Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/31/1995MINUTES ATTACHED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1995 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1840 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman (Dist. 3) Fran B. Adams, Vice Chairman (Dist. 1) Richard N. Bird (Dist. 5) Carolyn K. Eggert ( Dist. 2 ) John W. Tippin (Dist. 4) James E. Chandler, County Administrator Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board PAGE 9:00 A.M. 1. Courthouse Regulations (memorandum dated January 23, 1995) 2. Malcolm Pirnie Assessment Program and Waste Composition Study ( backup previously distributed) 3. Preliminary Budget Status Report (backup separate) 4. Old Courthouse Study ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: 5. Resolution adding a City of Vero Beach representative to the (old) Courthouse Ad Hoc Committee. 6. Tax Collector Karl Zimmermann regarding office space. 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 X408 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF MEETING. L Tuesday, January 31, 1995 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, January 31, 1995, at 9:00 a.m. Present were Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman; Fran B. Adams, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; Carolyn K. Eggert; and John W. Tippin. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Patricia Ridgely, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order and asked the County Attorney to advise the authority and latitude for the meeting. County Attorney Vitunac advised that the meeting was a special meeting only because the Board normally would not meet today, that it was not a workshop, but they may take motions and treat it as any other meeting. He continued that it was advertised and that there was only one addition to the agenda, a resolution on the Old Courthouse Ad Hoc Advisory Committee adding a member of the City of Vero Beach. (Clerk's Note: See page 2 for additions.) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING TUESDAY. JANUARY 31, 1995 9:00 AM - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1840 25th STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 1. Courthouse RegWations 2. Malcolm F"rnie Assessment Program and Waste Composition Shmm 3. Preptninary Suaget Stam Report 4. Old Courthouse Study Anvone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meenng will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which indudes the tesnmony and evidence upon which the appeal will be based. Anyone wno neeas a special accommodation for this meeting may contact the county's Americans With Disabilities Act JADAI coordinator of 567-8000, x408. at least 48 hours in aavance of meetinq, "tr fil January 31, 1995 60W.r+M. is I ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDMEMERGENCY ITEMS Chairman Macht requested the addition of a resolution amending Resolution 95-11 in order to add a City of Vero Beach representative to the Courthouse Ad Hoc Committee. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously added the above item to the Agenda. Later in the meeting, Administrator Chandler recommended the Board hear from Tax Collector Karl Zimmermann concerning office space. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously added the above item to the Agenda. COURTHOUSE REGULATIONS The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 23, 1995: To: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman 9** DATE: January 23, 1995 RE: Courthouse Regulations On January 19, 1995, the Courthouse Advisory Committee approved the attached rule for protection of the air in the new County courthouse. If approved by the Board of County Commissioners this rule would go into effect immediately and, it is hoped, would help to prevent "sick building syndrome." A copy of the rule would be given to all tenant groups. Requested Action: That the Board approve the attached rule and have it disseminated to all departments in the courthouse. January 31, 1995 2 5a 94 my 200 O r -I MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, to approve Indian River County Courthouse Property Control Regulation #1 as presented. Under discussion, Commissioner Adams asked how the rules would be enforced using as an example the "no smoking" rule, and County Attorney Vitunac advised that rules of the property owner (the County) were under consideration; that it was not an ordinance with penalties such as a fine or imprisonment. Infractions of the rules could result in speaking to an employee's supervisor or a tenant's eviction, that it was strictly a policy matter. He advised that State law prohibits smoking in public buildings. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the MOTION CARRIED unanimously. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE Property Control Regulation #1 Building Subject to Rule: Issuing Authority: Authority for Rule: County Representative Responsible for Reporting Violations to and Answering Questions re Rule: Statement of Policy: Indian River County Courthouse 2000 16th Avenue Vero Beach, FL 32960 Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Section 125.01(1)(c), F.S. Section 386.201 et seq., F.S. H. T. "Sonny" Dean General Services Director (407)567-8000, Ext. 223 Because of the recent difficulties with sick building syndrome in new public buildings, which have included serious illnesses to workers and significant public expense for repair and restoration of the buildings, Indian River County has taken every conceivable step to ensure that the air quality in the new courthouse is maintained in a safe and healthy condition. Once the building is occupied, to maintain it in a safe and healthy condition requires the adoption of reasonable rules concerning contaminates brought into the building and will require the cooperation of all tenants and the public in the building. K January 31, 1995 BOOK 94 Pni-20-1 Statement of Rules: Rule 1.1 There shall be no areas designated as smoking areas in the court- house and any smoking which is done outside of the building shall be done at a sufficient distance from doorways and other air intake structures so that the exhaled smoke will not enter the building. Rule 1.2 There shall be no cooking in the building other than by microwaves or toasters. Rule 1.3 There shall be no smoke -emitting devices brought into the building except evidence. Rule 1.4 There shall be no gas -emitting devices brought into the building except evidence. Rule 1.5 Any new furniture shall be cleared with the County representative before being brought into the building. Rule 1.6 No alteration of the building, including holes in the walls or blocking of ducts or other such activity, shall be done without prior County authorization. Rule 1.7 Wall hanging devices shall be approved in advance by the County representative. Personal pictures and diplomas may be attached with customary nails and hooks. Rule 1.8 No one shall adjust the thermostat or HVAC controls of the building without prior authorization of the County representative. Rule 1.9 Violations of this rule shall be reported to the County representative. DONE AND ORDERED this �/ day of County Commissioners of Indian River Coun , Flor Chairman. 1995, by the Board of through 14s undersigned Kenneth 1k. Macht Chairman Commissioner Bird suggested there is a need for directional signs in the new Courthouse and asked if there is a plan for some. Administrator Chandler responded that staff could look into the matter. Clerk of the Circuit Court -Jeff Barton advised that Building and Grounds is getting some information and costs. He declared that the information booth and maps have proved helpful and daily users are finding their way quite well now, but others are getting lost. He agreed that directional signs were necessary. The Chairman determined that General Services was working on the problem. REGULATION #1 ON FILE WITH AGREEMENTS IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 4 January 31, 1995 BOOK 94 mu 202 _I MALCOLM PIRNIE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY Chairman Macht announced the item and advised that backup materials had been previously distributed. Utility Services Director Terry Pinto explained there were two studies conducted by consultant, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., namely the Waste Composition Study, required by the Department of Environmental Protection to analyze the waste stream, and the Evaluation of the In -Place Solid Waste Disposal Assessment Program. Director Pinto advised the representatives of Malcolm Pirnie are here this morning to make their presentation to the Board but the Board is not being asked to take any action at this meeting. He explained that prior to the preliminary budget hearing for SWDD in July, staff for the Solid Waste Disposal District would formulate recommendations for modifications to the assessments and to policy. Commissioner Bird asked how these studies related to the input received at the public hearing held December 14, 1994, and Director Pinto advised that the hearing was held in order to hear the concerns/ suggestions of the public, primarily the commercial users, in order to provide staff with ideas for the type of changes they would need to recommend and the study provides them with factual information for those changes. Commissioner Bird asked how that public input was helpful since it was so late in the process, and Director Pinto explained that while the study was to look at factual detail, the concerns of the users had to be addressed in the study. Staff can now begin to implement some of the consultant's concerns with the present system and draw up specific policy. Following that, it will be even more important to sit down with the people involved to make sure that the suggested policy changes address their concerns. Director Pinto believed that one of the most important results would be changes to set out specifically what can be used for appeal in the petition procedure and how the Board may give or not give relief . As set up now, the burden is on the petitioner to prove he's not receiving the benefit. What staff will be able to do is establish new criteria and categories, and give the Board the ability to reach a decision based on clearer and more specific standards. Commissioner Eggert asked how that could be and referred to a sentence on page 5-4 of the Assessment Program: "However, since the system appears equitable, there is little reason to consider alternatives." Director Pinto explained that in looking at the E January 31, 1995 Boa 94 ouc other alternatives, it becomes very obvious that what we have is actually the best for the county and the users, that it is sound, but just needs some refinement. Commissioner Bird asked if we have a way to monitor what is going into the Landfill each day, and if so, could we differentiate how much is coming from commercial and how much is coming from residential and then, hopefully, apply those numbers to see if there is a fair relationship to what they are paying. If the equation could be balanced, so each would pay their fair share, then an equitable billing method could be established. Director Pinto advised that dollars -and -cents was not part of the study, and suggested the Board had to look through the budget and decide what commercial and residential users should be charged. The study would give them the information upon which they can base their decision. He cited curbside recycling as an example of benefit to the residential and not to commercial; therefore, the costs were distributed among the residential users. Commissioner Eggert asked what makes up the charge and why it isn't being charged to vacant land, and Director Pinto explained that the base charge was based strictly on the financial needs of the operation of the District. The financial needs are comprised of fixed or capital costs plus variable costs, which are directly related to how much waste is being generated. He reasoned the assessments need to be based on true benefit and explained the planning process for future development and specific concurrency needs. Director Pinto believed that the most important part of the study is the composition of the waste which is now identified and enables them to make a better decision in directing the cost allocations. Raul Torres, an associate with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., opened the presentation by introducing.himself and following members of the team, who have been working with the Commission and the Solid Waste Disposal District for the last two years or so: Tim Broder, the manager of the Florida operations of Malcolm Pirnie; Barbara Stevens, from Ecodata, statistical subconsultants; Sandy Gutner, project engineer from Malcolm Pirnie; and Teresa Ilan, president of TIA, Solid Waste Management Consultants, the prime subconsultant for performing the waste composition studies. 6 January 31, 1995 B®bK 94 fiuL 204 Mr. Torres gave credentials of Malcolm Pirnie and explained that their company has had little prior involvement with the Indian River County's solid waste program and, therefore, they could give an unbiased, independent view of the entire program. Teresa Ilan, of TIA located in Tampa, Florida, gave a lengthy multimedia (slides/charts/photos) presentation and reviewed in detail the waste composition study they had conducted. During the study, they worked closely with staff of the Solid Waste Disposal District, as well as the private haulers and the City of Vero Beach, in order to collect appropriate samplings for compilation of the data. She presented color photographic slides of the actual sorting of garbage as done by a group of Indian River County jail inmates who were trained and supervised by TIA personnel. Ms. Ilan reviewed in detail the composition of the waste generated in the study. She highlighted moisture content and recommendations for increase of recycling items such as glass, corrugated cardboard, newsprint, and food & organic (including citrus) wastes for possible composting. She stated that organics and corrugated cardboard are priorities for diversion from the Landfill. Increases in unrecycled newsprint and food wastes were noted, which easily could be attributed to influx of seasonal visitors. Commissioner Bird asked if information from the study would be used to help get the message out about recycling efforts by putting special emphasis on the areas needing improvement. Director Pinto indicated that those efforts already began once the study results were available. Staff has implemented multifamily recycling, with Board approval, and they plan to target corrugated cardboard. The report pushes for composting because so many organics are going into the Landfill. Much of the paper has been contaminated; it still has use in composting but not for the sale of paper. The moisture content portion of the study was important because it would dictate the size of a composting facility. Chairman Macht asked if there were any regulations to prohibit a separate site, less expensive to operate, for strictly composting. Director Pinto explained the care that would be required in selecting a composting site and that it would have to be closed vessel composting, due to odor controls and other problems. It is less costly inasmuch as it is built to handle a certain amount per day and never fills up, whereas a landfill does 7 BOOK 9 4 P,1r,,:2,05 January 31, 1995 r fill up and requires more land. Composting results in a saleable material. They would like to look at privatizing a composting operation, through proposals. Commissioner Adams thought there would not be a lot of money realized from it, but a resulting top soil could be used for roadsides to allow real grass to grow. She reasoned that over 50% of the Landfill was being taken up by two items that could be diverted to composting. She also suggested that excess citrus waste might be welcomed to supplement cattle feed. In addition, Commissioner Adams suggested looking at alternative disposal for C & D (construction and demolition) debris, such as a fishing reef, or other. Director Pinto replied that clean materials from C & D debris were being pulled out more and more and some privatizing has begun on use of concrete. Commissioner Bird submitted that multifamily buildings had space limitations and lacked recycling conveniences. Director Pinto advised that recycling containers had been placed around the condominium buildings wherever the owners of the complexes allowed them to be placed. He asserted that motivation and education were the key factors in accomplishing maximum recycling; getting the word out and keeping it in the forefront produced the best results. Many improvements have been made since the study began and we must continue reviewing both parts of the study, because the waste stream is changing daily. He cited examples of companies using the fact that they were recycling in their marketing and that the packaging industry is changing substantially as well. Commissioner Bird inquired about the feasibility of shredding. Director Pinto advised that they had looked into shredding and bailing, but the primary thrust was to get a large amount of material out of the waste stream. He believed there was minimal advantage for shredding in a landfill of our size. The Chairman called a 5 -minute recess at approximately 10:20 a.m. and reconvened the meeting at approximately 10:28 a.m. Mr. Torres resumed the presentation and reported extensively, using charts and slides, on the data and methodology used in their study. He further advised they would be recommending, for the Board's consideration, refinements to the existing assessment program. The Board's next step would be implementation of the recommendations. Sandy Gutner recounted the analysis sequence 'and the January 31, 1995 8 BOOK 94 I procedures used in field work performed to determine container densities. He called up the next speaker to explain the statistical analysis. Barbara Stevens advised that they had used the technique called multiple regression analysis, a fairly complicated statistical technique, to determine container densities. She explained the regression equation and covered Table 3-1, Initial Regrouping for Regression Analysis, and Table 3-2, Coefficients and Statistical Iterations. She concluded that the final equation explains over 92% of all the variation in container density, that is, that two factors, is it restaurant and manufacturing or isn't it, will give an explanation of more than 92% of the total variation in container density. They were pleased with the results and felt they were highly defensible and give a very good handle and methodology for proceeding to estimate the waste generated by commercial establishments. (CLERK'S NOTE: Chairman Macht left the meeting on a family emergency at approximately 10:31 a.m.) Mr. Gutner explained what makes up waste generation estimates. Essentially what they found was what type of business determined what type of waste. He described the factors in the equation used to calculate the assessment factor. He illustrated data used for each use code and clarified the correlation between the waste generation and square footage for each establishment. Mr. Gutner concluded that there is a distinct correlation between waste generation and square footage and the strength of that association varies a little, among different establishments. They found that over 80% of the in-place assessments were very close when compared with the factors they calculated independently. They believe that categories need to be reviewed further because of some variability in the data which may be explainable through additional data. He commented on the under -assessed and over - assessed categories and suggested shopping centers receive additional review. Mr. Gutner concluded by reviewing and explaining their recommendations and conclusions, namely: 1) review of the use codes in certain categories; 2) database should be refined and updated regularly; and 3) the dispute methodology should be expanded and additional considerations for appeal might include: property assessed under incorrect category; waste generated significantly 9 January 31, 1995 ROOK 94 f,A1je V207 different from assessment; special situations; and errors in assessment rolls. Mr. Torres added closing remarks and stated what was in place was really quite good. Their recommendations were really refinements of the current system and they will be pleased to assist the County in the implementation. Following the presentation, Commissioner Adams assumed the Chair, announced the Chairman had left on a family emergency, and opened the floor to questions from the Commissioners to be followed by comments from the public. Commissioner Adams asked why the calculations were based on square footage and Mr. Gutner explained the basis of their reasoning was on the existing system, that other bases could be used, but square footage generally doesn't change and it was considered equitable. Commissioner Bird expanded the query saying it always comes up about the equity of calculating based on square footage, that commercial users reason that the charge should be based on container size. He asked for a response to that comment. Mr. Gutner responded in detail concerning the findings of their study, impact of changes in amounts of recycled items, and believed as the program became more refined and recycling increased, that the assessments would be more equitable. Commissioner Bird asked if adjustments could be made mid -year based on fluctuating usage and Director Pinto responded in detail that although a particular user might generate less waste at certain times of the year, the fees do allow for variation; the County must provide the service all the time and the County's costs do not go down based on lesser usage by particular users at particular times. Commissioner Adams opened the meeting to public comment. Dennis Silver, owner of the Long Branch Saloon, asked questions of Commissioners Adams and Bird concerning volume, weight, and recycling and suggested a minimum fee based on volume, not weight. Carlton Miller, 9280 - 44th Avenue, Wabasso, worked in Broward County Solid Waste for 15 years and warned the Board not to get sold on composting, because of its low aesthetics and low nutrient 10 BOOK 94 FA,k 208 January 31, 1995 M M M value. From his experience, composting had a small market and a small return. With respect to disposal of logs and stumps, he suggested not purchasing stump grinders, but pit burners. (Commissioner Bird interjected that we are already burning.) He did not have a complaint, but believed the size of the container times the number of days of pick up should be the criteria used in assessments because that gives a good indicator of waste being picked up from an establishment. Commissioner Adams invited Mr. Miller to become involved so that his expertise would be available. Jerry Keen, 685 Colonial Drive, Vero Beach, felt there had been an in-depth study and maybe a little over done. He believed the best and most fair way to assess was by container size because similar businesses achieve different volumes. Square footage of a business doesn't determine how much waste is generated. Commissioner Bird asked how that would work practically; he had heard it for five years, was sick of hearing it, and wanted it put to bed once and for all. Director Pinto responded that the way the transfer station is used, there is no way to bill the users until we have mandatory trash pick up; possibly later we can do it but not now. It sounds great, but under the present circumstances, it will not work. Commissioner Eggert asked if SWDD correlates with the Tax Collector's Office and Occupational Licenses, and Director Pinto indicated it was not helpful, there would still be estimates based on categories. The current system just needs refinement and will continue to need refinement. All elements that go into the Landfill have to be treated differently and there are different associated costs. Commissioner Bird asked about billing practicality in a system based on container size and numbers of pickup; who do you bill and how often. Director Pinto told of all the variables and compared it to water meter sizes and water usage commitments. Commissioner Adams suggested staff look at it and come back with recommendations. Administrator Chandler stated there was an analogy on residential assessment and gave as example a retired couple versus a large family, both paying the same yet generating different amounts of waste. Stan Kahn, owner of Vero Beach KOA and S & S Investments, commented that he didn't understand the billing system and resented 11 January 31, 1995 Bou 94 r,A 0 having to pick garbage out of the recycle containers. He wondered where the credit is for recycling. Commissioner Tippin did not have any answers on what was fair and equitable. He believed it necessary to change the appeal process and felt that mandatory pickup would need to be considered very soon. Director Pinto advised of the process for the preliminary budget hearing for SWDD in July. Commissioner Adams wanted to discuss rates before then and Commissioner Eggert wished to also discuss, before July, the new appeal process and assessments. Commissioner Eggert felt that communication • was most important. Director Pinto advised that staff would be asking more administrative discretion in order to move categories or make reductions, if possible. Commissioner Adams. expressed thanks to everyone and advised they would not be taking any action today. REPORTS AND COPY OF SLIDES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 12 January 31, 1995 BOON 94 F,,fJE 210 s At approximately 12:01 p.m., Commissioner Adams left the meeting after announcing she had a 12:00 noon Committee meeting scheduled. PRELEVIINARY BUDGET STATUS REPORT The preliminary budget status report was DEFERRED BY CONSENSUS of the Board members present due to the absence of Chairman Macht and Commissioner Adams. OLD COURTHOUSE AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 31, 1995: TO: The Board of County Commissioners FROM: Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman - Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 31, 1995 SUBJECT: Amendment to Resolution No. 95-11 Establishing the Old Courthouse Ad Hoc Committee I recommend that the Old Courthouse Ad Hoc Committee which was created by Resolution No. 95-11 be amended to include a member to be appointed by the City Council of the City of Vero Beach. ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved (3-0, Chairman Macht and Commissioner Adams absent) Resolution 95-19 adding a member to the Old Courthouse Ad Hoc Committee. January 31, 1995 13 900K 94 r RESOLUTION NO. 95-19 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADDING A MEMBER TO THE OLD COURTHOUSE AD HOC COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, Resolution No. 95-11 established the Old Courthouse Ad Hoc Committee; and WHEREAS, representation on the Committee by the City of Vero Beach will provide greater input to the Committee, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: 1. The membership of the Old Courthouse Ad Hoc Committee is amended to include: g. A member appointed by the City Council of the City of Vero Beach 2. All other aspects of Resolution No. 95-11 remain unchanged. This resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner T i p p i n I and the motion was seconded by Commissioner B i r d , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Absent Vice Chairman Fran B. Adams Absent Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner John W. Tippin A y e The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 31 day of January , 1995. Attest: 1� — 11Q� Jef r Barton ler r �a v January 31, 1995 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN R ER COUNTY, FLORIDA By e eth R. Mad t, Chairman 14Boa 4 Fr i,212 Commissioner Adams returned to the meeting at approximately 12:04 p.m. and resumed the Chair. OLD COURTHOUSE STUDY The Board reviewed the following cost estimates in connection with the submission of an application for a grant to restore the Old Courthouse. I. INDIAN RNER COUNTY OLD COURTHOUSE 1/13/95 A. OLD C_01 TR THOi TSF - 26,480 S.F. 1. Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Inspection Report. - $1,000.00 2. Structural Inspection & Report - $1,700.00 3. Architectural Inspection & Report - $4,000.00 4. Schematic Drawings - $18,000.00 L Architectural b. Structural c. Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing 5. Construction Cost Estimate for Repairs - $3,500.00 6. Grant Writing - Il Total $34,700.00 + 10% Contingency S,3,470.On $38,170.00 Use $4Q,pQ0.Q0 7. Above Fees are based on a Renovation Cost of $65.00 per square foot. 8. Fees do not include: L Asbestos, Lead Paint & Air Quality Surveys b. Construction Documents for Building Renovation B. COURTHOUSE ANNEX -14,322 S.F. 1. Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Inspection Report - $1,000.00 2. Structural Inspection & Report - $1,500.00 3. Architectural Inspection & Report - $2,500.00 4. Schematic Repair Drawings - $10,000.00 5. Construction Cost Estimate - $2,000.00 6. Grant Writing - - 0 - TQral $17,000.00 + 10% Contingency 51,700.00 $18,700.00 Use $20,00n -on 7. Above Fees are based on a Renovation Cost of $40.00 per square foot. This price is exclusive of air conditioning. - 8. Fees do not include: a. Asbestos, Lead Paint & Air Quality Surveys b. Construction Documents for Building Renovation. 15 BOOK 1 January 31, 1995 Brief discussion was held concerning the urgency of approving this item and whether there would be sufficient optional sales tax funds to cover other projects of concern. Administrator Chandler advised that the new Courthouse had been completed at about $50,000 less than budgeted and that optional sales tax collection/expense for the year was approximately $278,000 to the good. Commissioner Eggert wished to ensure the additional funding necessary for the Library's new computer system. OMB Director Joe Baird explained that the Library had anticipated using some old equipment with the new system; however, that will not be possible, so they will require additional funds. He also pointed out that there was no contingency and suggested that some funds be reserved. The Board briefly discussed other projects, PEP reef, Kroegel property, and north county recreation and related estimated costs. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved (4-0, Chairman Macht absent) $40,000 to cover the fees to submit a grant application for the Old Courthouse. The Board asked that a full budget and optional sales tax presentation/report be on the agenda in two weeks. TAX COLLECTOR KARL ZBEUERMANN - DISCUSSION RE OFFICE SPACE Commissioner Adams asked if there were any additions to the agenda and Administrator Chandler recommended they add Tax Collector Karl Zimmermann concerning recent discussions on proposed renovations to the County Administration Building and possible relocation of constitutional officers' offices. Tax Collector Karl Zimmermann advised that he was aware that at the last meeting the Board had discussed possibly moving one of 16 ®OOK 94 P��,;i: 14 January 31, 1995 the constitutional officers out of the Administration Building and informed them of new computer equipment and systems in the works for the last year and a half for his office, which must be operational by August. If they wish to relocate his offices, any move would need to be completed prior to the computer's installation, which wouldn't leave much time. He advised that he had spoken with Chairman Macht about the old County Health .Building. Commissioners expressed concern about the old County Health Building regarding its size, layout, zoning, and limited parking. They felt that Mr. Zimmermann ought to visit the building before giving any more thought to moving into that particular building. Administrator Chandler added that it needed roof work and there would be other rehabilitation costs as well. Mr. Zimmermann advised that he was volunteering to move, but, in doing so, he wanted to improve the working environment and establish offices which would be satisfactory for 10 or 12 years. He went on to state his major concerns regarding a move: 1) the time factor relative to the new computer system; 2) upgrade/update of the facility to forestall any disruption in a few years; 3) need for more space, particularly lobby; 4) drive -up capability to improve service; 5) general condition of the building; and 6) a conference room for use as a training facility. Commissioner Bird did not believe moving to that building was possible or feasible for a variety of reasons. He had understood that Administrator Chandler was going to report back to the Board after speaking with Indian River County School Superintendent Roger Dearing about their future plans for expansion. He also expected estimated costs for expanding the Administration Building would be presented at that time. Administrator Chandler advised that staff was planning to present the Board a full report on this matter in about two weeks with all the new information they had learned. He advised he was unaware of Mr. Zimmermann's new system and time constraints and that General Services Director Sonny Dean was on vacation. Mr. Zimmermann advised of his conversations with Director Dean and the computer contractor and why time had become a critical factor. NO ACTION TAKEN. 17 January 31, 1995 BOOK 94 PAGE 215 Fr - Anthony Masi, 1700 Ocean Drive, Vero Beach, asked to be recognized and was informed that $40,000 had been approved earlier in the meeting for the old courthouse study. He informed the Board that Mr. Swartz was interested in putting a sports hall of fame into the old courthouse, and Commissioner Adams suggested that Mr. Swartz needed to develop a very quick interest level and commitment if, in fact, he wanted to begin reserving a spot in the building because there were a lot of folks lining up to get in. Mr. Masi advised that the Historical Society had designated him to be on the Old Courthouse Ad Hoc Committee and asked the status of the Committee and if a meeting schedule had been established. Commissioner Adams advised that he needed to contact Chairman Macht for information. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 12:25 p.m. ATTEST: J. Barton, Clerk January 31, 1995 on 18 enneth R. Macht, Chairman