURPLUS *****afar******************************** DATE 10/16/93 TIME 14846:41 PAGE 4 ASSET* SEGO CLASS DESCRIPTION/ DESCRIPTION/ LAST INV.DATE AG. DATE HOW CHO DATE FUNCTION FLEET 0 MANUFACTURER YEAR COMMENT ASSET VALUE I.D. # 1215 PURCHASING - RFA SURPLUS ** 009863-000006 STORAGE CABINET/ FILE CAB. 15 DRAWER CARD CATALOG 8/20/93 10/01/87 G 09/28/93 513 *+' FLO GAYLORD BROTHERS 1900 FRM 1640 .00 NONE 11 ** 009984-000000 EDP EQUIP./ MISC. NCR TELLER TERMINAL. MOD 2262 1/05/93 9/30/68 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLO NCR 1988 FRM 1520 2.895.00 01-19010588 12 ** 009985-000000 EDP EQUIP./ MISC. NCR TELLER TERMINAL► MOL. 2262 1/05/93 9/30/88 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLO NCR 1988 FRM 1520 29895.00 01-19010589 12 'I ** 010122-000000 EDP EQUIP./ MISC. NCR TELLER TERMINAL MOD 2262 1/05/93 10/01/88 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLO NCR 1988 FRM 1520 30980.00 0119010587 12 ' ** 010150•-•000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT AUTOMATE 1 WORKSTATION 1/13/93 10/01/88 R 09/28/93 513 rr* FLO IBIMAINT 1988 FRM 1710 682.00 000112 11 ** 010152-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT AUTOMATE 1 WORKSTATION 5/20/93 10/01/88 R 09/28/93 513 +r* FLO IBIMAINT 1988 FRM 1540 682.00 000800 12 ** 010655-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT MOD 3196 DISPLAY STATION 1/13/93 5/22/89 P 09/28/93 513 *ar FLO IBM 1989 FRM 1710 738.00 353XS8I7789 11 ** 010667-000000 STORAGE CABINET/ FILE CAB. 72 DRAWER CARD CATALOG 8/20/93 4/01/89 X 09/28/93 513 ** FLO 1900 FRM 1640 900 NONE 11 ** 010769-000000 VANS/CARGO 1989 CHEVY ASTRO VAN 5/07/93 7/19/89 P 09/28/93 513 +r* FL0469 GM 1989 FRM 1140 12.385.00 IOCCM15Z2KB240009 22 ' ** 011569-000006 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT ADDS CRT W/KEY BOARD 1/05/93 10/06/89 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLO ADDS 1989 FRM 1520 % 900 K090578 12 ** 011649-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STA./CRT LYNKLYTE II CRT 1/13/93 2/27/90 P 09/28/93 513 ar* FLED LYNK 1989 FRM 1710 640.00 4215 it ** 011853-000006 FURNITURE / DESK SINGLE PED. DESK 44" X 24" 2/25/93 5/08/90 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLO ANDERSON HICKEY 1990 FRM 1240 .00 WALNUT/SAND 11 ** 012270-000000 EDP EQUIP./ MODEM MOD QX 2400T STAND ALONE MODEM 1/13/93 10/05/90 P 09/28/93 513 ** FLO MICROCOM 1990 FRM 1710 510.09 1302164182 11 ** 013246-000000 AUTOMOBILE / SEDAN 1986 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 4DR 6/25/93 7/12/91 G 09/28/93 513 ** FL4510 FORD 1986 FRM 1300 119383.00 2FASP4301GX146834 22 LOCATION TOTAL VALUE--- 428128.78 TOTAL FIXED ASSETS------ 62 w 0 0 M 4w v LOCATION TOTAL VALUE--- 41339.14 TOTAL FIXED ASSETS------ 13 1 1 1 if+U�F%i1IldFili: *��*��*•>E�a�x�a��raew at�i�lttila4��f �*�*is* PROGRAM **FIXRPG037** * FIXED ASSETS BY LOCATION SELECTED DATE 10/18/93 TIME 14346t50 * PURCH. — ENTERPRISE SURPLUS * PAGE 1 x+�xalxx�lxac* xac�c* �c�oac *xecw+�**au x* w w zi m o z a)wD1 ASSE'iO SEQJ# CLASS DESCRIPTION/ DESCRIPTION/ LAST INV.DATE AQ. DATE HOW CHO DATE FUNCTION t7 m Z fit] FLEET 6 MANUFACTURER YEAR COMMENT ASSET VALUE I.D. 0g I w M * xaF * ► * x +� a►*aF alaG* at +F**aa * r ato6M*+t M�cK�cx�caaxx x* x *xat +tz ec xx**aF *x* �casac * ttx +c xxK * atac�l x�c *x x*K* ** +i �, O O M 0 6005 PURCH. — ENTERPRISE SURPLUS ilifii iF«*rMMiUIF;iwttK�Fittt lF lFatMliM�F *if MiFMlt9tliiFii«►«i�ttiFiF�FOFitM�iNltitNlFltiiKiF�Fi1K�FiFiFa6Kif�44iiitatiFlilFiFiiiEiF if�t«i4M�4�fitif iliFatiEitKti�fi1K1t1FiF 14iE�ilFliiFMKNetil�kitol8tii�FN iFii M+4 if D tj Ln a< 001779-000000 POWER TOOLS / COMPRESSOR COMPRESSOR 5/17/93 3/07/75 P 09/28/93 999 Z r� p m FLO WISC 1975 FRM 6010 .00 5474213 32 t —1 � F' V *+� 003214-000000 TRUCKS / FLATBED 1979 FORD F600 C/CHAS/CRANE 5/17/93 9/28/79 P 09/28/93 999 +� FL6126 FORD 1979 FRM 6010 30.383.18 F60CVEA0985 420. ** 003257-000010 TRUCKS / MULTI—TON 1979 FORD LTS000 REF CONT TRK 6/03/93 10/01/86 P 09/28/93 999 m jej7m �* FLO138 FORD 1979 FRM 6075 .00 6USlDVEJ7727 42 D� +�* 003729-000001 TRUCKS / MULTI—TON 1981 FORD LN'Y8000 REF CONT TRK 6/03/93 6/01/88 G 09/28/93 999 C 8�1m T-4 +1+1 FL4176 FORD 1981 FRM 6075 .00 SDYWSOU99VJ32093 42 +� 007398-000010 AUTOMOBILE / 4 WHEEL DR. 1985 FORD BRONCO 4WD 7/23/93 2/10/92 P 09/30/93 999 3 = O T O *+� FL0274 FORD 1965 FRM 6105 1►500.00 1FMAU15YOFLA27387 42 cs —i r r t+c�� 007641-000000 TRUCKS / 1/2 TON 1985 DODGE D150 6/03/93 4/11/85 P 09/28/93 999. �y� m OI FL0276 DODGE 1985 FRM 6075 6051#80 187FD14HiFS633754 42 r r 31 co +►* 007998-000000 COMMUNICATION/RADIO—MOBILE G E CORONA MOBILE RADIO 9/22/93 12/09/85 P 09/28/93 999 FLO GE — SEE FILE 1985 FRM 6064 11156.00 "WORN—OFF" 31 p 0 Z 8 +� 009056-000000 HEAVY EQUIP./ H/D MOWERS LESCO 012000 GREENSMOWER 7/23/93 3/15/8'7 P 09/28/93 999 A +�* FLO LESCO 1987 FRM 6100 71900.00 ON001690 32 ,.. n * 009175-000000 EDP EQUIP./ PRINTERS 6 ACCESS. IBM 400 CPS PRINTER 5/27/93 3/25/87 P 09/28/93 999 ' +Ir FLO IBM 1987 FRM 6050 4,033.50 4224-02 410033986 32 � g +► 009349-000000 HEAVY EQUIP./ H/D MOWERS LESCO 12000 GREENSMOWER 7/23/93 8/18/87 P 09/28/93 999 +� FLO LESCO 1987 FRM 6100 6.114.66 001809 32 C r+t 009928-000006 EDP EQUIP./ MONITOR COLOR MONITOR 7/27/93 8/31/88 P 09/28/93 999 n 0 r * FLO TANDY CORP. 1988 FRM 6062 .00 32 g- M+1 010665-000000 POWER TOOLS / HOIST BOOM CRANE 5/17/93 10/01/88 X 09/28/93 999 W +� FLO 1900 FRM 6010 .00 42 O 1— . tt 010917-000000 TRUCKS / 1/2 TON 1984 CHEV C-10 7/27/93 11/01/88 P 09/28/93 999 , * FL0453 GM 1984 FRM 6065 3►500.00 20CCC14DXE18868e 42 LOCATION TOTAL VALUE--- 41339.14 TOTAL FIXED ASSETS------ 13 1 1 1 NOV ® 2 1993 BOOK 90. FA;F 910 E. Award Bid #3125 - SR -60 Commercial Node - Utilities Department The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 26, 1993: ly DATE: October 26, 1993 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny".Dean, Directox:z* General Services FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manager yl SUBJ: Award Bid 03125/State Road 60 Commercial Node Utilities Department BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Bid Opening Date: September 29, 1993 AdvertisinV Dates: Sept 2,9,16;23,1993 Specifications Mailed to: Twenty -Three (23) Vendors Replies: Four (4) Vendors VENDOR Speegle Construction Cocoa, FL Johnson -Davis Lantana, FL Derrico Construction Melbourme, FL JoBear, Inc Palm Bay, FL TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID BID TABULATION CORRECTED TOTAL $617,000.00 $632,240.00 $690,065.00 $700,601.00 $624,684.00 $624,684.00 SOURCE OF FUNDS Utilities General Impact Fees ESTIMATED BUDGET $620,625.00 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Speegle ru Constction as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. (See attached Departmental Memo for recommendation). In addition, staff requests Board approval of the attached Agreement when all the requirements are met and approved as to form by the County Attorney. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #3125 in the total amount of $624,684.00 to Speegle Construction, as recommended by staff. AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD 18 F. Raintree Water Main - Bid #4019 - Utilities Department The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 27, 1993; DATE: October 27, 1993 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director General Services PI FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manager 7+p SUBJ: Award Bid #4019/Raintree Water Main Utilities Department BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Bid Opening Date: Advertising Dates: Specifications Mailed to: Replies: Timothy Rose Contracting Vero Beach, FL Treasure Coast Contr. Vero Beach, FL G.E. French Construction Okeechobee, FL October 6, 1993 September 22, 29, 1993 Twenty (20) Vendors Four (4) Vendors BID TOTAL $23,218.00 $29,536.40 $29,832.00 CORRECTED TOTAL $24,018.00 JoBear $48,688.00 Palm Bay, FL TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID $24,018.00 SOURCE OF FUNDS Utilities General Impact Fees ESTIMATED BUDGET $28,056.00 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the bid be awarded to Timothy Rose Contracting as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. In addition, staff requests Board approval of the attached Agreement when all requirements are met and approved by the County Attorney. 19 Nov ® 21993 BOOK 90 F-ACF911 NOV ® M3 800K ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #4019 in the total amount of $24,018.00 to Timothy Rose Contracting, as recommended by staff. AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD 90 F -b91 2 G. Section 8 Annual Contributions Contract Amendment - Housing Certificate Program The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 20, 1993: TO: me Honorable Manbers of the DATE: IM/20/93 - FILE: Board of County Coxm ss - SUBJECT: Request for signature on section. s Annual Contributions contract Am endmmt - A3409E N FROM: Guy L. Decker, Jr. REFERENCES: Mm utive Director IRC Housing_ Authority It is reoamns.ded that the data presented be given fornal consideration by the County Camniss' . The Departmet.t of Housing and Urban Development has forwarded five (5) copies of the Annual Contributions Contract (ACC) which have been. amended to our Contract Authority in the amount of $124,081. 7.e doanmtat3M required by HUD for their final approval and execution of the contracts is submitted for consideration and approval of the Board of County Comniss; me*s . (1) Five (5) copies of ACC Part I Number A3409E of the Annual Contributions Contract for the housing Certificate Program. Original signatures are requited on all copies of the Contract and no c barge in its format is permitted. We Mspectful y request the County Commission to authorize its Chaimun to execute these Contracts for transmittal to the Jackson- vi_lle Office of HUD. 20 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved the Section 8 Annual Contributions Contract, as amended, for the Housing Certificate Program and authorized the transmittal of 5 copies to the Jacksonville office of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), as recommended by staff. COPY OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD PUBLIC DISCUSSION - FORMATION OF TASK FORCE TO REVIEW COSTS OF FORCE ACCOUNT WORK VERSUS CONTRACTING WITH PRIVATE ENTERPRISES The Board reviewed the following letter from The Associated General Contractors of America, Inc.: Florida East Coast Chapter The Associated General Contractors of America., Inc 2617 Australian Avenue West Palm Beach, Florida 33407 Telephone: (407) 833-3609 Fax: (407) 833.6024 Please reply to: October 11, 1993 Mr. Jim Chandler, Administrator Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Mr. Chandler: 2770 North Indian River Boulevard Suite 304 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Telephone: (407) 778-1325 Fax: (407) 569-9303 OCT 1993 i.Ln ADMINISTRATOK .�, OFFICE A growing concern to the public is the process in which government spends tax dollars. The public should be assured that outlays for public spending are done as efficiently and in the most cost effective manner as possible. The Florida East Coast Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America, Inc. believes that private enterprise, through the competitive bid process and contract method of construction can provide construction and related services more efficiently and cost effectively than government, thereby maximizing public funds. Independent studies have shown that it costs significantly more in real dollars for the government to complete work with its own forces than it does to contract the same work out to the private sector. 21 BOOK 90 FArUE 913 NOS 2 1993 BOOK 90 FnF914 A recent example is the decision by the Orange County School System to contract out the construction of their schools for the first time since 1986. This decision was based on a study of construction costs of two identical schools. The study concluded that a four percent savings or $127,421 on approximately three million dollars worth of construction was realized by the school district when they contracted to the private sector. The Associated General Contractors believe that the potential for similar savings exist within Indian River County. As a result, the Florida East Coast Chapter would like to be placed on the County Commission meeting agenda under "Public Matters" to suggest the formation of a task force to review costs of force account work versus contracting with private enterprise. The Associated General Contractors of America, Inc. has members who have expressed an interest in being a part of this task force. We have also received favorable responses from other local associations. In the best interest of maintaining impartiality of the task force's conclusion, AGC believes it would be appropriate to have staff represented as well as a commissioner. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA, INC. � / Stevan A. Hall Executive Assistant In response to Commissioner Eggert's question, Steve Hall suggested that it might be better if the petition paving projects were contracted out. He also suggested annual contracts for maintenance of unimproved roads, and perhaps mowing of medians. Administrator Chandler noted that with the exception of petition paving, all construction is done by bids. We have started to look at a number of operations within the County with regard to basic operating expenses, i.e. fleet management, park management and perhaps going to day laborers for Road & Bridge work. Commissioner Adams felt a study would be very beneficial and wished to see Steve Hall become a part of the task force. Commissioner Tippin was in agreement with having a look at this matter in order to find out the most effective methods of doing the work. We might find it is better for the County if the County does the work. Commissioner Eggert also supported the study, saying she wanted next year's budget to reflect a real study of ways we can economize. She hoped the study would be completed in -6 months so it could be digested before the July budget workshops. 22 Commissioner Adams viewed this as a real opportunity, noting that the petition paving program is running 3 years behind. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, that the Board approve in concept the makeup of the task force and request Mr. Hall to bring back in more detail a proposed agenda and tentative meeting schedule for the Board's review and matching of items with the proper County staff. Under discussion, Steve Hall anticipated that they would be coming back very shortly as they already have begun looking at most of the areas where possible savings might be accomplished. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING REQUEST - SUSANNE E. IRWIN, ROBERT H. IRWIN, AND PETER IRWIN County Attorney Charles Vitunac announced that this public hearing has been properly advertised, as follows: y� VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he Is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press-Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being C r In the matter of In the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of A!� /041�Y Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advpAisamenty;or publication in the said newspaper. VP►C•S �P�iBtylCribed before me this day of A.D. 19 •� 9. �. .ray a My Comm. r�es Julie 29, 1997 ,n NO. CC30M • 72 • L NOV - 21993 ` { ,;'(Susiftess Manager) 23 GOV. LOT 3 , ---- RM-6' Subject Property RS -6 `'I- BAYTREE GOV. LOT 2 ; ; a G OT 1 NOTICE = PUBLIC WARINO " Notice of hsarhg to consider the adoption of a F y Rew�dp�mFft ordnance (U to g t ac to Midtiple Residentiat Obtrict (up to a by E. 4 R H. � � Peter e� o('s.R. 1�1A. the POPOtY Is � Oaks Conan the do- RWAM and the Town of Indian River shores. and contains Ws i p�Go�ver vnentt t t33 of Section�� 1 SIO 31S- R g 3' and in aovermrent Lot and being in k�ian mv: canty3Pbrk:!nga 39E grNg oitlA pLftstmtl havet which parties h interest and to be heard, will . be held by the Board of Oncantnissionars of SMIN ir � Florida, In, Adtr�m Mgd. irrg, boated at 1810.28Ut etreet, veno Bepahr laor i. 1tIR oa Tum ft. Novwhw?, IM al 9.05 a.m. Dw zoning dsUk� � district Quested. Provided it Is wi ftlrr ft BeerIne gffww use ' ��Who Mayh to y a< g w® need to em. arra that a verbatim record of the proceedings is nMft which .vd the ase& rgny and evidence upon . Anyone W11D needs a aperdslnoon idation far this oourdy's MWIcans ; with Acthe t (ADA) Coordi sta at 887.8000 extension 408 at least 48 irons, in 4"noeofi , 07!% w River Corsty Board of Comer C,amr By s Rktitsrrer 1� Bird, Cta�Mman ! OIL 13, Ef93 1 BOOK 90 rnF.915 NOV © 2 19 BOOK 90 Fncr sus The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 17, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE obert M. Reat n , AI THRU: Sasan Rohani, AICP 5' 4. Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM: John Wachtel Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning DATE: October 17, 1993 RE: Susanne E. Irwin, Robert H. Irwin, and Peter Irwin Request to Rezone Approximately 7.5 -acres from RS -6 to RM -6 (RZON 93-07-0150) It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of November 2, 1993. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS This is a request to rezone approximately 7.5 acres of property located on the east side of S.R. AlA, north of the Town of Indian River Shores and south of the Grand Harbor Beach Club. The request involves rezoning the subject property from RS -61 Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre). The owners of the subject property, Susanne E., Robert H., and Peter Irwin, intend to develop the site with multiple -family uses. On September 9, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve this request to rezone the subject property to RM -6. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property, zoned RS -6, is vacant uncleared land. The property to the north and west is zoned RM -6 and is also vacant and uncleared.. Land south of the site is within the Town of Indian River Shores and contains the Baytree residential development. This land is zoned R2A, Single-Family/Multiple-Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre), on the Town's zoning and future land use map. The Atlantic Ocean is east of the subject property. Future Land Use Pattern The subject property and land to the north and west is designated L-2, Low -Density Residential, on the County future land use map. The L-2 designation permits residential densities up to six units/acre. Land south of the site is within the Town of Indian River Shores and is designated R2A, Single-Family/Multiple-Family 24 M M Residential_District (up to 3 units/acre), on the Town's zoning and future land use map. Environment The eastern portion of the subject property is within a "VE" 100 year coastal flood and wave action hazard area, with a minimum base elevation requirement of 17 feet (National Geodetic Vertical Datum). The habitat consists of tropical hammock plant species adjacent to AlA, shifting to a coastal strand system closer to the dunes. This subject property may support the threatened southeastern beach mouse. The beaches of Indian River County are used as nesting beaches by the protected loggerhead and green sea turtles. Utilities and Services The site is within the Urban Service Area of the County. The North Beach Reverse Osmosis Plant provides potable water to the site. Wastewater service is available to the site from the Sea Oaks Wastewater Treatment Plant. Transportation System Access to the subject property is by as an urban principal arterial on th plan map. This segment of S.R. AlA approximately 100 feet of existing p Traffic Capital Improvements Plan it S.R. AlA is programmed for expansion ANALYSIS S.R. AlA, which is classified D future roadway thoroughfare Ls a two-lane paved road with iblic road right-of-way. The .dicates that this segment of to three lanes in 1994. In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the application will be presented. The analysis will include a description of: • concurrency of public facilities; • consistency with the comprehensive plan; • compatibility with the surrounding area; and • potential impact on environmental quality. Concurrency of Public Facilities This site is located within the county Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale development. The Comprehensive Plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community. To ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained, the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations require that new development be reviewed. For rezoning requests, this review is undertaken as part of the conditional concurrency determination process. Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the 25 F'mur 917 `NOV - 21993 ' BOOK. 90 PATE 91 NOV o 1993 subject property based upon the requested zoning district. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Property: ±7.5 acres 2. Size of Area to be Rezoned: 3. Existing Zoning Classification: 4. Proposed Zoning Classification: 5. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Existing Zoning Classification: 6. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Proposed Zoning Classification: #7.5 acres RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) 45 units 45 units As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of the County's Land Development Regulations, projects which do not increase density or intensity of use are exempt from concurrency requirements. This rezoning request is exempt from concurrency review because the requested zoning would not increase the total number of potential units that the site could accommodate. It is important to note that there will be no effect on service levels for any public facility as a result of the rezoning. In this case, a detailed concurrency analysis will be done in conjunction with site development. That concurrency analysis will address facility service levels and demand. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan. Rezoning requests must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map, which includes agricultural, residential, recreational, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are located in nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian River County. The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan. Policies are statements in the plan which identify the actions which the County will take in order to direct the community's development. As courses of action committed to by the County, policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this request are the following policies. - Future Land Use Element Policies 1.11 and 1.12 Future Land Use Policies 1.11 and 1.12 state that the L-2, Low - Density Residential -2 land use designation is intended for residential uses up to 6 units/acre. In addition, these policies 26 state that these residential uses must be located within an existing or future urban service area. Since the subject property is located within an area designated as L-2 on the county's future land use plan map and is located within the county's urban service area and the applicants propose to rezone the property to a residential use not greater than 6 units/ acre, the proposed request is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policies 1.11 and 1.12. While Future Land Use Element Policies 1.11 and 1.12 are particularly applicable to this request, other comprehensive plan policies also have relevance. For that reason, staff evaluated the subject request for consistency with all plan policies. Based upon that analysis, staff determined that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Compatibility with the Surrounding Area Staff's position is that granting the request to rezone the subject property to RM -6 will result in development which will be compatible with surrounding areas. Given the current development pattern on the north barrier island, the proposed rezoning is warranted. Presently, multiple -family development is allowed on all land bordering the subject property. Therefore, the requested RM -6 zoning will continue an existing development pattern. Although both districts are generally low density residential in character, there are some differences in terms of specific permitted and conditional uses. The following table lists only uses with permitting criteria that differ between the RS -6 and RM -6 zoning districts. The table also gives the permitting criteria for these uses under the RS -6 and RM -6 zoning districts. Uses such as single-family homes, which have the same permitting criteria in both zoning districts, are not listed in the table. -USE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RS -6 AND RM -6 USE RS -6 RM -6 noncommercial kennel & animal boarding house A - single-family attached - P duplex - P multiple -family - P guest cottages & servants quarters S - subdivisions w/special side yards A - bed and breakfasts - S residential resort - S group home (level II & III) - S ACLF (20 residents maximum) - S emergency services A P beach clubs - S tennis facilities - S yacht clubs - S health and fitness clubs - A limited public and private utilities A S P indicates permitted use A indicates administrative permit is required S indicates special exception is required - indicates use is not permitted 27 ® UV - Z 1993 BOOK 90 F'e U Q l I NOV - 21993 BOOK 90 FArc9 ��fl As the table indicates, there are several uses, besides multiple - family, that are not permitted in the RS -6 district but are permitted, either by right or conditionally, in the RM -6 district. One of these uses is residential resort, a use which has been the subject of some recent controversy. - Residential Resorts County Land Development Regulations (LDRs), require that residential resorts must meet several specific conditions to be approved. These conditions include requirements that: • at least 25% of the area of residential resort projects include property located within a CL, Limited Commercial, or CG, General Commercial zoning district; • residential resort projects must be a minimum of 50 acres in size; and no portion of a residential resort project shall consist of any portion of an existing or approved conventional residential project. These requirements effectively prohibit residential.resorts on the subject property. - Other Use Differences Other uses allowed in the RM -6 zoning district, but prohibited in the RS -6 zoning district, are generally residential or recreational in character and require special exception approval. Emergency services, which are permitted by right in the RM -6 district but require an administrative permit in the RS -6 district, are the only exception. The residential -character uses are bed and breakfasts, group homes, and Adult Congregate Living Facilities. The recreational -character uses are beach clubs, tennis facilities, and yacht clubs. Health and fitness clubs, which are prohibited in the RS -6 district, require an administrative permit in the RM -6 district. The conditions required to obtain special exception or administrative permit approval regulate setbacks, buffers, lighting, and other factors which may cause or mitigate potential impacts associated with these,.,uses. For these reasons, staff feels that the requested RM -6 zoning would be compatible with the surrounding area. Potential Impact on Environmental Quality Both single- and multiple -family residential development of the property would be subject to a number of environmental permits, Including land clearing, tree removal, and dune maintenance permits (as applicable). Additionally, the County's native upland plant community set-aside requirement will apply to the subject property. Any development east of the 1987 Coastal Construction Control Line will have to be approved by the state Department of Environmental Protection --Beaches and Shores Division. The state as well as the county have regulations restricting illumination of the beach during sea turtle nesting season (May 1 through October 31). The United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the County will require the developer to survey the site for the threatened beach mouse and other listed species before site plan approval. 28 M M r The proposed rezoning from RS -6 to RM -6 would not result in an increase in potential adverse environmental impacts associated with site development. Since multiple -family zoning facilitates the option of clustering development, the proposed zoning may, in fact, cause less stress to this coastal system than the current single- family zoning. Conclusion The requested zoning is compatible with the surrounding area, consistent with the comprehensive plan, and meets all concurrency criteria. The subject property is located in an area deemed suited for low-density, multiple -family residential uses and meets all applicable rezoning criteria. For these reasons, staff supports the request to rezone the subject property from RS -6 to RM -6. Recommendation Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve this request to rezone the subject property from RS -6 to RM -6. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. George Collins, Jr., attorney for the applicants, advised that his clients have been property owners of long standing in Indian River County. There being no others who wished to be heard, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION_by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance 93-31, amending the zoning ordinance and the accompanying zoning map from RS -6 to RM -6, for the property generally located on the east side of SR-A1A, north of the Town of Indian River Shores and south of the Grand Harbor Beach Club, as recommended by staff. W BOOK 90 FnUn9?1 Aft - 21993 BOOK 90 PAGE 922 ORDINANCE NO. 93- 31 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -6 TO RM -6, FOR THE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF S.R. AlA, NORTH OF THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES AND SOUTH OF THE GRAND HARBOR BEACH CLUB, AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and - WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: The South 500 feet of Government lot 3 as measured along the East right-of-way of State Road AlA and lying East of said right-of-way in Section 25, Township 31 South, Range 39 East. Together with the North 145.02 feet Government Lot 1 lying East of State Road AlA right-of-way Section 36, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, all being and lying in Indian River County, Florida. Be changed from RS -6 to RM -6. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Land Development Regulations. 30 ORDINANCE NO. 93- 31 Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 2nd day of November, 1993. This ordinance was advertised in -the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 13th day of October, 1993 for a public hearing to be held on the 2nd day of November, 1993 at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Tippin , and adopted by the following vote: Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Vice -Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY: Rich rd N. Bird, Chairman x �. ATTEST BY: Jeff ey . arton, Cler jjQQ11 ,J , Acknowledgment by the Department of Sta a of the State of Florida this day of , 1993. Effective Date: Acknowladgement from the Department of State received on -this day of , 1993, at A.M./P.M. and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY William G. Collins II, Deputy County Attorney Obert M. Keat n , A P Community Development Direct r u\v\j\irwin.ord 31 NOV - 2 19 3 —T— H�^•f"1!ri. int- __�_�_ Le:;af / I Risk Mgr. { /Jf/ BOOK 90 F'ACIF 9�jI NOV m 21993 �.00K 90 Fir, jF 924 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS - CLAYTON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS'S REPORT The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 25, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator 4; THRU: Jack Price, Personnel Director 99 H.T. (Sonny) Dean, General Services Direct FROM: Beth Jordan, Risk ManagNrounds r Lynn Williams, Buildings Superinten DATE: 25 October 1993 SUBJECT: Staff Recommendations; Clayton Environmental Consultants As a follow-up to the Board's October 19, 1993 meeting during which Millard Griffin, Clayton Environmental Consultants, made indoor air quality recommendations, we request Board consideration of the following staff comments at the November 2, 1993 meeting. 1. Retain the services of a qualified HVAC Engineering Consultant to study all current primary air handling systems (including ducts and vents) and determine If they can provide continuous delivery of 20 cfm per person of outdoor air as well as handle additional moisture loads Inherent with the Florida climate.... Staff concurs with this recommendation. Two (2) alternatives for facilitating this review are (1) through a Request for Proposals (RFP) from qualified HVAC engineering consultants or (2) through amendment of the current agreement with Gee & Jensen. While issuance of an RFP would elicit responses from several firms, an amended contract with Gee & Jensen would allow work to begin almost immediately. Staff estimates costs for this engineering review will be approximately $15,000.00. Further, staff recommends that the Gee & Jensen contract be amended to include this service. 2. Raise office temperatures until they are within the recommended comfort limits. Staff concurs with this recommendation and this will be done as soon as possible. 3. Add Inspection of Internal supply duct/fan coil Insulation to the regular Inspection checklist... This is currently done and will continue. 4. Allow the air handling systems to remain on during the weekend.... This is currently done and will continue. 5. Remove or cap the roof vent 'above the Engineering Department... This will be done by staff as soon as possible. 6. Remove and dispose of any ceiling tiles which are discolored or water stained.... This is currently done and will continue. 7. Clean all supply grilles thoroughly. Routine cleaning will continue by custodial staff, and additional cleaning will be done during regularly scheduled preventive maintenance. - 32 W 8. Remove solid debris from above ceiling tiles. Thoroughly vacuum/dust from tile tops with a high efficiency particulate air (NEPA) filtered vacuum.... Staff is currently awaiting further information from Clayton on the schedule for such cleaning and on the potential benefits of additional sanitization of the ducts. Staff recommends contracting with a specialty service capable of such clean-up. 9. Make sure all above ceiling chilled water and condensate pipes are Insulated to prevent external condensation. Staff believes this is related to Item 5 in that removal of the roof vent will prevent the introduction of untreated outdoor air. In addition, staff will inspect all pipes and insulate any areas which remain uncovered. 10. Inspect the structural ceiling and building envelope thoroughly during rainy weather to make sure there Is no leakage.... This is currently done and will continue. 11. Vacuum partitions, chairs, and carpets throughout the Utilities Department using a HEPA-filtered vacuum to remove respirable particulate.... In conjunction with Item 8, staff recommends a specialty service to perform this cleaning. 12. Consider extending or redesigning rooftop restroom vents/pipes such that they are (1) greater than 25 feet from any outdoor air Intake and (2) not directly upwind of any outdoor air intake. Staff has completed this work. 13. After all other recommendations have been Implemented, thoroughly clean Mr. Pinto's office (including above ceiling areas), replacing stained or water damaged ceiling tiles, as necessary. Consider returning Mr. Pinto's office to the control of the Utility Department air handling systems.... Staff will follow through with this recommendation. In summary, staff recommends amendment of the current Gee & Jensen contract for HVAC engineering consultant services and contract with a specialty cleaning service to effect the HEPA-filtered cleaning. Funding is requested from Reserves. All other recommendations will be completed by staff. Approved for Agenda: �mesChandler, County Administrator / / - --w --- '? _*� Date commissioner Adams inquired about the routine cleaning of the supply grilles, and General Services Director Sonny Dean advised that the cleaning people are supposed to clean them as needed. 33 BOOM 90 ruF.99 r W BOOK 90 NVJ- 926 . Commissioner Adams didn't feel that was routine or good enough. She would like to see them done on a regular basis, and Commissioner Eggert agreed. Commissioner Adams felt that ceiling tiles should be checked on a regular basis and any stained and discolored tiles replaced as soon as they are noticed. She asked if we are following what Clayton has told us to do, and Director Dean said we already have started to do these things. Administrator Chandler advised that the thrust of staff's recommendation is to follow to a tee what Clayton has recommended. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved amendment of the current Gee & Jensen contract for HVAC engineering consultant services at an estimated cost of $15,000.00; authorized a contract with a specialty cleaning service to effect ther HEPA- filtered cleaning; and authorized other action as set out in staff's recommendation. ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS PROJECTS The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 27, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., 1� Public Works Director SUBJECT: Engineering Services foxy Various Projects DATE: October 27, 1993 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The following Public Works Department projects have been funded in the FY 1993/94 County Budget: 1) Lindsey Road (49th St) Paving west of Kings Highway - Approx 900 LF $50,400 available - Developer's Construction Bond 2) 5th St. SW Paving and Drainage Improvements - Access to South County Middle School and High School $300,000 in Traffic Impact Fee Dist. 6 3) Gibson Street Paving - Existing south terminus to Sebastian City Line (600 L.F.) - City of Sebastian funding 50%/Petition Paving 50% 34 1—_-1 7-7 4) St. Johns .River Water Management District - Management and Storage of Surface Waters (MSSW) Permit - Vero Lake Estates Subdivision - Required for Paving 101st Avenue and 79th Street Funds available in VLE MSTU Fund 5) CR507 Roadway Realignment north of CR512 to Babcock Street Traffic Impact Fee Dist. 7 - $200,000 budgeted 6) 66th Avenue Paving and Drainage - 5th St. SW to 4th St. (1 mile) Traffic Impact Fee Dist. 8 & 9 - Special Assessment Funding possible - $300,000 budgeted The Public Works Department's staff would have difficulty designing all 6 projects prior to September 1994, unless Petition Paving Design and other project design is temporarily suspended. Currently, funds are budgeted and available in the various funds for professional services to design the projects. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The alternatives are as follows: Alternative #1 Develop a scope of work for the 6 projects and request proposals from local consultants. Projects 1, 2, and 3 are generally below the CCNA thresholds of $10,000 for planning/design fee and $120.,000 for construction cost. The CCNA procedures would not be required for projects 1, 2, and 3, but formal advertisement and selection will occur. Standard CCNA procedures will be used for Projects 4, 5, and 6. Alternative #2 Authorize staff to proceed through the Competitive Consultant Negotiation Act Procedures to recommend Consultants for projects. A prioritized short list of recommended consultants would be prepared for Board approval. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Alternative No. 1 is recommended. previously described. 35 Funding shall be as �pp BOOK 90 PA,UE 927 ,14 NOV ® 1993 BOOK 90 PA -998 Public Service Director Jim Davis pointed out an error in the RFP for Lindsey Road, explaining that it should read 900 L.F. instead of 1200 L.F. Chairman Bird understood we are talking about engineering, services for design and permitting, not just consultants to tell us what to do. He wondered if it would make more sense to put all the projects in one RFP package, but Director Davis explained that staff would like the flexibility to use one or more engineering firms. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously authorized staff to develop a scope of work for the 6 projects and request proposals from local consultants, as set out in Alternative #1 of staff's memorandum. MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION NO. 1 - BROWN AND CALDWELL - SOUTH COUNTY UTILITY SERVICE AREA The Board reviewed the following mamo dated October 27, 1993: DATE: OCTOBER 27, 1993 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PIN DIRECTOR OF UTILI SERVICES STAFFED AND PREPARED BY: WILLIAM_F4 McCAIN CAPIT P ECTS ENGINEER DEPAR ILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION NO. 1 BY BROWN AND CALDWELL FOR THE SOUTH COUNTY UTILITY SERVICE AREA BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: On September 7, 1993, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved a modification to the Master Plan (see attached agenda item and minutes) for the South County service area by Brown and Caldwell, the Utilities Master Plan consultant. This modification was required due to the County's acquisition of General Development Utilities, Inc., in the South County service area. The consultant has completed the water and wastewater portion of this task and the Utilities Department is preparing engineering design contracts to implement same. To this end, we have come to the Board of County Commissioners to present these Master Plan modifications for approval. RECOMMENDATION: The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the adoption - of the Master Plan modifications, as presented. 36 Utilities Director Terry Pinto advised that the purpose of this presentation today is to explain what changes will be made in the south county area for water and sewer with respect to our master plan. Since the master plan goes beyond the year 2000, a lot of the costs presented today are not immediate costs but costs that go out through the entire planning time. Of utmost importance is that all of the capital costs fit very comfortably within our present impact fee structure and no increases in impact fees are needed to cover this. As a matter of fact, we are talking about a savings of $2.4 -million and picking up two thousand customers plus the possibility of an additional thousand or so. When this program is completed, we will have eliminated 7 treatment plants. We also will have reduced or possibly eliminated the excess flows from the south county area to the City of Vero Beach. There is the possibility of eliminating expansion of our Sea Oaks treatment plant that would be necessary to service the Walt Disney development, but it all hinges on putting this part of the master plan into realty. Zack Fuller, vice president of Brown & Caldwell, reviewed the Executive Summary of the Addendum to the IRC Water, Wastewater and Effluent Reuse and Disposal Master Plan, dated November 2, 1993: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADDENDUM TO THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY WATER WASTEWATER, AND EFFLUENT REUSE AND DISPOSAL MASTER PLAN November 2, 1993 37 V - 2 1993 BOOK 90 PA F 9 ,9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BOOK 90 FA^E 9P30 In September of 1993 the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved a negotiated purchase agreement with General Development Utilities (GDU). The purchase was negotiated by the Indian River County Utility Department. GDU is located in the southeast corner of the County (Figure ES -1) and provides wastewater treatment, effluent reuse, and water distribution facilities for this portion of the County. Water was purchased from the County through a bulk water agreement. In conjunction with the Board approval of the GDU purchase in September, the preparation of an addendum to the adopted Master Plan was also approved. The Board had adopted the comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Effluent Reuse and Disposal Master Plan in March of 1993. The area served by GDU was excluded from the master planning area because wastewater treatment, effluent reuse and water services were already provided. With the purchase of the GDU facilities the County determined that it was necessary to evaluate the impact of adding the additional service area into the long _ term planning for the County's water, wastewater and effluent reuse systems. WATER DISTRIBUTION The evaluation of the water distribution system not only considered the existing GDU water distribution system, but also considered the entire County distribution system with GDU as an element of that system. As was the case with the Master Plan the water distribution system was evaluated to identify immediate improvements necessary to bring the system up to County standards, and improvements necessary to meet future flow conditions (Year 2010). The water demand projections developed in the adopted Master Plan were used for this evaluation; however, the existing water demands were calibrated using actual water use records for GDU. The following modifications to the water distribution system are required based upon the analysis of the system: Immediate Needs 1. Replace 6 -inch pipe with 8 -inch pipe in the Garden Grove development in the cul & sac of 6th Avenue. This is required to meet max day flow plus fire flow conditions. Future Needs 2. Install a distribution main on the north GDU boundary. This project was previously identified in the adopted Master Plan and will be triggered by growth North of GDU. W.\7763\REP0RT4D[ CSUMM ES -1 38 November 1993 r Executive Summary 'BROWN AND C A L D W E L L The adopted Master Plan also identified a Project 29 which included a 16 -inch distribution pipe through the center of the GDU site. The analysis of the County distribution system, with the GDU system included, indicates that this project is no longer necessary. The existing GDU distribution system contains the necessary capacity to enable the County to meet 2010 flow conditions without the 16 -inch distribution pipe. The revised Indian River County, Proposed Potable Water Transmission Main Projects Tables are found at the end of Chapter 2. These tables indicate in which phase improvements need to be completed, the purpose for proposed changes, the trigger event which the County can use to time implementation of the project, estimated additional equivalent residential units served, and the estimated capital cost. These tables are from the adopted Master Plan and have been modified to reflect the following changes: 1. Addition of Project 3C -- 8 -inch pipe in the Garden Grove development in the cul de sac of 6th Avenue. Estimated cost $72,000: 2. Deletion of Project 29 -- 16 -inch pipe through center of GDU site. Estimated cost $915,000. Therefore, with the addition of one project and the deletion of another project, the overall proposed water transmission line project cost have been reduced an estimated $843,000. WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM The South Region wastewater service area has been redefined by the purchase of the GDU facilities. Not only has the wastewater collection service area been expanded, but the location of the proposed South Region Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) is recommended to be changed to the existing GDU WWTP location.'The The existing 0.85 MGD GDU WWTP would be expanded to meet regional needs. The proposed modifications to the South Region wastewater service area result in changes to the quantity, distance and direction of wastewater transmission. Consequently, the entire South Region wastewater collection system was re-evaluated. Hydraulic modeling of the wastewater collection system was performed to identify existing system deficiencies and to develop proposed expansions to meet future demands. The hydraulic modeling included evaluation of existing pump station adequacy as well as force main capacity. Based on this analysis, the following capital improvements were identified: W.V763W"0RrF MMUMM ES -3 November 1993 W ® 1 BOOK 90 FAGS 9.31 Nov = 2 1993 Executive Summary ROOK 90 F'd;F 932 BROWN AND CALDWELL 1. Replacement of existing pumps with higher capacity pumps at the Tropic Village North, Orange Terrace, Crystal Woods, and Colonial Gardens lift stations. The hydraulic problems at these lift stations were identified by the more detailed modeling performed in this study, but were not a result of redirecting flow to the GDU WWTP. (Estimated cost $120,000). 2. Installation of a regional repump station near Oslo Road to convey wastewater from the previously proposed WWTP site to the GDU WWTP. (Estimated cost $500,000). 3. Installation of a force main from the proposed regional repump station to the GDU WWTP. (Estimated cost $1,600,000). r 4. Installation of force main on Oslo Road from 27th Avenue to US 1. This project was previously identified in the adopted Master Plan; however, some force main sizes were changed. (Currently under construction). 5. • Installation of a force main on 27th Avenue. This project was previously identified in the adopted Master Plan; however, some force main sizes were changed. (Estimated cost $772,000). 6. Installation of force mains to the Vista Royale and Vista Gardens WWTPs to allow removal of these facilities from service. These projects were identified previously in the adopted Master Plan. (Estimated cost $720,000). 7. Installation of force mains on 1st Street SW and Oslo Road (west of 27th Avenue) to provide service to critical septic tank areas in the west part of the South Region. The need for these projects was not a result of the purchase of GDU. (Estimated cost $598;000). The total capital cost for the recommended modifications is $5,440,000, $2,200,000 of which was previously identified. The total additional cost identified by this study is $3,240,000. The reasons that additional capital improvement needs were identified in this study are two fold, 1) the more in-depth analysis of the collection system resulted in identification of additional needs, and 2) the addition of GDU to the service area and the decision to move the regional WWTP to the GDU site resulted in the need for additional capital improvements. W.7763WMR1N9W SUMM ES -4 November 1993 .i 40 r � � r � � Executive Summary - BROWN AND C A L D W E L L WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION Wastewater generated in the South Region is currently conveyed to the City of Vero Beach WWTP where it is treated and disposed. Previous plans called for diversion of wastewater from the City of Vero Beach WWTP to a proposed South Region WWTP to be located near Oslo Road. With the purchase of the GDU system, it is recommended that wastewater flows be diverted to the 0.85 MGD GDU WWTP and that the GDU WWTP be upgraded and expanded as required to treat all South Region wastewater flows to reuse standards. This recommendation is made based on the following factors: • Additional Staff Requirements - If a second WWTP were constructed, the County would have to add operators for 24-hour staffing of the new facility to meet regulations for producing reuse level effluent. • Operations and Maintenance Costs - Addition of a second facility would substantially increase operations and maintenance costs. • Regulatory Compliance - Compliance monitoring and reporting costs would double. • Available Capacity - The GDU WWTP currently has about 400,000 gpd of available capacity. This available capacity would allow diversion of wastewater flows from the City of Vero Beach. Current wastewater treatment capacity allocations with the City .of Vero Beach are not adequate to treat the additional 100,000 gpd of wastewater flows expected from the Oslo Road area in the near future. The GDU WWTP would provide the additional capacity required to meet these needs. Three expansions have been identified to serve the growth within the expanded South Region service area. The expansions are planned to provide additional capacity by the year 1995 (1.15 MGD expansion -- total capacity 2.0 MGD), 2000 (1.0 MGD expansion -- total capacity 3.0 MGD), and 2003 (1.0 MGD expansion -- total capacity 4.0 MGD). The 1995 expansion is planned to coincide with growth of the service area and adding additional service area. Vista Royale and Vista Garden WWTPs are assumed to come off line in 1997. At this time flow will be diverted to the*South Region WWTP located on the GDU site. The estimated cost of the proposed expansions to the GDU South Region WWTP, through the 2010 master planning period, are $10,800,000 as compared to expansion costs of $13,200,000 for the previously proposed South Region WWTP as identified in the adopted Master Plan. By the County using and expanding the GDU facility rather and building the proposed South Regional WWTP north of Oslo Road the net reduction in capital cost is approximately $2,400,000. W.7763%RIP0R7jDcBCSUMM ES -5 Novmba 1993 41 RooK OV _ 2 199 Nov 2 1993 Boor 99 F -Dr 934, Executive Summary BROWN AND C A L D W E L L EFFLUENT REUSE The adopted Master Plan recommends a County -wide reuse network consisting of a muse force main which would loop around the County to collect effluent from WWTPs and deliver effluent to muse sites. The force main path was selected to take advantage of as many muse options as possible. All four regional WWTPs to the west of the Indian River (North Region, Central Region, West Region, and South Region) would discharge effluent into the reuse network. The proposed interconnected muse system would provide the County with a high degree of flexibility and' reliability. The addition of GDU to the South Region has very little impact on the County -wide reuse network because the increase in total effluent flow into the network will be minor. On the other hand, the recommendation to use the GDU WWTP as the Regional WWTP will require the addition of effluent force main from the GDU WWTP to the reuse loop. The estimated cost of this project is $902,000. The effluent force main from the previously the reuse loop would not be necessary,p y proposed WWTP site to Therefore, the overall effluent reuse costs have been increased an mated estimated $842,000. n in cost of $60,000. SUMMARY The effect of the County expanding the South Region service area in terms of capital projects and cost are as follows: I. Water Distribution ($ 843,000) 2. Wastewater Collection $3,240,000 3. Wastewater Treatment ($2,400,000) 4. Effluent Reuse 1 842,000 Net Change ($ 839,000) By the County purchasing and expanding the South Regional service area they will be able to serve a larger number of customers with a minimal additional capital cost outlay: This is primarily due to purchasing an existing system and taking advantage of capacity and This already available. W 17763\REP0Rr,McECSUMM ES -6 1 42 Novemba 1993 � � r Summary of Capital Improvement Changes nth Water Distribution System GDU 1 Delete Project 29 ............................ ($915,000) 2 Garden Grove Pipe Upsizing ................... $72,000 Subtotal ($843,000) Wastewater Collection System 1 Replacement of Existing Pumps ........... ...... $120,000 2. Regional Pump Station ........................ $500,000 3. Force Main From Oslo Road to GDU ...................... $1,600,000 4. Other Force Main Projects .................. $1,020,000 Subtotal $3,240,000 WWTP Expansions and Upgrades ................ ($2,400,000) Effluent Reuse Sytem 1 Force Main From GDU to Reuse Loop .............................. $902,000 2. Force Main From Old WWTP Site to Reuse Loop ......................... ($60,000) 3. Additional GDU Percolation Ponds........................................ $0 Subtotal $842,000 BC Brown &A CWftd Consultants 1111=%;7 OMM00. FtoR2M Total $839,000 43 Without GDU ($915,000) $0 ($915,000) $120,000 $0 $0 $1,020,000 $1,140,000 F GDU Seperate ($9151000) - $72,000 ($843,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,700,000 $0 $4700,000 $225,000 $2,357,000 OV , 2 99BOOK 90 F:aGE 935 J BOOK �® rnF 9,636 NOV - 21Q9 Chairman Bird thanked Mr. Fuller for his excellent presentation. Director Pinto advised that no action is needed at this time. Copies of the Executive Summary have been distributed to the Board for their perusal, but the actual changes of the master plan will be brought back to the Board for approval of their incorporation into the master plan. SOUTH REGION WASTEWATER REPUMP STATION TRANSMISSION SYSTEM - WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 1 - MASTELLER AND MOLER, INC. The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 7, 1993: DATE: OCTOBER 7, 1993 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILI SERVICES PREPARED WILLIAMF. c IN AND STAFFED CAPITAL ENGINEER BY: DEPAR UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: SOUTH REGION WASTEWATER RSPDHP STATION TRANSMISSION SYSTEM - WASTEWATER WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. IIS -93 -28 -CS �IA� On September 28, 1993, the Board of County Commissioners approved a continuing services contract with Masteller and Moler, Inc., for wastewater collection system design services (see attached continuing services contract). With the County closing on its purchase of GDU's South County Wastewater Treatment Plant, we will now be diverting sewer flow from Oslo Road (the site of our previously planned South County WWTP) south to the GDU WWTP (see attached exhibit by Brown and Caldwell). The Utilities Department has negotiated a contract with Masteller and Moler for the design, construction; administration, and inspection of the above -referenced project. The estimated construction cost for this project is $1,752,151.50, -which includes a 10% contingency. The negotiated fee for design and inspection is $131,000.00, with an additional $31,000.00 for surveying services (see .attached Work Authorization No. 1 for details). The fee is a lump sum negotiated contract, which is well within the acbeptable range for a project of this magnitude. For comparison purposes --if the Farmer's Home curves were utilized, the fees would be $176,120.00± for engineering and inspection alone. The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve 'the attached Work Authorization No. 1 with Masteller and Moler, Inc., as presented. 44 w ON -MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved Work Authorization No. 1 with Masteller and Moler, Inc., as recommended by staff. WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 1 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION The Board reviewed the following memo dated October 27, 1993: TO: Board of County 11Commissioners e2,6K�V V FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: October 27, 1993 RE: LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION The Indian River County Legislative Delegation Meeting will be on November 17, 1993, at 8:30 a.m. in the Vero Beach City Hall. Indian River County has reserved a spot on the agenda to discuss matters of concern to the County. Although this year there are no Special Acts requiring presentation before the delegation, the delegation is prepared to accept comments on subjects of interest to the County which could be corrected by General Acts filed by a`member of the delegation itself. Indian River County, as a member of the Treasure Coast Council of Local Governments (TCCOLG), represented by Commissioner John Tippin, has approved a slate of the ten issues attached to this memo. In addition to the issues presented by the TCCOLG, the County may present other items on its own. Items which Commissioners have expressed interest in include small business economic aid, affordable housing, environmental mitigation, and getting regional planning councils out of mediation of local government disputes. REQUESTED ACTION: Request direction from the Board on which items it may wish to present to the Local Legislative Delegation on November 17 in addition to those being presented by the TCCOLG. 45 BOOK 90 FacF 937 NOV ® 21993 � I Fr,_ NOV - 2 1993 BOOK Mr, 13 Attorney Vitunac advised that OMB Director Joe Baird would like to request a General Law amendment of Section 192.091, Florida Statutes, which would remove exemption for school boards and municipalities from paying their own commissions to the Tax Collector and Property Appraiser. Director Baird advised that he also would like to request adequate state funding of the court system (witness fees, court costs). Commissioner Eggert wished to see us object to having to use the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council as a mediator. She supported the following: 1) A way to insure larger buses for the transportation disadvantaged; 2) Additional small business administration aid for small counties; and 3) Possible ways for us to reduce the cost of affordable housing. Commissioner Macht wanted to present and objection to the State's unfunded mandates and an objection to the 1 -cent advance charge that recently went -into effect. Commissioner Tippin advised that he would present the following 10 items prioritized by the Treasure Coast Council of Local Governments: SENT BY CITY OF VERO BEACH ;10-27-93 ;11:19AM MAIL ROOM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 4 1/ 1 7(~RICAS URI C0A6 J"^11' D. X LOCAL LIST OF LEGISLATIVE ISSUES IN PRIORITY ORDER 1993 1. Florida State Retirement System 2. Modifications to Homestead Exemption 3. Establishing a Partial Year Assessment for New Construction and Renovation d. Unfunded Mandates AssiOnpd Inca] Governments by State a.nd Federal Governments' 5. Treasure Coast University Campus 6. Prostitution 7. Dry Line Utilities Permitting by Department of Environmental Protection 8. Mandatory Public Hearings on New Electrical Transmission Linc 9. St. Lucle.Rtver/Indian River Lagoon Cleanup 10. "See-through" Guardrails un New Bridges 46 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved the items discussed, to be presented by the Commissioners and appropriate staff. NOTE: Please see Minutes of November 9, 1993 for list of items actually presented to the Legislative Delegation. GRANT QUESTIONS Commissioner Eggert explained that after reading a letter written by OMB Director Joe Baird to Sheriff Wheeler regarding consideration of the Police Hiring Supplemental Grant, it occurred to her that we might make up a generic list of questions that need to come to the Board with each grant application. OMB Director Joe Baird distributed copies of his letter dated October 29, 1993: Telephone: (407) 567-8000 October 29, 1993 B" RD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Sheriff Gary C. Wheeler Indian River County Sheriffs Office 4055 41st Avenue Vero Beach, FL 32960-1808 Dear Gary: Suncom Telephone: 224-1011 I have received a copy of the letter requesting that you be added to the November 2, 1993 Board of County Commissioners agenda regarding consideration of the Police Hiring Supplemental Grant. As the Budget Director for the County, I am concerned about what current financial impact this will have as well as long term impact. Therefore, I have the following questions: 1. Is the Police Hiring Supplemental Grant a 100% grant or does it require a County match? 2. If there is a match where will the match come from? 3. Does the grant cover capital costs or start-up costs affiliated with a new police officer? 4 47 F'r�UC V►�� L_,NOV -21,993 NOV - 2 1993 BOOK 4. Can you pay for existing officers under the grant or are you considering adding additional officers? If so, how many? 5. How many years is the grant for? After the grant is over are you obligated to fund the supplemental police officers for any additional period of time? 6. What is the total cost of adding each officer (including capital, start-up and operating)? 7. What is the cost of each officer to the County in 1993/94 after 7 the grant match? ° 8. What is the total cost of all officers you plan to hire in 1993/94 after the grant match? 9. What will the cost be over a five year period to the County? If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, jMJseph . Baird B Director ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously directed staff to prepare a generic type of form to be filled out prior to any type of grant application being before the Board. 90 FACE940 FACo LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE Commissioner Macht explained that he could not attend the conference on December 1, 2, and 3, but felt that someone ought to attend. Commissioner Tippin said he would try to go, and Chairman Bird thought he probably would attend also. ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved out -of -county travel for Commissioners to attend the FACo Legislative Conference. - 48 SOLID WASTE -DISPOSAL DISTRICT The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment the Board would reconvene sitting as the Board of Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal District. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 10:45 a.m. ATTEST: J. arton, Clerk 49 Richard N. Bird, Chairman Bou 90 PACE 941