HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/10/1997� MINUTES"TTTACHED =
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
A G E N D A
TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 1997
9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
County Administration Building
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman (District 2)
John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman (District 4)
Fran B. Adams (District 1)
Caroline D. Ginn (District 5
Kenneth R. Macht (District 3)
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
9:00 a.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER BACKUPPAGES
2. INVOCATION None
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. Caroline D. Ginn
4. ADDITIONS to the AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
11.E. FY 1997-98 Anti Drug Abuse Grant
13.A.1. Budget Workshop Dates
13.A.2. Appointment to Dodger Task Force
13.D. Report on Utilities Advisory Committee Meeting
5. PROCLAMATION and PRESENTATIONS
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Regular Meeting of May 6, 1997
B. Regular Meeting of May 13, 1997
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Received & Placed on File in Office of Clerk to
the Board: 1) Delta Farms Water Control District
Budget for FY 1997-98; 2) Fla. Dept. of Env. Reg.,
Rule Adoption Notice, Coastal Construction Con-
trol Line Permit Fees Effective June 16, 1997;
3) St. of Fla., Report on Audit of I. R. C. District
School Board for FY Ended 6130196; 4) Report
of Convictions, May, 1997
B. Approval of Warrants
(memorandum dated May 29, 1997)
C. Reappointment of Comm. Carolyn Eggert as
BCC Rep. on JEP Board
(memorandum dated May 22, 1997)
1-7
P,0'r 101 °';F IU��
8
�� 0i FACE 88. BACKUP
7. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd.): BOA PAGES
D. Accept with Regret Gerard Koziel's
Resignation as BCC Rep. on TC Health
Council
(letter dated May 26, 1997) 9
E. I.R.C. Recreation Committee Appointments
(letter dated May 30. 1997) 10
F. Release of Utility Easement - Lots 12 & 13,
River Boat Club S/D
(memorandum dated June 2, 1997) 11-17
G. Award Bid #7048 / Golf Course Turf Equip.
(memorandum dated June 2, 1997) 18-22
H. Lakewood Village Assumption of Impact
Fee Agreement
(memorandum dated June 3, 1997) 23-29
I. Budget Adjustment, Broward County Inmate
Revenue
(letter dated June 3, 1997) 30-31
8. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS and
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
None
9:05 A.M. 9. PUBLIC ITEMS
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. US 1 Water Main - East Side (39th St. to
Harbor Dr.) - Preliminary Assessment
Resolution III
(memorandum dated June 2, 1997) 32-50
2. AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
FOLLOWING CHAPTERS OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDRs):
CHAPTER 901, DEFINITIONS, CHAPTER
910, CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM; CHAPTER 911, ZONING;
CHAPTER 912, SINGLE FAMILY DEVE-
LOPMENT; CHAPTER 954, OFF-STREET
PARKING; CHAPTER 971, REGULATIONS
FOR SPECIFIC LAND USE CRITERIA; AND
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICT-
ING PROVISIONS, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE
(memorandum dated June 4, 1997) 51-106
B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
Presentation by the Civic Association
Planning for Solid Waste Disposal - Gene Winne
(no backup provided)
10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
None
- 11. DEPARTMENTAL MAW
PAGES
A. Community Development
Appointment of I.R.C. Representatives to the
Regional Overall Economic Development
Program Committee
(memorandum dated June 4, 1997) 107-118
B. Emergency Services
None
C. General Services
None
D. Leisure Services
None
E. Office of Management and Budget
None
F. Personnel
None
G. Public Works
1. Fla. East Coast Railway Company
Blanket License Utility Crossing Agreement
(memorandum dated June 3, 1997) 119-141
2. Experimental Test Plan for PEP Reef Sea
Turtle Monitoring - Amendment to Contract
(memorandum dated June 3, 1997) 142-150B
H. Utilities
• I.R.C. RFP 7025, Consulting Services for Civil Site
Work at the West Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant
(memorandum dated May 23, 1997) 151-154
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY
None
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert
B. Vice Chairman John W. Tippin
C. Commissioner Fran B. Adams
ElleK 101 PAGE '03"0.
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS (cont'd.): 60�'r
D. Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn
E. Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTSBOARDS
A. Emergency Services District
None
B. Solid Waste Disposal District
None
C. Environmental Control Board
None
15. ADJOURNMENT
PAGE 1731 BACKUP
PAGES
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
M meeting.
Meeting broadcast live on TCI Cable Channel 13 - rebroadcast 5: 00 p.m. Thursday through
S: 00 p. m. Friday
Falcon Cable Channel 35 - rebroadcast Friday evening
INDEX TO MINUTES
JUNE 109 1997
REGULAR MEETING OF
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1. CALL TO ORDER .... »............ »..................»...........................................................»».................... 1
2. INVOCATION ..... ......»............... ......................................... ».... »................. »... »»....................... ..... ------ 1
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ... »»....... »...................................................»................................................1
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS..............................»......................»..............1
5. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS.................»..................»....»»....»...».»......................».» 2
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ........ ......»»......... ».»............... ...»........... ........ ........»............ ......... .......... ....» 2
7. CONSENT AGENDA........».»»».»..........» ... ..... ............. »........... »....
»...............................».....»..»....»...» 2
A. REPORTS...................................................................................................................................................2
B. APPROVAL OF WARRANTS......................................................................................................................... 2
C. REAPPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONER CAROLYN EGGERT TO IEP BOARD ..................................................... 8
D. ACCEPTANCE OF GERARD KOziEL'S RESIGNATION WITH REGRET FROM TC HEALTH COUNCIL .................... 9
E. RECREATION COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT - SEBASTIAN - NANCY DIAMOND ............................................. 10
F. RELEASE OF UTII TTY EASEMENT - RIVER BOAT CLUB SUBDIVISION, LOTS 12 & 13 .................................. 11
G. AWARD BID #7048/GOLF COURSE TURF EQUIPMENT............................................................................... 12
H. LAKEWOOD VILLAGE MOBILE HOME PARK - ASSUMPTION OF IMPACT FEE AGREEMENT ........................... 13
I. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT, BROWARD COUNTY INMATE REVENUE................................................................. 13
9.A.L PUBLIC HEARING - US#1 WATER MAIN -EAST SIDE (39' STREET TO HARBOR DRIVE) -
PRELINIINARY ASSESSMENT, RESOLUTION III..............................»».......»»»..........»».....»....».».».....16
9.A.2. PUBLIC HEARING -PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS(LDR)............................... ».............................. »....................... ».................. ................. ......» 19
9.11. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM -PRESENTATION BY THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION (GENE
WRM) - PLANNING FOR SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL......».».........................»..................................... 44
11.A. REGIONAL OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM COMMITTEE -
DISCUSSION..»..».............»»»..».......................».........................»»»...»».........»................................». 45
11.E. 1997/98 ANTI-DRUG ABUSE GRANT APPLICATIONS..........................»..................................... 52
11.G L FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY BLANKET LICENSE UTILITY CROSSING
AGREEMENT........ ... »..»...... ».»......... »...».»....... »....... »........ ».»....»....... »........ ...»...............»»........»»......... 53
11.G.2. PEP REEF - EXPERIMENTAL TEST PLAN FOR SEA TURTLE MONITORING -
AMENDMENTTO CONTRACT ........ »»..».»..................................................».....».......................................55
11JL RFP 7025, WEST REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT - CONSULTING
SERVICES FOR CIVIL SITE WORK ..».... »........................»..».............»......»............................................. 58
13.A.L BUDGET WORKSHOP DATES ..................».».......»...».» .......... ..........»»............. ........... »».»»... 60
13.A.2. APPOINTMENT TO DODGER TASK FORCE ......... »....................»....».......................»........» 61
13.D. REPORT ON UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING .........................»....................»... 61
EOrlr i FAGS
June 10, 1997
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Regular
Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on
Tuesday, June 10, 1997, at 9:00 a.m. Present were Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman; John W.
Tippin, Vice Chairman: Fran B. Adams; Kenneth R. Macht, and Caroline D. Ginn. Also present
were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and
Patricia Ridgely, Deputy Clerk.
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Eggert called the meeting to order.
2. I WOCATION
Commissioner Ginn gave the invocation.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Ginn led the Pledge to the Flag.
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Eggert requested three additions to today's agenda:
11.E. FY 1997-98 Anti -Drug Abuse Grant,
13.A.1. Budget Workshop Dates
13.A2. Appointment to Dodger Task Force
Commissioner Ginn requested the addition of item 13.D., Report on Utilities Advisory
Committee Meeting.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED BY Commissioner
Adams, the Board unanimously added the above items to the Agenda.
1
June 10, 1997
boor, l u� FADE o-ji
EOE i�" �aGE 2
5. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
None
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any correction or additions to the Minutes of the
Regular Meetings of May 6, 1997, and May 13, 1997. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved the
Minutes of the Regular Meetings of May 6, 1997, and May 13,
1997, as written.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Ginn requested that item 7.I. be removed from the Consent Agenda.
A. Reports
1. Delta Farms Water Control District Budget for FY 1997-98;
2. State of Florida. Department of Environmental Regulation, Rule Adoption Notice,
Coastal Construction Control Line Permit Fees Effective June 16, 1997;
3. State of Florida, Report of Audit of Indian River County District School Board
for FY ended 6/30/96;
4. Report of Convictions, May 1997.
B. Approval of Warrants
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated May 29, 1997:
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DATE: MAY 29, 1997
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS
FROM: EDWIN M. FRY, JR., FINANCE DIRECTOR
In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all warrants issued
by the Board of County Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board minutes.
Approval is requested for the attached list of warrants, issued by the Clerk
to the Board. for the time period of May 23 to May 29, 1997.
2
June 10, 1997
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved the list of
Warrants as issued by the Clerk to the Board for the period of May
23, 1997, to May 29, 1997, as recommended by staff.
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0018455
BARTON, JEFFREY K -CLERK
5/23/97
472.50
0018456
KING, JOE J
5/23/97
2,050.00
0018457
FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF
5/23/97
175.00
0018458
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
5/27/97
20.00
0018459
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
5/27/97
20.00
0018460
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
5/27/97
20.00
0018461
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
5/27/97
20.00
0018462
WARD JR, CHARLES
5/27/97
499.84
0018463
WHITE, MARTIN
5/27/97
372.00
0018464
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITY
5/28/97
61.58
0018465
SHERIFF OF MARTIN COUNTY
5/28/97
20.00
0018466
HELSETH SR, PHILLIP R. HARRY C
5/28/97
16,713.70
0018467
TEN -8 FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC
5/28/97
192,684.00
0018468
FT PIERCE, CITY OF
5/28/97
1,278 83
0018469
COSCO, KEN
5/28/97
306.00
0018470
PALUMBO, LOUIS
5/28/97
309.00
0018471
KRUCZKIEWICZ, LORIANE
5/29/97
0018472
BREVARD COUNTY CLERK OF THE
5/29/97
138.50
0018473
ORANGE COUNTY CLERK OF THE
5/29/97
166.79
0018474
ST LUCIE COUNTY CLERK OF THE
5/29/97
135.20
0018475
RICHLAND COUNTY CLERK OF THE
5/29/97
541.75
0018476
VELASQUEZ, MERIDA
5/29/97
15 0.00
150.00
0018477
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CLERK OF
5/29/97
4,695.08
0018478
JACKSON COUNTY CLERK OF THE
5/29/97
0018479
DOUGLAS COUNTY CLERK OF COURT
5/29/97
124.80
0018480
TRANSOUTH FINANCIAL CORP
5/29/97
23.08
0018481
VERO BEACH FIREFIGHTERS ASSOC.
5/29/97
155.72
0018482
INDIAN RIVER FEDERAL CREDIT
5/29/97
1,992.00
85,005-04
0018483
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
5/29/97
0018484
NACO/SOUTHEAST
5/29/97
257.69
0018485
KEY TRUST COMPANY OF FLORIDA
5/29/97
2,991.42
0216110
T M S COMPUTERS & SOFTWARE
1/16/97
989.18
0216469
MC DONALD, TIM
1/23/97
.00
0216525
KITTLEMAN, WILLIAM T
1/23/97
.00
0216528
SMITH, KURT
1/23/97
.00
0216992
KITTLEMAN, WILLIAM
1/30/97
.00
0217286
MONTGOMERY, ANTHWONE
2/06/97
.00
0218011
J R DEVELOPMENT INC
2/20/97
.00
0218520
PETERSON, ANNICE
2/27/97
.00
0218523
GRAVER, JEFF
2/27/97
.00
0218526
CALIXTE, MARIE
2/27/97
.00
0218534
CEGLADY, KENNETH
2/27/97
.00
0218537
SMITH, INEZ
2/27/97
.00
0218538
MERCEDES HOMES
2/27/97
.00
0218852
JOHNSON, MONA
3/06/97.00
0219223
FOLLOW, EVELYN
3/13/97
c;';•00
0219226
MCGRIFF, CLAUDINE
3/13/97.00
0219229
DELLERMAN, T G
3/13/97
.00
0219256
MENEGHINI, ROBERTO
3/13/97
.00
0221896
MICROAGE
4/30/97,•00
-'>.00
0222093
ARTS & CRAFTS
5/08/97
3
June 10, 1997 EonK 0_' L m G E 8U
boor, 10i PAGE526
CHECK NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUNIDER
DATE
AMOUNT
0222375
ST JOHNS RIVER WATER MGMT DIST
5/08/97
.00
0222595
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
5/15/97
.00
0223027
JACKSON, RICKY A
5/22/97
.00
0223159
FOLSOM III, JOHN
5/22/97
.00
0223175
BROWARD COUNTY HOUSING AUTH
5/22/97
.00
0223204
FT PIERCE, CITY OF
5/22/97
.00
0223313
A A FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC
5/29/97
290.30
0223314
AERO PRODUCTS CORP
5/29/97
12.05
0223315
A G L L
5/29/97
84.25
0223316
AIRBOURNE EXPRESS
5/29/97
56.67
0223317
ALBERTSONS SOUTHCO #4357
5/29/97
267.71
0223318
AEROSPACE EXPRESS
5/29/97
68.25
0223319
A B S PUMPS, INC
5/29/97
2,280.00
0223320
ADAM'S MARK HOTEL
5/29/97
72.00
0223321
ALLEN COUNTY PUBLIC
5/29/97
70.00
0223322
A T & T
5/29/97
100.59
0223323
ALL FLORIDA BEVERAGE & OFFICE
5/29/97
81.45
0223324
ALRO METALS SERVICE CENTER
5/29/97
562.12
0223325
AMADEAS LEGAL PUBLICATION, INC
5/29/97
126.00
0223326
AMBAC CONNECT INC
5/29/97
3,060.00
0223327
ADVANCED MEDICAL & PHARMACY
5/29/97
318.00
0223328
ADAMS, COOGLER, WATSON &
5/29/97
3,946.26
0223329
A T & T
5/29/97
35.95
0223330
A T & T LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES
5/29/97
50.00
0223331
ALLIED MEDICAL SERVICES
5/29/97
500.00
0223332
ATLANTIC COASTAL TITLE CORP
5/29/97
300.00
0223333
ALL COUNTY EQUIPMENT COMPANY
5/29/97
157.22
0223334
AMERICAN REPORTING
5/29/97
171.50
0223335
AMERICAN MARKETING CORP
5/29/97
142.32
0223336
AMERICAN INST. FOR POLISH
5/29/97
50.00
0223337
BAKER & TAYLOR, INC
5/29/97
1,140.89
0223338
BAKER BROTHERS, INC
5/29/97
109.54
0223339
BARNETT BANK
5/29/97
15.00
0223340
BARTH CONSTRUCTION
5/29/97
500.00
0223341
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
5/29/97
3,431.38
0223342
BERNAN ASSOCIATES
5/29/97
32.00
0223343
BELLSOUTH MOBILITY
5/29/97
69.51
0223344
BARTON,JEFFREY K- CLERK
5/29/97
169,574.50
0223345
BARTON, JEFFREY K -CLERK
5/29/97
3,712.00
0223346
BRANDON CAPITAL CORPORATION
5/29/97
500.00
0223347
BILLING SERVICE; INC
5/29/97
152.99
0223348
BEVERAGE STOP, THE
5/29/97
120.00
0223349
BAKER & TAYLOR ENTERTAINMENT
5/29/97
253.28
0223350
BELLSOUTH
5/29/97
6,790.57
0223351
BARKETT, GEORGE A DDS
5/29/97
81.00
0223352
BELLSOUTH PUBLIC COMMUNICATION
5/29/97
128.56
0223353
BANK OF NEW YORK
5/29/97
1,657.05
0223354
BYRON SISTLER & ASSOCIATES INC
5/29/97
39.50
0223355
BUILDING OFFICIAL'ASSOC OF THE
5/29/97
105.00
0223356
BASE CAMP OUTLET
5/29/97
249.75
0223357
BILINGUAL PUBLICATIONS CO
5/29/97
27.95
0223358
FALCON POWER LIMITED
5/29/97
65.79
0223359
CHANDLER EQUIPMENT CO, INC
5/29/97
504.74
0223360
CLASSIC AWARDS
5/29/97
17.20
0223361
COLD AIR DISTRIBUTORS
5/29/97
276.23
0223362
COMMUNICATIONS INT'L INC
5/29/97
145.50
0223363
CORBIN, SHIRLEY E
5/29/97
143.50
0223364
CLINIC PHARMACY
5/29/97
88.64
0223365
CROSS CREEK APPAREL, INC
5/29/97
190.26
0223366
COMPUTER & PERIPHERIAL
5/29/97
255.00
0223367
CLIFF BERRY, INC
5/29/97
195.00
4
June 10, 1997
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0223368
COOGAN,• MAUREEN AND
5/29/97
540.20
0223369
CARLSEN, ERIK M
5/29/97
100.00
0223370
CRAFTS & STUFF
5/29/97
20.00
0223371
CUES, INC
5/29/97
399.06
0223372
CLIFFORD, MIKE
5/29/97
100.00
0223373
CALHOUN, TARA
5/29/97
14.25
0223374
CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDENT
5/29/97
71.50
0223375
CENTER FOR EMOTIONAL AND
5/29/97
85.50
0223376
CH2M HILL INC
5/29/97
10,160.00
0223377
COASTAL HOME TRADING
5/29/97
30.00
0223378
DAVES SPORTING GOODS
5/29/97
543.97
0223379
DEMCO INC
5/29/97
38.60
0223380
FLORIDA DEPT OF MANAGEMENT
5/29/97
3,107.67
0223381
DICKERSON FLORIDA, INC
5/29/97
2,556.44
0223382
DICKEY SCALES, INC
5/29/97
325.00
0223383
DATA SUPPLIES, INC
5/29/97
2,041.48
0223384
DAVIDSON TITLES, INC
5/29/97
108.12
0223385
DRIVEWAY'S, INC
5/29/97
3,330.00
0223386
E -Z BREW COFFEE SERVICE, INC
5/29/97
15.75
0223387
ENVIROMETRICS, INC
5/29/97
6,001.75
0223388
ERRETT, NANCY
5/29/97
64.00
0223389
EBSCO SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES
5/29/97
124.56
0223390
EXPEDITER INC, THE
5/29/97
504.12
0223391
ELSEY'S BOOKS
5/29/97
80.00
0223392
FINNEY, DONALD G
5/29/97
107.01
0223393
FIRESIDE THEATRE, THE
5/29/97
23.28
0223394
FLORIDA COOPERATIVE EXTENSION
5/29/97
2,814.00
0223395
FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY CO
5/29/97
4,240.41
0223396
F P & L
5/29/97
9,907.70
0223397
FRED PRYOR SEMINARS
5/29/97
295.00
0223398
FLINN, SHEILA I
5/29/97
28.00
0223399
FMC CORPORATION
5/29/97
4,440.00
0223400
FLORIDA SECTION ITE
5/29/97
95.00
0223401
FLORIDA MEDICAID COUNTY
5/29/97
34,069.58
0223402
FALZONE, MATTHEW
5/29/97
38.00
0223403
FLORIDA CLASSICS LIBRARY
5/29/97
98.20
0223404
FRYFOGLE, ROBERT
5/29/97
130.00
0223405
GENE'S AUTO GLASS
5/29/97
203.95
0223406
GEORGE W FOWLER CO
5/29/97
68.97
0223407
GREYHOUND LINES, INC
5/29/97
219.00
0223408
GREENE, ROBERT E
5/29/97
1,736.98
0223409
GIBSON, INC
5/29/97
1,265.72
0223410
GENEALOGICAL RESEARCH DIRCTORY
5/29/97
148.75
0223411
GREENWOOD PUBLISHING GROUP
5/29/97
99.00
0223412
GITELES, KRISTIN
5/29/97
57.00
0223413
HALL, PAMELA J
5/29/97
104.14
0223414
HARRISON UNIFORMS
5/29/97
96.60
0223415
HURLEY, LARRY
5/29/97
54.50
0223416
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
5/29/97
160,414.10
0223417
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
5/29/97
54,638.75
0223418
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID
5/29/97
107.70
0223419
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
5/29/97
25.00
0223420
INDIAN RIVER BLUE PRINT, INC
5/29/97
2,475.05
0223421
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITY
5/29/97
98.21
0223422
INGRAM
5/29/97
67.12
0223423
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PLANNING
5/29/97
1,320.00
0223424
INDIAN RIVER OFFICE CENTRE,INC
5/29/97
16.37
0223425
IBM CORP-DVU
5/29/97
46.00
0223426
INTERIM PERSONNEL:VERO BEACH
5/29/97
197.04
0223427
IAEI, TREASURE COAST DIVISION
5/29/97
50.00
0223428
HOMELAND IRRIGATION -IRRIGATION
5/29/97
190.65
0223429
JONATHAN SHEPPARD BOOKS
5/29/97
310.65
0223430
JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA
5/29/97
2,253.83
0223431
JEWETT ORTHOPAEDIC CLINIC
5/29/97
250.00
0223432
JOHNSON, COURTNEY D
5/29/97
9.50
0223433
JOHN JACKSON HOMES
5/29/97
500.00
0223434
JONES CHEMICALS, INC
5/29/97
7,061.24
0223435
K MART
5/29/97
116.19
5
June 10, 1997
'&� FADE
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0223436
KELLY TRACTOR
5/29/97
440.92
0223437
KARL, JAMES W
5/29/97
6.00
0223438
KEY, PATRICIA W
5/29/97
224.00
0223439
KT MOWER & EQUIPMENT
5/29/97
514.84
0223440
KOMPAN/BIG TOYS SOUTHEAST, INC
5/29/97
500.00
0223441
LUCAS WATERPROOFING CO, INC
5/29/97
1,177.30
0223442
L I TREE SERVICE, INC
5/29/97
425.00
0223443
LFI VERO BEACH, INC
5/29/97
3,444.00
0223444
LEKNISKAS, SHANNON
5/29/97
52.25
0223445
LESCO, INC
5/29/97
895.43
0223446
LANGDON & LANGDON
5/29/97
54.00
0223447
L J RUFFIN & ASSOC
5/29/97
1,029.91
0223448
LAWSON, JUDD V
5/29/97
.75
0223449
MARSHALL CAVENDISH CORP
5/29/97
487.55
0223450
MCGRAW-HILL COMPANIES
5/29/97
28.94
0223451
INDIAN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLEGE
5/29/97
15,131.00
0223452
MICKLER'S FLORIDIANA, INC
5/29/97
284.68
0223453
MID COAST TIRE SERVICE, INC
5/29/97
53.00
0223454
MIKES GARAGE
5/29/97
200.00
0223455
MOSSALI, NANCY H
5/29/97
3.77
0223456
MEDICAL RECORD SERVICES, INC
5/29/97
18.33
0223457
MARRIOTT HARBOR BEACH RESORT
5/29/97
195.00
0223458
MIDWEST TAPE EXCHANGE
5/29/97
54.90
0223459
MR BOB PORTABLE TOILET
5/29/97
76.12
0223460
MICROAGE
5/29/97
125.00
0223461
MEDCHECK
5/29/97
219.72
0223462
MARSHALL, PAUL
5/29/97
172.00
0223463
M J M INVESTIGATIONS, INC
5/29/97
353.50
0223464
MALDONADO, SIGRID R
5/29/97
27.00
0223465
NOLTE, DAVID C
5/29/97
157,026.00
0223466
NORTH SOUTH SUPPLY
5/29/97
73.52
0223467
NICOSIA, ROGER J DO
5/29/97
1,500.00
0223468
NEFF MACHINERY, INC
5/29/97
36.71
0223469
NATIONAL AMBULANCE BUILDERS,
5/29/97
59.16
0223470
NEW HORIZONS OF THE TREASURE
5/29/97
30,249.58
0223471
NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC VIDEO
5/29/97
23.70
0223472
NATIONAL PROPANE CORP
5/29/97
194.23
0223473
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF STATE
5/29/97
12.00
0223474
NOLEN, VICKIE L
5/29/97
29.00
0223475
OFFICE PRODUCTS & SERVICE
5/29/97
488.34
0223476
OFFICE DEPOT, INC
5/29/97
1,172.12
0223477
OSCEOLA PHARMACY
5/29/97
331.42
0223478
PERKINS DRUG, INC
5/29/97
176.34
0223479
PERKINS INDIAN RIVER PHARMACY
5/29/97
196.32
0223480
PETTY CASH
5/29/97
284.10
0223481
PETTY CASH
5/29/97
66.05
0223482
POSITIVE PROMOTIONS
5/29/97
562.78
0223483
PROCTOR CONSTRUCTION
5/29/97
500.00
0223484
PRYOR RESOURCES, INC
5/29/97
99.00
0223485
PERKINS MEDICAL SUPPLY
5/29/97
46.00
0223486
PINKERTON, DOREEN A
5/29/97
6.00
0223487
PRESS JOURNAL
5/29/97
133.10
0223488
PROFESSIONAL COMPUTER SERVICES
5/29/97
345.00
0223489
PAGE, LIVINGSTON
5/29/97
80.00
0223490
PANGBURN, TERRI
5/29/97
50.00
0223491
PRESS JOURNAL - SUBSCRIPTION
5/29/97
112.00
0223492
RIFKIN, SHELDON H PHD
5/29/97
1,300.00
0223493
RINKER MATERIALS CORPORATION
5/29/97
29.59
0223494
RUSSELL CONCRETE, INC
5/29/97
6,651.67
0223495
RUSSO PRINTING, INC
5/29/97
272.20
0223496
ROBERTS & REYNOLDS PA
5/29/97
6,411.67
0223497
RAYSIDE TRUCK AND TRAILER
5/29/97
392.57
0223498
RUBBER STAMP EXPRESS
5/29/97
41.22
0223499
RISSMAN, WEISBERG, BARRETT,
5/29/97
35.37
0223500
RENAUD INC
5/29/97
2,250.00
0223501
RAWLEY, LINZEY
5/29/97
52.25
0223502
SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY
5/29/97
1,297.00
0223503
SAFETY KLEEN CORP
5/29/97
88.25
6
June 10, 1997
CHECK NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0223504
SCHOPP, BARBARA G
5/29/97
143.50
0223505
SCOTTY'S, INC
5/29/97
646.49
0223506
SCOTTY'S, INC
5/29/97
33.82
0223507
SEARS
5/29/97
1,218.50
0223508
SEBASTIAN, CITY OF
5/29/97
150.00
0223509
SEWELL HARDWARE CO, INC
5/29/97
123.76
0223510
SEXUAL ASSAULT ASSISTANCE
5/29/97
4,087.75
0223511
SHELL OIL COMPANY
5/29/97
11.19
0223512
SNIDERS OF VERO BEACH, INC
5/29/97
500.00
0223513
SOUTHERN CULVERT
5/29/97
10,685.75
0223514
SOUTHERN ELECTRIC SUPPLY
5/29/97
240.28
0223515
SOUTHERN TRUCK EQUIPMENT
5/29/97
240.44
0223516
ST LUCIE BATTERY & TIRE, INC
5/29/97
219.00
0223517
SUDDEN IMAGES
5/29/97
6.50
0223518
SUNCOAST WELDING SUPPLIES, INC
5/29/97
199.84
0223519
SERVICE REFRIGERATION CO, INC
5/29/97
184.50
0223520
SIMON & SCHUSTER CONSUMER
5/29/97
714.10
0223521
SCHOOL DISTRICT OF IRC
5/29/97
426.74
0223522
SOUTHERN SEWER EQUIPMENT SALES
5/29/97
358.00
0223523
SEXTON, HILDY
5/29/97
80.00
0223524
SELIG CHEMICAL IND
5/29/97
346.74
0223525
SOLINET
5/29/97
495.96
0223526
SUPERIOR PRINTING
5/29/97
2,874.60
0223527
SAFECO, INC
5/29/97
2,182.70
0223528
SYSCO FOOD SERVICE
5/29/97
135.45
0223529
STEWART INDUSTRIES
5/29/97
21,159.55
0223530
SHERMAN SPECIALTY COMPANY
5/29/97
31.80
0223531
SOUTHEAST LIBRARY BINDERY,INC
5/29/97
187.90
0223532
SAM'S CLUB
5/29/97
35.00
0223533
SLP INVESTMENTS
5/29/97
69.95
0223534
TAYLOR RENTAL
5/29/97
242.93
0223535
7EN-8 FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC
5/29/97
5,510.42
0223536
TOTAL PRINT, INC
5/29/97
194.38
0223537
TCI MEDIA SERVICES
5/29/97
100.00
0223538
TRI -DIM CORP
5/29/97
2,281.30
0223539
TEMP CONTROL INC
5/29/97
30.00
0223540
TARGET STORE T-1050
5/29/97
106.02
0223541
SMITH, TERRY L
5/29/97
72.12
0223542
UNIVERSITY PRESS OF FLA
5/29/97
62.78
0223543
UTILITY SUPPLY OF AMERICA
5/29/97
231.64
0223544
ULI-THE URBAN LAND INST
5/29/97
43.90
0223545
U S FILTER DISTRIBUTION,INC
5/29/97
4,371.09
0223546
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
5/29/97
27,147.14
0223547
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
5/29/97
9,175.00
0223548
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
5/29/97
56,666.67
0223549
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
5/29/97
1,634.18
0223550
VEY, CARRIE
5/29/97
194.75
0223551
VERO BEARING & BOLT
5/29/97
780.16
0223552
VERO ORTHOPAEDICS
5/29/97
9.00
0223553
WALGREENS PHARMACY
5/29/97
633.23
0223554
WALGREENS PHARMACY #03608
5/29/97
855.91
0223555
WEST PUBLISHING PAYMENT CTR
5/29/97
656.82
0223556
WINN DIXIE STORES, INC
5/29/97
536.99
0223557
WAL-MART PHARMACY, INC
5/29/97
32.48
0223558
WAL-MART PHARMACY, INC
5/29/97
90.00
0223559
WILSON SPORTING GOODS -GOLF
5/29/97
282.55
0223560
WILLHOFF, PATSY
5/29/97
130.00
0223561
WABASSO GOLF
5/29/97
300.00
0223562
WALKER, KEITH
5/29/97
130.00
0223563
WOLFE, MEGAN
5/29/97
28.50
0223564
WAGNER, MICHAEL
5/29/97
40.00
0223565
WALGREENS PHARMACY
5/29/97
22.88
0223566
WHITTINGTON, MEGAN
5/29/97
109.25
0223567
WOOD, EDGAR
5/29/97
30.00
0223568
XEROX CORPORATION
5/29/97
1,290.00
0223569
ZEDEK, KELLY
5/29/97
14.50
0223570
WHITE, WAYNE J.
5/29/97
883.94
7
June 10, 1997 609r ti PAGE�
HOK PAGE _70
CHECK NAME
CHECK
DATE
CHECK
AMOUNT
NUMBER
RE:
Board Reappointment for New Term
DATE:
May 22, 1997
Chris Fogal
5/29/97
52.97
0223571
TEETERS, JOHN K
5/29/97
241.33
0223572
FOLDS, GEORGE
5/29/97
1,985.02
0223573
WOODLAWN MANOR
5/29/97
53.52
0223574
INMAN, BARBARA
5/29/97
93.75
0223575
RICHTER, DARLA
SONS
5/29/97
34.83
0223576
ANTHONY DEMARCO &
5/29/97
38.05
0223577
MYERS, CAROL
1,240,892.81
C. Reappointment of Commissioner Carolyn Eggert to JEP Board
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated May 22, 1997:
JOBS S� EDUCATION PIARTNERSHIP
405 NW 1 edCral H121ma . SUI[e 101
Jeiiscii Beach, FL 34957
�61/692-1500: 800/330-31030 FAX: -56 1
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Below Listed Board Members
FROM:
Nan Griggs
RE:
Board Reappointment for New Term
DATE:
May 22, 1997
The Following board member's terms expire June 30, 1997:
Werner Bols
Cynthia Gaber Ken Sattler
Rick Curtis
Elmira Gainey Ken Vickers
Don Dixon
David Hazellief
Carolyn Eggert
Barbara Kauffman
Chris Fogal
Darryl Rutz
To be reappointed for another term, we need a letter from your sponsoring
agency endorsing your service for another term. The new term will be for
three (3) years. Some of you have served less than three (3) years because
of staggered initial terms or because you filled a vacant slot that was due
for turnover sooner. I hope all of you will seek reappointment and
continue to serve on our board. If by some chance, you do not choose to
remain a board member, please let me know so I can solicit nominations for
new members. I will need the letters by mid June in order to attain
Consortium reappointment before July 1, 1997
8
June 10, 1997
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved the
reappointment of Chairman Eggert as the Board of County
Commissioners' representative on the JEP Board.
D. Acceptance of Gerard Koziel's Resignation with Regret from TC Health Council
The Board reviewed a Letter dated May 26, 1997:
IRMu Indian
River 293031
Memorial X120
— - Hospital SUN
_ ^
A0 FL
.rr,
t>,,r ur Dinners N co, i� y
i �'l�:s Cosi
May 26, 1997
ZA��
, Chairperson
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25h Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Commissioner Adams:
DISTRimmmFN JJST
Commissionen3 G
Administrator
Attorney
ilersonnel
Public works
Community Dev.
Ur.111des
Rnance
011.13
Emerg. Serv.
Risk Mgt.
Other
As a result of my recent resignation as Sr. Vice President at Indian River Memorial
Hospital, I no longer am eligible to represent Indian River County as the provider
representative on the Treasure Coast Health Council. Please accept this letter as my
formal resignation from that position.
I am sure that Barbara Jacobowitz, Executive Director, of the Health Council will be in
touch with you shortly to identify a replacement for me. As I indicated to you in my
previous letter, the Council has undergone a reorganization which will result in a far more
strengthened Board of Directors which will be able to accomplish much more in the area
of health planning. I would urge you to give consideration to appointment of a strong
provider to appropriately represent the interests of Indian River County.
It was a pleasure serving in this capacity for the past four years and I wish you and the
other commissioners the greatest degree of success in your future endeavors.
Sincerely,
�Wt
Gerard J. Koziel
cc: Barbara Jacobowitz
9
June 10, 1997 b0K PAGE 702
6001 1-0-11-4 PAGE 702.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously accepted with regret
the resignation of Gerard Koziel from the Treasure Coast Health
Council.
E. Recreation Committee Amointment — Sebastian — Nancy Diamond
The Board reviewed a Letter dated May 30, 1997:
•
.,��To�aNT10NJ.L$I
a2�77-
n6 c7 2d2g)0
commissioners --
,��
Administrator
0 0�� vG2
Attorney
r
0"&!
li, C- `t j 1' -
personnel
public Worlm ------
-)
o��yt� City of Sebastian
community
Utilities
25 MAIN STREET o SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958
r� ! TELEPHONE 589-5330 o FAX (561) 589-5570
Finance
F1 Z111(561)
OMB
Emerg- Serv-
Risk Mgt.
Other
May 30, 1997
Commissioner Fran Adams
Indian River County Administration
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Re: Indian River County Recreation Committee Appointee
Dear Commissioner Adams:
Mayor Barnes, at the May 28, 1997 Regular Council Meeting, appointed Nancy Diamond as the City's
representative to the Indian River County Recreation Committee.
Ms. Diamond's address is 437 Seagrass Avenue, Sebastian and she can be reached at 388-1833 (home), 567-
9626 ext 400 (work) or 605-6934 (beeper).
Sincerely, 1--F T -G" Al S . 00 G 12 S HP,'s / A, 1=C 12 419 p u S 1 14A -T '
L'+Ad 7— 7-0 /,, G7- 'TSE
Kathcyn M. O'Halloran, CMC/AAE J15I�
City Clerk
sam
cc: Reta Smith, IRC Recreation Committee Secretary
10
June 10, 1997
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Commissioner
Tippin, the Board unanimously accepted Nancy Diamond as the City of
Sebastian's appointment to the Indian River County Recreation
Committee.
F. Release of Utility Easement — River Boat Club Subdivision, Lots 12 & 13
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated June 2, 1997:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: urc William G. Collins II - Deputy County Attorney
DATE: June 2, 1997
SUBJECT: Release of Utility Easement - Lots 12 and 13, River Boat Club
Subdivision
Mr. Henry Muller, developer of the River Boat Club Subdivision has requested
the County release a 20 -foot utility easement on Lots 12 and 13 of the River
Boat Club Subdivision. This easement was created in 1989 by a prior owner.
The plat of the River Boat Club Subdivision dedicated 95th Street (Durrance
Road) and the south 10 feet of each lot within the River Boat Club Subdivision
as a utility easement. The property having been developed with dedicated utility
easements, the old metes and bounds easement is no longer required by the
Utilities Department. The developers of the River Boat Club Subdivision have
an upcoming closing on Lot 12 and they wish the Release to be of record prior to
transferring the property.
RECOMMENDATION:
Release the 20 -foot utility easement which overlies the common property
line of Lots 12 and 13, River Boat Club Subdivision.
2. Authorize the Chairman to execute the Release.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Commissioner
Tippin, the Board unanimously approved releasing the 20' utility easement
which overlies the common property line of Lots 12 and 13, River Boat
Club Subdivision and authorized the Chairman to execute same, as
recommended in the Memorandum.
RELEASE OF UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE RECORDED IN THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
COPY IN OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
11
June 10, 1997 n
fp�
C 1k 40E ✓
G. Award Bid #7048/Golf Course Turf Equipment
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated June 2, 1997:
DATE: June 2, 1997
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
H T. "Sonny" Dean, General Services Directo
FROM: Fran Boynton -Powell, Purchasing Manager
SUBJECT: Award Bid #70481Golf Course Turf Equipment
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Bid Opening Date: May 7, 1997
Advertising Dates: April 16, 23, 1997
Advertisement Mailed to: Fifteen (15) Vendors
Replies: Three (3) Vendors
Statement of "No Bids" Two (2)
VENDOR • BID ITEM #1 ALTERNATE #1 BID rrEM #2
nit rice nit rice nit rice
Pifer, Inc.
$11,899.00 No Bid $18,400.00
Jupiter, FL
Diamond Turf Equipment
$12,375.00 $10,058.92 No Bid
Palm Beach, FL.
(Remantifitchi*ed)
Kilpatrick Turf Equipment
$13,092.00 No Bid $18,047.00
Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
" Note: Bid Item #1 is for the purchase of (2) new Triplex mowers. Bid Item #2 is for the purchase
of (1) new 1900D TriKing mower. Alternate #1 is for a remanufactured triplex mower.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID $41,845.00
ESTIMATED BUDGET $49,000.00
Golf Course Other Machinery and Equipment (418-221-572-066.49)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the bid be awarded on an item by item low bid basis for the new mowers
instead of the remanufactured units as follows; award Item 91 to Pifer. Inc. and award Item #2 to
Kilpatrick Turf Eauioment. Both vendors are the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidders
meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. Remanufactured equipment was not
selected due to past experience indicating constant repairs and a shorter life span of the equipment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #7048
as follows: Item #1 to Pifer, Inc. and Item #2 to Kilpatrick Turf
Equipment, as recommended in the Memorandum.
12
June 10, 1997
x
H. Lakewood Village Mobile Home Park - Assumption of Impact Fee Agreement
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated June 3, 1997:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Terrance G. Pinto,i e or
Utility Services Depa ent
DATE: June 3,1997
RE: LAKEWOOD VILLAGE ASSUMPTION
OF IMPACT FEE AGREEMENT
In 1991 the County entered into an impact fee agreement with the owners of
Lakewood Village Mobile Home Park for the payment of certain utility fees over
time. The standard County policy is that on the sale of the liened property the
entire amount is due and owing. The Homeowners' Association has now
contracted to purchase the park from the park owner and is requesting that the
County let the homeowners assume the impact fee agreements to take advantage
of the time payment plan and to subrogate the County's lien to the new purchase
money mortgage so that the financing lien will still have first priority and the
County's lien will still have secondary priority.
The Utilities Department has no objection to this assumption and subrogation
since it will assist in having the residents of the park become the owners of the
park.
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the
Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to execute the attached
assumption and subrogation agreement.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously authorized the
Chairman to execute the assumption and subrogation agreement
presented in the backup, as recommended in the Memorandum.
ASSUMPTION AGREEMENTS (2) HAVE BEEN PLACED ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
L Budget Adjustment, Broward County Inmate Revenue
The Board reviewed a Letter dated June 3, 1997:
13
June 10, 1997 FC'�Y - UI uI-,F a ��
,*Fjeriff
4055 41 st AVENUE
June 3, 1997
60T.r, 1-0-11
GARY C. WHEELER • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS' ASSOCIATION
MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS' ASSOCIATION
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-1808
The Honorable Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960-3394
Re: Budget Adjustment, Broward County Inmate Revenue
Dear Mrs. Eggert:
PHONE (561) 569-670C
This letter is a request to amend our fiscal year 1996-97 Operating Budget by $136,845. These funds
represent the revenue generated from the housing of Broward County inmates for the month of May, 1997.
A portion of these monies will be used by the aviation unit for salaries and operating expense. Another
portion will be used to purchase three (3) vehicles for Law Enforcement. The balance will increase the
Corrections budget in the such areas as office supplies, departmental maintenance, food for jail, jail
supplies, inmate clothing and to purchase a PC for the Inmate Clasiffication component. These added
expenses are directly related to the increased inmate population.
The budget amendment will be distributed as follows:
Law Enforcement Salaries
$ 7,230
Law Enforcement Expense
14,000
Law Enforcement Capital
70,000
Corrections Expense
42,615
Corrections Capital Outlay
3,000
Total
$ 136,845
I have attached a worksheet to further detail the above amounts. I am requesting this item be placed on the
"Consent Agenda" for your June 10, 1997, meeting.
If you have any questions or any further information is required, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Gary %teler, Sheriff
14
June 10, 1997
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE
BUDGET AMENDMENT #6.1996-97
BROWARD COUNTY INMATE REVENUE
FOR THE MONTH MAY, 1997
Component
Description
Salaries
Expense
Capital
Total
Outlay
Law Enforcement:
Aviation
Salaries
5,432
5,432
FICA
416
416
Retirement
1,358
1,358
Retirement Health
24
24
Expense
Helicopter Operations
14,000
14,000
Equipment
Vehicles
70,000
70,000
7,230
14,000
70,000
91,230
Corrections:
Expense
Operating Expense
42,615
42,615
Capital Outlay
Personal Computer
3,000
3,000
0
42,615
3,000
45,615
7,230
56,615
73,000 136,845
In response to Commissioner Ginn's request for more information concerning the
helicopter operation and vehicles covered in this budget adjustment, Sheriffs Office Comptroller
Ricky Dees advised that helicopter costs were involved in hangar rent, fuel and two flight suits.
He further advised that the vehicles to be purchased are one fully -equipped road patrol car at
$30,000, and two administrative vehicles at $20,000 each.
Commissioner Ginn advised that she had checked with OMB Director Joseph A. Baird
and learned that over a million dollars had come in from housing prisoners. She strongly
believed these funds should used for maintenance, repair and replacement for the jail.
Mr. Dees advised that flooring and cabinets had recently been done in the jail's booking
area.
Administrator Chandler advised that the Broward inmate program had started last August
and that the income is being looked at in the next budget.
Commissioner Macht asked, and Mr. Dees responded that the income from the Federal
prisoners program is still good.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED BY Commissioner
Macht, the Board unanimously approved the Budget Adjustment as
described in the letter and accompanying details, as requested.
15
June 10, 1997 ? P,�CE i�
'10 1 F,{cE 708
9.A.1. PUBLIC HEARING — US#1 WATER MAIN — EAST SIDE
(39' STREET TO HARBOR DRIVE) — PRELEVIINARY ASSESSMENT,
RESOLUTION III
Utility Services Manager of Assessment Projects James D. Chastain reviewed the
Memorandum dated June 2, 1997:
DATE:
JUNE 2, 1997
TO:
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRA�
FROM:
TERRANCE G. PI
DIRECTOR OF UTIICES
PREPARED
JAMES D. CHASTA
VSNT
AND STAFFED
MANAGER OF ASSEOJECTS
BY:
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT:
US 1 WATER MAIN - EAST SIDE (39TH STREET TO
HARBOR DRIVE) - PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT
PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION III
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -96 -18 -DS
:7• •.ice
On May 20, 1997, the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners approved Resolution I (97-57) and Resolution II (97-
58). Resolution I contained the preliminary assessment roll
describing the project and cost. Resolution II set the date of the
public hearing for the subject project. Property owners have been
notified of the public hearing by certified mail. Resolution I
(97-57) was published in the Vero Beach PRESS JOURNAL on May 26,
1997. (See attached agenda item and minutes of the above meeting.)
ANALYSIS
esign.._of—.the water distribution system is complete. An
informational meeting was scheduled for the property owners on May
29, 1997. The thirty-five (35) properties which will benefit from
water service are along the east side of US 1 between 39th Street
and Harbor Drive. The total estimated project cost to be assessed,
including engineering and administration, is $223,299.89. The
estimated cost per square foot is $0.176227 (rounded).
Approval of the attached Resolution III will confirm and approve
'the preliminary assessment. The attached map displays the area to
benefit from the assessment project. This project is to be funded
through the assessment of property owners along the proposed water
line route. In the interim, financing will be from the assessment
fund.
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve Resolution III, which affirms
the preliminary assessment on the subject project.
In response to Commissioner Ginn, Mr. Chastain and Administrator Chandler explained
the 11/2% penalty and the basis of the 8 '/a% interest rate and that the rate was set in January by
the Board.
16
June 10, 1997
Commissioner Tippin observed that this was very expensive pipe, and Capital Projects
Engineer William F. McCain explained that this was a conservative estimate, that the final costs
would depend primarily on the DOT right-of-way.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this
matter. There being none, she closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Commissioner
Macht, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution No. 97-61 confirming
the special assessments in connection with a water main to the east side of
U.S. Highway #1(300' Street to Harbor Drive); providing for special
assessment liens to be made of record.
RESOLUTION NO. 97- 61
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CONFIRMING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN CONNECTION
WITH A WATER MAIN EXTENSION TO THE EAST SIDE OF U.S.
HIGHWAY #1 (39TH STREET TO HARBOR DRIVE); PROVIDING
FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LIENS TO BE MADE OF RECORD.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County has, by
Resolution No. 97-57, adopted May 20, 1997, determined to make special assessments
against certain properties to be serviced by a water main extension to the east side of
U.S. Highway #1 (between 39th Street and Harbor Drive); and
WHEREAS, said resolution described the manner in which said special
assessments shall be made and how said special assessments are to be paid; and
WHEREAS, the resolution was published in the Vero Beach Press Journal, as
required by Section 206.04, Indian River County Code; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County passed
Resolution No. 97-58 on May 20, 1997, and set a time and place for a public hearing at
which the owners of the properties to be assessed and other interested persons would
have the chance to be heard as to any and all complaints as to said project and said
special assessments, and for the Board to act as required by Section 206.07, Indian
River County Code; and
WHEREAS, notice of the time and place of the public hearing was published in
the Press Journal Newspaper on Friday, May 23, 1997, and once again on Friday, May
30, 1997 (twice one week apart; the last being at Veast one week prior to the hearing),
as required by Section 206.06, Indian River County Code; and
WHEREAS, the land owners of record were mailed notices at least ten days prior
to the hearing, as required by Section 206.06, Indian River County Code; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County on
Tuesday, June 10, 1997, at 9:05 a.m. conducted the public hearing with regard to the
special assessments; 17
June 10, 19971
1
�G' - U PAGE 739
BOOK 10 1 PAGE 710
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in their entirety.
2. The special assessments shown on the attached assessment roll are hereby
confirmed and approved, and shall remain legal, valid, and binding first liens against
the properties assessed until paid in full.
3. The Board finds that the properties assessed by this resolution will receive special
benefits equal to or greater than the cost of the assessment.
4. The County will record the special assessments and this resolution, which describes
the properties assessed and the amounts of the special assessments, on the public
records, which shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the special
assessments.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Adams , and the motion
was seconded by Commissioner M a c h t , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote
was as follows:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert
Aye
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin
Aye
Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn
Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
Aye
Commissioner Fran B. Adams
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this
10th day of June, 1997.
st:
Je a ,Clerk
Attachment: ASSESSMENT ROLL
(to be recorded on Public Records)
June 10, 1997
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: 'e
Carolo K. Eggert
Chairman
18
mfian Fbiff Ca I Apprm-4
Admin �l�rar
Dept
02
s � �
9.A.2. PUBLIC HEARING — PROPOSED ORDINANCE
AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDR)
P.O. Box 1268 Vero Beach, Florida 32961 562-2315
Preto Journal
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the underAgned authorityy personally appeared Darryl K
Hicks who on oath saxs that he is President of the Pres0ournal, a
day =aper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County,
Fioriaa; that
H §D. 62
billedW 119. PI�NN_ i
was published in �said newspaper in the issues) of ua� l sr 1997 in, DAG3 A—
Sworn to� sand subscribed before me1t�his
P"woU President
syQ�Pp A RFs�or�
i s Sl�7v.A �TMF.a�O7Y. \f7fMYP(.'B�.IC
MY cprt9n. EzpRes : 25. 1997
0
Pa<.sc
June 10, 1997
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida shall hold a
public hearing at which parties in interest and citizens shall
have an opportunity to be heard, in the County
Commission Chambers of the County Administration
Building located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida,
on Tuesday, June 10, 1997, at 9:05 a.m. to consider
recommending the adoption of an Ordinance, addressing
various land development regulations; entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FOLLOWING CHAPTERS
OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDRs):
CHAPTER 901, DEFINITIONS; CHAPTER 910,
CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM; CHAPTER
911, ZONING; CHAPTER 912, SINGLE FAMILY
DEVELOPMENT; CHAPTER 954, OFF-STREET PARKING;
CHAPTER 971, REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC LAND
USE CRITERIA; AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF
CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
Said ordinance, if adopted, would be effective in the
unincorporated area of the county.
Topics relating to the amendments contained in the
proposed ordinance include, but are not limited to, the
following:
1. Allowing non-commercial stables and kennels in the
AIR -1 zoning district as administrative permit uses, as
presently allowed in other single family residential
districts [Chapters 911, 9711.
2. Modifications to parking requirements for hotel/motel
uses, gas station/sales uses, and health and fitness
centers [Chapter 9541.
3. Modifications to update concurrency regulations in
conformance with comprehensive plan changes
approved in 1996 [Chapter 9101.
4. Allowing banks and financial/credit uses in the PRO
(Professional, Residential, Office) zoning district (note:
this proposal is not recommended by staff) [Chapter
9111.
A copy of the proposed ordinance will be available at
the Planning Division office located on the second floor of
the County Administration Building beginning the
afternoon of June 2, 1997.
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 testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is
based.
ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION
FOR THIS MEETING MUST CONTACT THE COUNTY'S
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COORDINATOR
AT 567-8000 x 223 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF
THE MEETING.
19
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY -s- Carolyn K, Eggert, Chairman 51990
.fin qq
6001 m_U FnE 1,
boot, 10 'k, PAGE?
Chairman Eggert read the title of the proposed ordinance.
Planning Director Stan Boling reviewed in detail the Memorandum of June 4, 1997 and
explained that they were considering four unrelated amendments to the LDRs. He also reviewed
and explained the stars recommendation.
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
I ON HEAD CONCUR$ENCE:
ober M. Kea i A
Community Develo-Lent 7yirector
,4-6.
FROM: Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
DATE: June 4, 1997
SUBJECT: Proposed LDR Amendments
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of June 10, 1997.
Several LDR amendment proposals have been reviewed by staff, the
PSAC (Professional Services Advisory Committee), and the PZC
(Planning and Zoning Commission) and are now ready for Board of
County Commissioners review. These amendments include the
following:
1. (Staff -initiated) Allowing non-commercial kennels and stables
in the AIR -1 zoning district as administrative permit uses, as
presently allowed in other single family zoning districts.
2. (Initiated by Ram Patel and staff) Modifying off-street
parking requirements for hotel/motel uses, gas station/sales
uses; and health and fitness centers.
3. (Staff -Initiated) Update of concurrency management regulations
in conformance with comprehensive plan changes made in 1996.
4. (Initiated by Peter Beuttell) Allowing banks and
financial/credit uses in the PRO zoning district.
The Board is now to consider adopting, modifying, or denying each
of the proposed amendments.
AN LYU S :
1. Allowing Non -Commercial Kennels & Stables in AIR -1
The AIR -1 zoning district is a special single family zoning
district that allows private airstrips, and is designed to
accommodate developments such as the Aerodrome Subdivision
(located on the west side of 82nd Avenue S.W. at 5th Avenue
S.W.). That subdivision is zoned AIR -1. It was recently
brought to staff's attention that the AIR -1 district is the
only single family zoning district that, according to the
current LDRs, does not allow non-commercial kennels and
20
June 10, 1997
stables as an administrative permit use. In staff's opinion,
such an omission is an oversight and should be corrected by
treating the AIR -1 zoning district the same as other single
family districts, in relation to non-commercial kennels and
stables. As proposed, the existing criteria for non-
commercial kennels and stables would apply to such proposals
in the AIR -1 district (see attachments #1 and #2).
PSAC Recommendation: At its April 3, 1997 meeting (held after
the joint Agriculture Advisory Committee/PSAC meeting), the
PSAC recommended unanimously to approve the AIR -1 district
amendment.
PZC Recommendation: At its April 24, 1997 meeting, the
Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend
that the Board approve the AIR -1 district amendment.
2. Modifying Parking Requirements
Knight, McGuire & Associates, Inc. has submitted an LDR
amendment on behalf of Ram Patel (Holiday Inn Express
applicant) to modify the parking requirement for hotel/motel
uses. In addition to that request, planning staff has
initiated proposed amendments to modify the parking rates for
gas stations, health and fitness centers, and rifle/pistol
ranges.
A. Hotel/Motel: As part of the applicant's submittal, hotel
parking rates for Melbourne, St. Lucie County, Okeechobee
County, and Highlands County were submitted for staff's
review. In addition, staff obtained parking rates for
hotel uses from Orange and Brevard counties, and
researched the parking requirements for hotel uses in
Planning Advisory Service Report #432, a publication
which provides rates for 8 different jurisdictions.
These rates range from a low of .666 spaces per room plus
1 space per 100 square feet of office area for Orange
County to a high of 1.3 spaces per room plus parking for
accessory uses such as lounges, etc. Brevard and Indian
River County use the highest rate of 1.3 spaces per room.
Please see attachment #3 for a comparison of the various
rates.
B. Gas Stations: Staff has initiated a modification to the
county's current gas station rate based upon the
evolution of the gas station use. In the 1960s, the gas
station use was teamed with automotive repair. That
changed in the 1970s and 1980s, when gas stations became
paired with the retail convenience trade. Now, in the
1990s, the trend is to join the gas station and fast food
uses. Staff is proposing to modify the parking rate for
gas stations to address the combination of gas sales with
uses other than automotive repair.
When applying the existing parking standards to these
combination uses, staff has taken a conservative approach
and applied the rate for each use in a cumulative manner,
not allowing excess spaces at the pumps to be credited
toward meeting some of the parking demand of other uses
on site. Staff believes this approach is resulting in
excess, unnecessary spaces. The present regulations do
not take into account shared customer parking between the
uses and the relatively quick vehicle turnover time.
Therefore, staff has developed standards for combination
June 10 1997 �� duh . 'r,
l PAGE 1-3
6001K 10i PAGE
uses which are generally less than the requirement for
the sum of "stand-alone" uses of the same type.
C. Health & Fitness Center: Presently, there is no "Health
& Fitness Center" use listed in the parking requirements.
Thus, staff has had to make policy decisions on how to
apply the parking code for such uses. Staff has applied
a one space per 200 square foot rate where the entire
facility is indoors such as World Gym or the Fitness
Connection. For facilities such as Twin Oaks Tennis Club
or the Jungle Club, staff has applied a rate of one space
per 300 square feet of building area plus the required
parking for each outdoor structure creating parking
demand (e.g. tennis courts, racquet ball courts).
The proposed changes will formalize the policy staff has
been implementing. This formal amendment will ensure
consistent application of these requirements. In staff's
opinion, the rates have proven to provide for an
appropriate amount of parking.
PSAC Recommendation: At its March 14, 1997 meeting, the PSAC
voted 5-0 to recommend adoption of the proposed parking
changes.
PZC Recommendation: At its April 24th meeting, the Planning
and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the
Board approve the proposed parking ordinance amendments.
3. Concurrency Management Regulations
*Changes in Concurrency Requirements & Allowances
One of the principal components of the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of
1985 was a requirement that each local government in the state
include a concurrency management plan as part of its capital
improvements element. As enacted, the state planning law
defined concurrency strictly, essentially requiring that
adequate facilities (for potable water, sanitary sewer, solid
waste, drainage, parks, and roads) be available concurrent
with the impacts of new development. In 1995, however, the
legislature amended the concurrency law, providing local
governments more flexibility in implementing the concurrency
requirement. On March 19, 1996, the Board of County
Commissioners adopted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that
allowed the county to take advantage of that increased
flexibility. The proposed LDR amendment would formally codify
the provisions of that plan amendment, thus bringing the
concurrency LDRs into conformance with the comprehensive
plan's latest concurrency policy changes.
Although six types of facilities are subject to the state's
concurrency mandate, the major focus is on transportation.
Statewide, lack of adequate roads has been the primary factor
which has delayed or eliminated development projects. This
has occurred not only because of the cost of building new
roads or widening existing roads, but also because of the long
lag time between identification of a roadway level -of -service
problem and completing a major roadway improvement project.
For these reasons, the legislature, in 1995, modified several
provisions of the state concurrency law. Among those changes,
the most significant was a modification of when a capacity -
enhancing roadway improvement would have to be in place to
22
June 10, 1997
� i �
accommodate the demands of new development. Previously, state
law required that a roadway improvement necessary to serve a
development project either be in place or be under
construction prior to issuance of a development order (e.g.
building permit) for a project needing that improvement.
Besides those transportation concurrency provisions, state law
also allowed issuance of a development permit for a project,
where roadways impacted by the project would not maintain
adequate service levels, as long as the needed roadway
improvements were guaranteed by an enforceable developer's
agreement or an executed contract to be under construction
within one year of development order approval, or were
included within the first three years of the local
government's or FDOT's five year capital improvements program
with the condition that minimum level of service standards for
the roadways be maintained. As amended, the state concurrency
law now allows local governments to approve development
projects where existing roads are inadequate to accommodate
additional development, but where necessary roadway
improvements will be under construction within three years of
issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the development
project.
The major difference between the previous state law and
current law is this: under the previous law, a local
government could approve a development project even if
adequate roads to serve the project were not in place if the
local government had requirements to ensure that adequate
roads would be in place when the project's impacts occurred.
Under present state law, a local government may approve a
development project, where adequate roads to serve the project
do not exist, even if the needed roadways will not be under
construction until three years after issuance of the
development project's certificate of occupancy --with no
requirement to maintain minimum acceptable levels of service.
To take advantage of the more flexible state concurrency law
the Board of County Commissioners, in 1996, amended the
concurrency management plan component of the capital
improvements element of the comprehensive plan. Those
amendments involved modifying the timeframe allowed for
commencing construction of a needed roadway facility. The
adopted plan amendment changed that timeframe from one year
after development order approval (building permit issuance) to
two years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the
project. Also modified was the county's capital improvements
plan which now lists committed commencement and completion
dates for certain critical roadway projects. The proposed
land development regulation amendment would update Chapter
910, Concurrency Management System, to reflect the 1996 plan
amendment.
*Proposed Concurrency LDR Changes
The portion of Chapter 910 being modified parallels the plan
amendment. The Chapter 910 change would allow for approval of
a development project where adequate capacity to accommodate
the project does not currently exist with the requirement that
"delayed construction" of certain capacity improvements occur
under the following conditions:
23
June 10, 1997 6001K 1 1 PAGE711
I
PAGE t y 6
1. The improvement must be in place or under construction
not more than two years from issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for a development project needing the
improvement; or
2. The capital improvements element must specify the
improvement's estimated date of commencement of actual
construction and the estimated date of completion; and
3. The Capital Improvements Element must include a
requirement that, if this allowance is used to meet the
concurrency requirement for a project, then a
comprehensive plan amendment will be required if the
roadway improvement needed to maintain levels of service
is deferred, delayed, or eliminated.
To conform with the 1996 plan amendment, the proposed LDR
amendment would update the text of Chapter 910 and include in
Chapter 910 a reference to Capital Improvements Element Table
13.24. That table gives the estimated date of commencement of
actual construction and the estimated date of project
completion for priority transportation projects.
PSAC Recommendation: At its May 15, 1997 meeting, the PSAC
voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed
concurrency regulation changes.
PZC Recommendation: At its May 22, 1997 meeting, the Planning
and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the
Board adopt the proposed concurrency regulation changes.
4. Allowing Banks in the PRO District
Recently, Peter Beuttell filed an LDR amendment request to
allow banks (including ATMs and drive-through facilities) and
credit institutions in the PRO district (see attachment #6).
Mr. Beuttell has an interest in a ±3 acre parcel located at
the northwest corner of SR 60 and 74th Avenue that is zoned
PRO (Professional Office) and has a residential (M-1 up to 8
units/acre) land use designation. The parcel does not appear
to qualify for, nor does planning staff support, a change in
the land use map to allow for a more intense commercial zoning
district. To increase the spectrum of allowable uses on the
parcel, Mr. Beuttell has filed the subject request, which, if
approved, could be applied to all properties within the county
zoned PRO.
*Applicant's Analysis
The applicant states that banks and credit institutions are
similar to other office uses (e.g. insurance and securities
sales offices) currently allowed in the PRO district.
Furthermore, the applicant contends that banks are less
intense than medical offices (currently allowed in PRO) in
relation to parking requirements. The applicant also states
that banks would not have as negative an impact as post
offices and libraries, which are allowed in PRO. The
applicant also cites examples of banks (many within the City
of Vero Beach) that abut residential uses and appear to be
compatible. Also, the applicant points out that the City of
Vero Beach's P.O.I. (Professional, Office, and Institutional)
district allows banks.
24
June 10, 1997
Staff's general response is that traffic generation is a
better measure of use activity and intensity than parking or
hours of operation assumptions. Comparing traffic generation
characteristics shows that banks are significantly more
intense than any uses currently allowed in the PRO district
(specifics are included in staff's analysis below). Staff
acknowledges that there are numerous examples within the
county where commercial abuts residential. In fact, such is
the case with almost every commercially zoned property in the
county. However, unlike properties zoned PRO, commercial
properties have a commercial land use designation.
On June 3, 1997, the applicant submitted an addendum to his
request. The addendum (see attachment #6) seeks to allow
banks in the PRO district as a "conditional use" (e.g.
administrative permit use) subject to 11 specific limitations
and design criteria. Although the applicant has attempted to
restrict the impacts of a bank use on PRO -zoned property
through special criteria, staff is still not in favor of the
request. Even under the proposed conditional use arrangement,
the primary use of the PRO -zoned property would still be a
bank. Such a use, even restricted in size to a 3,000 square
foot facility with 3 drive-in stations on a 1 acre parcel, as
now proposed by the applicant, would still allow a standard
sized bank on a standard sized "outparcel" property within the
PRO district. The resulting intensity of use on a one acre
parcel would generate an estimated 830 daily vehicle trips,
the same trip amount that would be generated by 83 single
family homes. In addition, the bank use itself would still be
inconsistent with the PRO district purpose and intent. Thus,
staff's denial recommendation is unchanged despite the
applicant's new, "conditional use" proposal.
*Staff's Analysis
This request needs to be analyzed on a countywide basis.
Currently within the county there are three areas that have
PRO district zoning:
OSR 60/74th Avenue area (Beuttell and Grall sites)
017th Street area (601 Plaza, Collins sites)
043rd Avenue between 18th Street and 19th Street.
These PRO -zoned areas are located adjacent to major arterial
roadways and are limited to areas that the county determined
are not appropriate for new single family development, but are
appropriate for a limited range of commercial uses and, in
some cases, as a buffer or transition between commercial and
residential uses. The special characteristics of these areas
are consistent with the purpose and intent of the PRO district
(see attachment #7). The PRO district is unique in relation
to all of the commercial zoning districts (OCR, MED, CN, CL,
CG, and CH) in that properties designated as residential (L-1,
L-2, M-1, M-2) on the land use map may be zoned PRO.
As illustrated by the attached table of uses allowed by zoning
district, the PRO district is the most limited district in the
county, while the CG and CH districts are the most intensive
districts with the broadest range of allowable uses (see
attachment #8). Under the current LDRs, the PRO district
allows only limited uses such as small, lower intensity
general and professional offices and medical offices. More
intense and larger scale uses such as banks, hotels, general
retail, convenience stores, and restaurants are not allowed in
the PRO district but are allowed in the more intense
25
June 10, 1997 , , I _ U_L FAGE 7.1 i
b00!;.. FAGE
commercial districts. In staff's opinion, the current PRO
district use limitations are consistent with the district's
purpose and the residential land use designation of all the
sites currently zoned PRO.
In regard to use intensity, as measured by traffic
generation/traffic parameters, banks are the most intense use
per square foot of building area except for drive-in
restaurants and convenience stores. The "commercial" uses
currently allowed in the PRO district generate between 16.3
and 86.8 trips per 1,000 square feet of building area (general
office and post office uses) compared to 190-276.7 trips per
1,000 square feet for banks (see attachment #9). Thus,
allowing banks in the PRO district, would allow a
significantly more intense use than the currently allowable
range of uses. In staff's opinion, allowing an intense use
such as a bank within the PRO district would be contrary to
the PRO district's purpose and intent and would "open the
door" for other, inappropriate and more intense uses. In
addition, it is staff's opinion that allowing such uses in the
PRO district could result in furthering a "strip commercial"
effect along arterial roadways, whereas development of
professional offices in PRO districts (currently allowed)
would not have the same effect. Therefore, in staff's
opinion, it is not appropriate to allow banks and financial
uses in the PRO district.
PSAC Recommendation: At its February 27, 1997 meeting, the
PSAC voted 5-1 to recommend that the Board deIIy the proposal
to allow banks in the PRO district.
PZC Recommendation: At its April 24, 1997 meeting, the
Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend
that the Board demy the proposal to allow banks in the PRO
district.
Each of the 4 amendments has been incorporated into a single
proposed ordinance (see attachment #1). Amendments 2 and 3
(see Parts 2 and 3 of attachment #1) are the type of LDR
modifications that can be adopted at a single hearing. Thus,
the Board could adopt one or both of these amendments at the
June 10th hearing. However, amendments 1 and 4 (see Parts 1
and 4 of attachment #1) involve a change in allowable uses
within a zoning district and can be adopted or denied only
after a second hearing. Therefore, a second hearing is
scheduled for the Board's June 24, 1997 regular meeting,
beginning at 9:05 a.m. in the Commission Chambers. In staff's
opinion, the Board, at the June 10th hearing, should direct
staff on each of the 4 proposed amendments to adopt, modify,
or delete the proposal. Then, at its June 24th meeting, the
Board can adopt the amendments that it wishes to adopt, with
any modifications it has directed staff to make.
Staff recommends that the Board:
1. Indicate its intention to adopt proposed amendments 1, 2, and
3 at its June 24, 1997 public hearing; and
2. Direct staff to delete amendment 4 (to allow banks in the PRO
district) from the proposed ordinance and indicate its
intention to deny the proposed amendment 4 request at its June
24, 1997 public hearing.
26
June 10, 1997
M M M
Commissioner Adams inquired about trip generations for post offices, and Director
Boling responded that it is 86.8 daily trips per thousand square feet and that a drive-in bank
generated 276.7 daily trips per thousand square feet. If the bank did not have a drive-in, the
number of trips would drop to 190 trips. The recent experience with new banks coming in has
been they have drive-ins. The figures come from the LDR's and are based on ITE (Institute of
Traffic Engineers) standards. In some instances, the County has done their own traffic counts.
Commissioner Ginn felt that the downtown post office was far busier than the Barnett
Bank on the beach. The figures did not make sense to her. She was reminded that the figures
were based on square footage.
Chairman Eggert asked about handicapped parking at gas stations having a small store,
how much is being required. Director Boling explained that it is based on the size of the store
and our requirements are based on the State standards. More would be required for larger
projects.
Commissioner Macht had a problem with the trip generation in thinking about the beach
post office, which is small yet swarming with cars all the time. He had no profound objection to
banks.
A brief discussion ensued about trips generations at banks versus post offices.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard
concerning the first proposed amendment. There was none. She asked if anyone wished to be
heard concerning the second proposed amendment. There was none. She asked if anyone
wished to be heard concerning the third proposed amendment. There was none. She then asked
if anyone wished to be heard concerning the fourth proposed amendment.
John Dean, local architect, advised that he was representing Mr. Beuttell. He presented
booklets to the Board members to illustrate his remarks. He then reviewed the following from
the booklet.
Administrative use Request
Limited size `
Banks and Financial 1 Credit uses
Repersentives Peter Beuttell
and John Dean Architect .
This request is an Increase to the spectrum of
allowable limited uses in PRO zoned properties.-
June
roperties:
27
June 10, 1997
Eine PAGE 71
john h. dean architect & associates, p.a., a.i.a.
June 9, 1997
This original application for this Administrative Use request would have been better handled if we had
applied for a Administrative Use rather than a Permitted Use. As it is now, both the PSAC and the
Planning and Zoning Commission voted not to recommend the Board of County Commission to support
the Permitted Use request.
What is before you now is not the same request, but a revised request, which modifies the Permitted Use
request to a Administrative Use request. There is a big difference between a Permitted Use request and
a Administrative Use request. It is our belief that the Administrative Use request is a proper and fitting Use
request for the four of the five parcels of PRO land in our County and that, should any other PRO
designation be made in the future by Indian River County on urban principal arterial roads, this
Administrative Use would be compatible with the intended use of the PRO zone.
The intended purpose of the PRO zone is by County Code.
(a) PRO: Professional office district. The PRO, professional office district, is designed to
encourage the development of vacant land and the redevelopment of blighted or declining
residential areas along major thoroughfares in selected areas of the county. The selected areas
will be deemed as no longer appropriate for strictly single-family use but which are not
considered appropriate for a broad range or commercial uses, as permitted in a commercial
zoning district. The PRO district may serve as a buffer between commercial and residential uses
or be established in areas in transition from single-family to more intensive land uses. The PRO
district shall be limited in size so as not to create or significantly extend strip commercial
development.
It is our belief that if the size and scale of a bank or credit institution is administratively limited, as we have
listed in our amended Administrative Use request, the requested use is entirely compatible with the
presently allowable PRO uses which include:
Security and credit institutions (banks do this)
Insurance agents, brokers, and service (banks sell insurance and broker securities)
Real estate
Holding and other investment offices (banks do investments)
Legal services
Bed and breakfast
Advertising
Credit reporting and collection (banks do credit collecting)
Employment agencies
Computer and data processing
General and professional offices (banks are offices)
Health and medical services offices and clinics
Places of worship
Cultural and civic facilities
Emergency services
Libraries
Post offices
Administrative approved uses of child and adult care
Government and administrative buildings
Limited public or private utilities
'Unless the Lord build the house they labor in vain that build it.' Psalm. 127
2223 10th Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 (561) 567-4907 / Fax: 569-3939
We believe that banks are offices and are not retail in nature.
The key here is that our Administrative Use request will limit the size of building and minimum land use
area for the facility. The Administrative Use request is very definitive and, not only limits the size of the
facility, but requires a high land use area for the use.
The Administrative Use request requirements define a small neighborhood bank which is compatible with
all the PRO uses allowed and is not a large, high intensity use facility, as is permitted in CN, CL, or CG
zoned areas.
28
June 10, 1997
M M M
M
Mr. Dean then reviewed the following and commented on each:
COUNTY
Just West of 17th Street bridge on
North side of road. High traffic area!!
Immediately West of 43rd Avenue
West office and medical complex
High traffic area!! This is not called
out by the county as an urban principle
arterial highway but rather an minor urban
arterial highway. So it will not qualify for
administrative bank use.
PRO SITES
South West corner of 17th Street
and 6th Avenue. George Warren
Corp. Building fully developed with
one and two story buildings.
High traffic area!!
Zara Plantation - Attorneys office
developed. Front paved area could
be developed further. High traffic
area!!
29 n
June 10, 1997
OUR PRO SITE
Northwest corner of 74th Avenue and Route 60 - North side of road.
View From Route 60 North across
our three acre site.
Sealed sweet is directly across
Route 60 just South of our PRO lot.
Sealed Sweet is zoned CN.
View to West and North of our PRO lot is
a six foot high solid wall which separates the
property from the adjacent Indian River Estates.
June 10, 1997
30
M M
OUR PRO SITE
Northwest corner of 74th Avenue and Route 60 - North side of road.
Looking East on Route 60.
Traffic!!
Directly west is 74th Avenue. Across 74th
Avenue is the west side of Village Green,
Looking West on Route 60.
Traffic!!
Directly West is a six foot high
Indian River Estates buffer wall.
Looking directly North is Indian
River Estates six foot high buffer wall.
31
June 10, 1997
RE: Land development Regulation Amendment
I wish to change my Land Development Regulation Amendment application,
requesting that banks and credit institutions (with automatic teller machines and drive
through facilities) be permitted as a ADMINISTRATIVE use within the PRO district. My
original application requested that banks, credit institutions, etc. be allowed as a
permitted use.
The suggested revised conditions are outlined as follows:
1. Development site must be located on a majef a#efieF an urban principal
arterial roadway.
2. Building square footage shall not exceed 3000 square feet of enclosed, air-
conditioned space.
3. Bank or credit institution shall not have more than three drive -up stations.
4. The development site of a bank or credit institution shall be no less than
one acre in size per each bank or credit institution.
5. Bank and credit institutions shall be limited to one story in height.
6. Where the development site of a bank abuts any residentially zoned property,
the buffer shall be a TYPE "B" BUFFER.
7. Where the development site of a bank abuts any residentially zoned property,
the site lighting shall be designed to shield abutting residential properties. The
site lighting plan must show outdoor lighting locations, method of shielding light
source from adjacent properties and intensity of outdoor illumination.
S. Interior Parking Area. 15% of the parking area shall be landscaped or the
amount of area needed to provide 1.5 landscape island for every 10 parking
spaces, whichever is greater.
9. "Drive -up" windows/stations or "loud speakers" shall not face any abutting
residential property. They shall be located in such a manner as to minimize any
adverse impact to any abutting, residentially zoned property and be designed in
such a manner as to be an aesthetic asset to the building and neighborhood.
10. All public telephones and ATM's shall be confined to an enclosed space built
into the main building or enclosed in a separate structure compatible with the
main building's architecture and designed with the safety of the user in mind.
11. "Visually offensive elements", as determined by the Indian River County
Planning Department, shall be concealed from view on all sides by approved
screening devices.
These conditions are suggested and may not be all inclusive. Likewise, the
terminology I have used may need to be refined. The assistance of the planning staff
in finalizing these conditions is requested.
32
June 10, 1997
"__J
WE ARE NOT REQUESTING A LARGE BANK!!!
l
Barnett Bank -Located in Vero Beach
on Miracle Mile. This is a large bank!!
First Union Bank -Located in Vero Beach
on Route 60 and Mockingbird.
This is a Large bank!!
June 10, 1997
Savings of America -Located in Vero
Beach on US 1. This is a large bank!!
New Harbor Federal Savings -Located
in Vero Beach on Route 60. This is a
Large bank!!
Our Special Administrative use request is for a small
scale neighborhood bank to be not larger than 3000
square feet with no more then three drive thru lanes.
The type of banking facility we are proposing is the
size of the Suntrust Bank located on the South side of
Route 60 just south of 43rd Avenue.
33
w"J
NOT THIS !!
Northern Trust Bank (Beach Bank) - Located on the corner of Route 60 and A -1-A. Too Large!!
First Union Bank - Located on Route 60 in Vero Beach (next to citv hall). Too Large!!
June 10, 1997
M
9M
M
M
NOT THIS !!
.r
First Union Bank -Located on the corner of Route 60 and 58th Avenue. Too Large!!
Great Western Bank - Located on Riverside National Bank - Located on
Route 60 in Vero Beach. Too large!! Route 60 Two -Story Facility. Two large!!
35
June 10, 1997
f,r
I
These two pictures are of one and two story office buildings at 43rd avenue Park West. Some of
the large banks indicated earlier are two story buildings. This Special Administrative use request
is for a small one story banking facility. This is to be limited to a maximum of 3000 square feet of
air conditioned building area, one story construction and three drive thru lanes on a minimum
lot size of one acre. These proposed revisions in Administrative use will affectively control
banking and credit uses to be entirely compatible with the PRO zone.
Traffic generation statistic presented by the county staff are book and field generated and we will not take issue with the
study. We do request that the generation statistics be reviewed with the new criteria which is limited to the total amount of
specific property to the use. The administrative use criteria we are presenting adds a new dimension to the equation of
traffic generation based on use in relation to required land area for a particular use.
In effect we are saying with one acre of land their will be a maximum of 3000 square feet of allowable bank office area. This
is new criteria and greatly effects the intensity of property use. Trip generation is thus regulated by use and minimum land
area requirements - a new factor which will changes the statistics and thus controls intensity.
Our request is somewhat similar to the POI zoning in the City of Vero Beach. The City of Vero Beach POI zoning does
allow businesses and professional offices including medical and dental along with administrative services, including banks
and financial institutions.
The City P.O.I. zone is similar to the County P.O.R. in that it is also intended as a transitional zoning area to be
implemented in highway oriented locations providing transitional uses to residential areas.
36
June 10, 1997
M
M
Mr. Dean advised that he had a concern with a portion of staff's memorandum (above)
under the section Staffs Analysis, the sentence: "Under the current LDRs, the PRO district
allows only limited uses such as small, lower intensity general and professional offices and
medical offices. More intense and larger scale uses such as banks, hotels, general retail,
convenience stores, and restaurants are not allowed ..." If the size were limited in the PRO
district, it would work. For example, hospitals are not allowed but medical offices are. They
serve the same function, but are limited in size. To illustrate his point, he commented on the
following:
3bL
i_
37
¢
a
13
o
M wn
7
W
U
�0 H
N
C7 Z� ¢
ia= a
LU
�
Y O F = 0
¢G H¢
S�
O020,)W
W
aac7Wa
W Z— S
W
044�WH
J a H w
aZMZO
<U.,;..
S
}
k C
F
0_0 jH
¢
O<Z
OW H
Wul
3bL
i_
37
¢
a
13
o
.D
W
Z
O
N
I
I
I
\�j
June 10, 1997 1'4,
w
00
1
r(nE ''G" Vt,r-Fe2
G
I
'Fl10 Q 1 E Ca o
pr, zoµ�-
7Zuo 5F 5LG,
PAnt I �ICe --
7zo-3oo =Z¢
ArEA
4-�5 5-6 SF CI S
PERMITTED OFFICE USE
ONE ACRE
COULD BE 7200 SF
COULD PUT PARKING UNDER
BUILDING AND ADD MORE
BUILDING AREA. THIS WOULD
GENERATE MORE TRAFFIC.
C. ,a
m
F.
U
ZONED POR
d
CD
CD
PCA Zo"e
Z(ob81Vr"711CU 6. CRANt� O
--
pAvr wv
43 556 <C ace) •
iv
CD
td
CD
ADMINISTRATIVE USE
N
1 BANK
W
CD
1 ACRE
MAXIMUM 3000 SF
MAXIMUM 3 DRIVE -UP LANES
(D
(D
c�
Mr. Dean then commented on the following:
Y
NOT THIS It.
Y "r L
Ci#w
New Community Savings Bank Route 60 located in front of Indian River Mall.
First American Bank - Route 60 in Vero Beach. Large facility with many drive thru lanes.
June 10, 1997
The type of Bank we want as a Special Administrative use is the office size of First Union on
Route 60 next to Cambridge Park but not with five drive thru lanes. Just three lanes is our
suggested limitation.
.±sye�
Sun Trust Bank on Route 60 in Vero Beach with a maximum of three drive thru lanes serves as
a prototype. This facility is one story in height, is less then 3000 square feet in area, and is a prime
example of the neighborhood branch bank the request will allow.
I
CONCLUSION
We have introduced some new information regarding Mr. Beuttell's original Permitted
Use request. There are many safeguards built in this Administrative Use request
before you. Since this request takes two public hearings, we request that this
Commission either approve this Administrative Use request as is, or request us to work
with the Planning Staff to further tailor the Administrative Use conditions so that the
Planning Staff is comfortable with the request for final presentation at the next
Commission meeting.
41 r r" ,u� Rdlc1
June 10, 1997
George Beuttell, 5000 16'h Street, stated that this type of bank is very similar to a
doctor's office for need. If you go to a small bank, you go for need. Branch banks are for the
convenience of the citizens/customers, and may limit extra traffic going to another location.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the Chairman closed the public
hearing.
In response to Commissioner Adams' inquiry, Community Development Director Robert
M. Keating chronicled the zoning history of the site. Commissioner Adams also asked if the
Board had done anything with the "big/small" with respect to grocery stores, and Chairman
Eggert recalled that they had not. Director Keating explained that there is a "big/small"
differentiation in the CL zoning for department stores.
Commissioner Ginn called attention to the fact that a real estate office would be allowed
and that Michael Thorpe's office (on AIA), which has caused many complaints because of the
high-intensity use, is a conditional use.
Director Boling pointed out the differences between the PRO district and the City's PIO.
He suggested that what had to be dealt with in this matter is that there can be mismanagement of
any type of use.
Discussion ensued as to the intent of the current application.
Commissioner Adams, Commissioner Ginn, and Commissioner Macht thought that this
should go back through the process, before Planning & Zoning, with Mr. Dean's presentation.
Commissioner Macht asked if staff found any points objectionable in Mr. Dean's
presentation. Director Boling thought there needed to be some clarifications, such as point 2,
that the square footage shall not exceed 3,000 square feet, and that 3,000 square feet shall be one
building and shall be the only building on that one acre, that there would be no additional office
uses.
Chairman Eggert understood that the drive -in -bays were not considered a separate
building area.
Commissioner Adams understood that on a 3 -acre parcel a 9,000 square foot building
would be allowed. Director Boling suggested that they could limit it to 3,000 square feet for a
bank use and they would have to find a way to have open area around the building.
Commissioner Adams felt that the trip generation was a key element because it was one
of the things that throws commercial designation and the associated activity into objectionable
form when it interferes with residential and lower uses. Perhaps we could get it down to
something within reason, compared to other uses in those areas that we allow now, and restrict
the square footage or something else, such as the height of the building.
Chairman Eggert stated she had a hard time with broad -brushing everything. But she felt
that it was true that there are properties in logical spaces that can take the smaller form of the
J
June 10, 1997
M r M
unit where you would not want to put the big form of it, in order to help the neighborhood. She
then asked when the next public hearing on these amendments was scheduled.
Director Boling advised that it had not yet been advertised but was scheduled for June
20. He suggested they could take action on the first three amendments and re -advertise for a
final hearing on this fourth amendment and track it separately.
Chairman Eggert was concerned about timing in the process of taking it back to the
Planning & Zoning. A brief discussion was held.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, to adopt staff recommendation #1, our intent to
adopt the proposed amendments 1, 2, and 3, at the June 24a` public
hearing, and that the new request (on 4) be redirected back to PSAC and
Planning & Zoning.
Commissioner Macht felt it was implicit that it be coordinated with staff, as Mr. Dean
had suggested. Chairman Eggert thought that most of the information was on the 6a` page of Mr.
Dean's booklet.
Chairman Eggert then asked when this would come back to the Board, and Director
Boling advised that it could come back to the Board either the end of July or the middle of
August after going to the PSAC and Planning & Zoning. Then she asked if it would be possible
to advertise the public hearing earlier, and Director Boling agreed that it could be brought back
in mid-July if it was fast -tracked.
County Attorney Vitunac counseled that when it is advertised, a copy of what will be
discussed must be available for people to look at and this will not be developed until it comes out
of PSAC and Planning & Zoning.
Director Boling stated they could take it to the Planning & Zoning Commission on June
26s`, do the PSAC sometime, and have it back to the Board on July 15a'.
Commissioner Adams AMENDED THE MOTION to bring all four of the
LDR amendments back to the July 15, 1997 Board of County
Commissioners meeting. Commissioner Tippin ACCEPTED the
amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion was
carried unanimously.
C,91
June 10, 1997 6001 G1-. PAGE-7c�;a
BOOK I E MGE '36
9.B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION MM — PRESENTATION BY THE CIVIC
ASSOCIATION (GENE WINNE) — PLANNING FOR SOLID WASTE
DISPOSAL
Gene Winne, 2096 Windward Way, Vice President and Board member of the Civic
Association, appreciated the opportunity to present suggestions on future solid waste planning.
He told of his monitoring of and contributions to the MRIVCO proposal and advised that the
Civic Association strongly supports the decision to table the plans at this point for solid waste
disposal.
Mr. Winne counseled that more analysis is required to select the most cost-effective and
politically -appropriate solution before proceeding again, because it is a very complicated subject,
the technology keeps changing, and cost can vary considerably. He believed that one of the
flaws of the INRIVCO proposal was that DUUVCO would have been given too many decisions
for too long. Even if privatization is the way to go, the Board cannot abdicate the major decision
making.
Mr. Winne suggested this is an appropriate time to step back and evaluate the alternatives
in order to be prepared to expand disposal of our solid waste more knowledgeably in the future.
With due respect to all Indian River County staff; he felt the need for outside expert knowledge,
namely a consulting organization with freedom from any historical biases. The Commissioners
need to know the alternatives and the costs, and then they can define waste disposal goals
consistent with the cost of each alternative. He maintained that any future RFQP must be more
specific as to the selection of waste -processing alternatives.
Mr. Winne then focused on the types of policies and goals that should provide guidelines
for the Board for.their ultimate selections. He stressed that extension of the landfill life is very
important, but it is a major economic factor impacting future costs, not the end in and of itself as
far as a goal is concerned.
The overall goal, Mr. Winne believed, was best described as political, that is: what must
we do to contribute our share to preserve the environment. It breaks into two categories: 1) to
minimize the negative impact on the environment caused by excessive depletion of our natural
resources; and 2) minimize the impact of our solid waste processing on the community's air and
water quality and other disturbances affecting nearby neighborhoods. Obviously, the pursuit of
our goals must comply with federal and state mandates and regulations.
On a policy level, Mr. Winne continued, we have such matters as privatization, regional
cooperation and total time frame to be encompassed in any plan. Perhaps privatization is the
June 10, 1997
- M M
way to implement the job, but with the County government still accountable. He cautioned that
regional cooperation could have many ramifications and mentioned several.
Lastly, Mr. Winne discussed the alternatives that were possible for the recycling process,
followed by his recommendation that an RFPQ be issued as soon as possible for a study before
the Board is confronted with major waste. disposal decisions.
At the conclusion of Mr. Winne's presentation, Chairman Eggert asked that he give a
copy of his presentation to Executive Aide Alice White.
(CLERK'S NOTE: Mr. Winne's typewritten notes have been filed in the
office of the Clerk to the Board with the backup materials for the
meeting.)
11.A. REGIONAL OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAM COMMITTEE — DISCUSSION
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated June 4, 1997:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DI N HEAD CONCURRENCE:
i
Obert M. lteating, P/7
Community Development Director
THROUGH: Sasan Rohani, AICP ,7"/ 1
Chief, Long -Range Planning
FROM: Peter Radke rK
Economic Development Planner
DATE: June 4, 1997
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY REPRESENTATIVES TOME
REGIONAL OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
COMMITTEE
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at their regular meeting of June 10, 1997.
45
June 10, 1997 L�nv '1 ,� p{GE r ��.
BOGY Mi PAGE 738
BACKGROUND
In 1985, Indian River County prepared an Overall Economic Development Plan (OEDP) and
established a set of policies for implementing this plan. This plan was prepared as a cooperative
effort of county government and citizens in the community for the purpose of promoting economic
growth and attracting qualified, desirable types of businesses to the county. The OEDP was prepared
in order to make the county eligible for receiving federal funds under the Economic Development
Act.
To remain eligible for assistance under the Economic Development Act, the county is required to
update the OEDP every five to eight years. Additionally, the county must submit an OEDP annual
report to the Economic Development Administration (EDA) to remain eligible for assistance.
Recently, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) initiated efforts to create a
regional economic development district (EDD). At its January 17, 1997 regular meeting, the
TCRPC unanimously approved a motion to authorize council staff to proceed with the initial steps
of forming an EDD and developing an Overall Economic Development Program for the region
(Indian River County, St. Lucie County, Martin County, and Palm Beach County).
If a regional EDD is created, there will not be any effect on future Indian River EDA applications.
Future grant applications will continue to compete with other applications from the entire eight -state
Southeast Reaion as defined by the RDA. The county will not have to compete separately with other
local governments within the EDD for EDA funds. Additionally, future EDA applications will
continue to go directly to the EDA. Applications will not have to be processed through the EDD.
Proposed projects, however, will have to be consistent with the regional OEDP.
At its May 27, 1997 meeting, the Indian River County Economic Development Council (EDC)
considered the issue of appointing representatives to the regional OEDP committee. Instead of
recommending representatives, however, the EDC recommended that Indian River County not join
the regional EDD as proposed by the TCRPC.
ANALYSIS
EDA guidelines require that an OEDP committee be formed to oversee the process of establishing
an Economic Development District. The OEDP committee will set the goals and objectives of the
program, identify actions, and set priorities to foster economic development and determine
appropriate programs and projects to be implemented.
The appointment of members to the OEDP committee is to be done by the counties (Indian River,
Martin, Palm Beach, and St. Lucie) which will be members of the Economic Development District.
The proposed composition of the OEDP committee is as follows:
► Indian River County 5 members
► St. Lucie County 5 members
' Martin County 5 members
► Palm Beach County 8 members
The guidelines provided by the EDA also indicate that the OEDP committee "must represent diverse
interests to ensure that viewpoints of all components of the community are considered and to take
advantage of local skills in program formulation and implementation." It should include
representatives of -
10.
f
► local governments
businesses
► industry
' finance
ER
June 10, 1997
► agriculture
the professions
► organized labor
► utilities
► education
► community organization
► public health agencies
► the unemployed or underemployed
The OEDP committee must also be representative of the population in the region. Therefore, it
should include racial or ethnic minorities and women.
According to the guidelines, the following elements should be considered when selecting OEDP
committee members:
I. public leadership
► economic and business development organizations
► employment and training sector
► distressed population, women, and minorities
► health and education professions
The TCRPC has requested that the Board of County Commissioners appoint five members to the
OEDP committee. Those members will represent Indian River County. The OEDP committee
appointments may represent any of the interests listed above.
As indicated, the EDC has recommended that the Board of County Commissioners not appoint
members to the regional OEDP committee and, in fact, has recommended that Indian River County
opt not to be included in the regional economic development district. The EDC's position reflected
the members' feeling that the county would not benefit from membership in the regional EDD and
that the county might lose some if its autonomy by participating in the regional EDD.
According to regional planning council staff, there are benefits for local governments participating
in a regional EDD. One benefit is an additional 10% federal share on EDA funded projects. Another
benefit is technical assistance from EDD staff. A further advantage is that the regional EDD will
eliminate the need for county staff to update and maintain the county's OEDP and eliminate the need
to submit annual reports.
While the EDC's concerns may be valid, it is possible for Indian River County to participate on the
regional OEDP committee and opt out of the regional. EDD at a later date. For that to occur, the
Board of County Commissioners must appoint representatives to the regional OEDP committee.
G WWL
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners appoint five members to the regional
overall economic development program committee as proposed by the Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Correspondence from the TCRPC, dated February 14, 1997.
2. Correspondence from the TCRPC, dated May 13, 1997.
3. TCRPC Information Handout.
47
June 10, 1997 boor, PAGE 7 q
boor, 10", DGE740
Community Development Director Robert M. Keating apologized for this matter being
listed as an "appointment", it should have been a "discussion".
Director Keating reviewed the above memo and the following letter from the Treasure
Coast Regional Planning Council:
trecvu
sL lude
May 13, 1997
Mr. Robert Keating
Community Development Director
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
AlT CCW 3
MAY 1997
V'.
�� 1fEtGr'IAElrT OEPT.
Subject: Appointments to Regional Overall Economic Development Program (OEDP)
Committee
Dear Mr. Keating:
As we discussed at a recent meeting in your office, the Board of the Treasure Coast
Regional Planning Council has instructed the Council staff to proceed with the initial
steps to develop an OEDP and to form an Economic Development District The
Guidelines provided by the Economic Development Administration (EDA) of the U.S.
Department of Commerce indicate that an OEDP Committee must be formed to oversee
the process. The Committee will set the goals and objectives of the program, identify
actions and set priorities to foster economic development and determine appropriate
programs and projects to be implemented.
The appointment of members to the OEDP Committee is to be done by the counties
(Indian River, St Lucie, Martin and Palm Beach) who will be members of the Economic
Development District The Guidelines provided by the EDA also indicate that the OEDP
Committee "must represent diverse interests to ensure that viewpoints of all components
of the community are considered and to take advantage of local skills in program
formulation and implementation." It should include representatives of
• local governments
• business
• industry
• finance
• agriculture
• the professions
• organized labor
• utilities
48
June 10, 1997
• education
• community organization
• public health agencies
• the unemployed or underemployed
The Committee must also be representative of the population in the Region It should
include racial or ethnic minortiw and «.onien.
According to the Guidelines, the following elements should be considered when selecting
Committee members:
• Public Leadership
• Economic and Business Development Organizations
• Employment and Training Sector
• Distressed Population, Women and Minorities
• Health and Education Professions
The Resource Committee of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council has suggested
that Council staff correspond with the counties through our uutud contacts with county
economic development staff in
seeking appointments to this Committee. We request that
you assist us in forming the OEDP Committee
by aPPng the
and/or county administrator and requesting County Ca�nission
Indian River CoO1n�nt of five (S� members from
tmty. The Committee appointments may represent any of the interests
listed above, keeping in mind that we must have a diverse committee which is
representative of the Region.
Thank you very much for your assistance. If you have any additional
q
feel free to call me or Linda Friar at the Council offices.. Oas Please
Sincerely,
Terry L. Hess, AICP
Planning Director
T LH:lg
3= LW. whoffln downs ewe
suns 205 • p.o. box IS29
Patin crh. ftrift 34990
Phone (961) 221.MW
u 269 4040 'o. 'Se 4 '214061-
Director
21106+-
Director Keating mentioned some of the benefits and drawbacks of membership in the
OEDP. He concluded with a revised recommendation that the Board appoint members to the
OEDP, but keep available the option of pulling out of the OEDP if at some future point in time
they feel it is not advantageous for the County to continue participating. He advised that Mike
Busha, the Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, was present to
answer any questions.
As a member of the Economic Development Council, Chairman Eggert pointed out that
County staff would still have to gather the information to be sent.
49
June 10, 1997 600111k I U -i PAGE 741
6021" —104 FAGE 9
Commissioner Adams inquired about costs involved, and Chairman Eggert advised that
the TCRPC would be adding staff but they had not advised the cost to the County.
Mike Busha, Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council,
advised that it was not anticipated that there would be a cost to the County. It is hoped that
funding would come from planning grants of between $50,000 to $70,000 from the EDA. If the
grants are not received, another way will have to be found to fund. The task they will perform is
to prepare an overall economic development plan for the four counties initially, and help
coordinate the updates required by the Federal government.
Commissioner Adams understood that the OEDP would merely coordinate, that no
economic benefit would come directly to the County.
Chairman Eggert advised that Indian River County would receive 10% on our funded
projects, for which we have never applied.
Chairman Eggert then voiced her concerns which started back at the strategic plan and
doing the economic development part of it. Some changes were sent in by the County, and
nothing was changed. She was really concerned about what was in the plan versus what was in
the overall economic development plan and what is going to fit for St. Lucie, Martin, and Palm
Beach Counties, and how it would really help Indian River County in the long run. She
maintained there was no benefit for the County to do it now.
Mr. Busha said he had stayed up all last night trying to figure out how he was going to
convince Indian River County why this would be such a great idea. He had come to the
conclusion that he cannot say anything other than the 10% bonus credit, the OEDP updates, the
grant writing and things like that. The reason is that the regional planning council has no track
record, no experience related to engaging all four counties in some economic development effort.
He could tell them about what has happened in other regional planning councils. The Treasure
Coast region is untried. He knew that everyone was worried about the 800 pound gorilla (Palm
Beach County). He had recently made a presentation for them on "Eastward Ho" for Palm
Beach County and at the conclusion, they took him aside and asked, "What the heck are the three
northern counties doing? They're taking over." They further indicated to him that they felt the
three northern counties were taking over the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. So,
they have concerns, too, and he did not know how to deal with it, but he knew there was strength
in numbers and that a lot of the positive initiatives that happened in the other regional planning
councils would not have happened if there was not a forum.
try it.
Mr. Busha commented that he was not before them to offer anything, just to ask that they
From what Chairman Eggert has been able to observe, she failed to see interaction and
cooperation resulting from groups which supposedly worked together, but yet might actually be
50
June 10, 1997
working at cross purposes. It seemed to her that if we worked at the part of the equation we
would be a lot further ahead. Her other concern was the selection of the committee members and
the criteria.
Commissioner Adams asked how it was that Palm Beach County ended up with 8
members and the other three counties had 5 each, and Mr. Busha remarked that Palm Beach
County had asked the same question, "How come we have only 8, when we have a million
people?" The representation numbers were based on population.
Commissioner Adams countered that the money is coming from a grant, one county is
not giving any more than any other county, so she did not see that one county should have any
more representatives than any other county. She could see it if they contributed more money.
Her other concern had to do with the meeting place because Indian River County was quite a
distance from Stuart and it was difficult for people to make the journey.
Mr. Busha thought the OEDP could be rotated to the different counties, so that everyone
is not completely inconvenienced every meeting.
Commissioner Adams felt that all four counties already had very strong economic
development councils already working, and the offer would merely coordinate, but it would still
involve county staff to furnish information. She felt there were other sources of loans. She had
mixed emotions that maybe this was just another bureaucratic layer to find a niche to qualify to
fund another staff member. She was not convinced that it was necessary.
Commissioner Ginn agreed that this might turn out to be another layer of bureaucracy.
She had to wonder if the benefits to Indian River County are worth the involvement. We are
unique and have a unique lifestyle here. We want economic development, but we have an idea
of what we'd like, and we're not really in sync with some of the other counties to the south.
Also, there is likely to be competition in numbers.
Commissioner Tippin did not want to risk tampering with what is now in place with the
Chamber of Commerce's efforts, plus he was not in favor of adding this to what the regional
planning council needs to be about.
Commissioner Macht commented this is the age of devolution as defined by the Congress
on down, which means we are restoring the authority that has been usurped from local
governments over the years. He thought Indian River County had no business going in the
opposite direction.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Commissioner
Macht, the Board unanimously and respectfully declined the invitation to
join the Regional Overall Economic Development Program Committee.
51
June 10, 1997
ECnr .�
-� L FAGE 7J
EO�K.
4
11.E. 1997/98 ANTI-DRUG ABUSE GRANT APPLICATIONS
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated June 6, 1997:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: June 6, 1997
SUBJECT: 1997/98 ANTI-DRUG ABUSE GRANT APPLICATIONS
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET AGENDA ITEM
FROM: Joseph A
OMB Dir
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At the Board meeting on June 3, 1997 the Board of County Commissioners approved the funding for
the 1997/98 Substance Abuse Drug Grant. We now have the original grant applications ready to be
submitted to the state for the following agencies: IRC Adolescent Substance Abuse Counseling
Program and Aftercare Program, Multi -Agency Drug Enforcement Unit (M.A.C.E.), Teens Acting
Responsibly Global Education Troupe (T.AR.G.E.T.), and the Substance Abuse Council of Indian
River County. These applications are on file in the Board's office for the Board's perusal.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the Board chairman to sign the individual grant applications and other necessary related
documents for submittal to the state by the deadline of June 16, 1997.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously authorized the
Chairman to sign the individual grant applications and other
necessary related documents for submittal to the State by June 16,
1997, as recommended in the Memorandum.
COPIES OF GRANT APPLICATIONS ARE ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
52
June 10, 1997
11.G.1. FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY BLANKET
LICENSE UTILITY CROSSING AGREEMENT
The Board reviewed Memoranda dated April 7, 1997 and June 3, 1997:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Direct
SUBJECT: Florida East Coast Railway Company
Blanket License Utility Crossing Agreement
REF. LETTER: M.O. Bagley, Manager, FECRR, to James Davis dated May 29, 1997
DATE: June 3, 1997
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
During the April 15, 1997 meeting of the Board of County Commissioners, staff was
directed to request the FECRR Company to waive the 16th Street and 12th Street storm
sewer pipe crossing fees since the drainage mutually benefits the County and the
Railroad. The Railroad has responded by denying the request.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends approving the agreement as presented during the April 15, 1997
Commission meeting (see attached April 7, 1997 memo from James Davis to James
Chandler).
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director '="
SUBJECT: Florida East Coast Railway"Company -
Blanket Utility Crossing Agreement
REF. LETTER: M.O. Bagley, Manager, FECRR Industrial Development and Real Estate Office, to
Jim Davis dated Mar. 26, 1997
DATE: April 7, 1997
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
As the Public Works Department has constructed various drainage pipes and traffic signal
conduit beneath the FEC Railway tracks, individual agreements for each project were
approved to provide for the County facilities in the 100' railroad right-of-way. A yearly
license fee of $50. per year has been required to be paid by the County. At this time, the
53
June 10, 1997
60�h '� O' PAGE.
FECRR requests that the County execute one blanket agreement for all three pipe
crossings instead of having three individual agreements on record. In addition, the annual
license fee is increasing substantially between 1997 and 2000, for one crossing as much
as 700%. The total yearly fee for the three pipes will be $150 for 1997 and $725 in 2000
and thereafter.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
As usual, the FECRR is very autonomous in requiring right-of-way users to execute
agreements such as the one attached. The alternatives are as follows:
Alternative No. 1
Approve the agreement and authorize the Chairman's signature.
Alternative No. 2
Do not approve the agreement and remove the two storm sewer pipes (one
under the 16"' Street and one under 12t' Street) and traffic signal conduit at
Highland Drive.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 whereby the agreement is approved. Funding to be
from Road and Bridge Division Fund 111-214.
ATTACHMENT
1) Referenced letter
2) 04/07/97 Agenda Item memo from James Davis to James Chandler
3) Agreement
County Administrator James E. Chandler advised that Vero Beach City Manager Rex
Taylor had requested that the Board defer action on this matter.
Commissioner Adams had spoken with the Florida Association of Counties regarding this
matter and she thought the impact of this is important state-wide and the cost to the counties is
significant. She plans to speak with the attorney for the FAC after the meeting to discuss this.
She thought it had to be looked at long-range as it has incredible financial implications. She also
thought that our U.S. Senators and Congressmen needed to be brought into this as there are
considerable railroad subsidies. In the past we have tried to cooperate, but she believed it is now
time to join together with the other cities and counties in the state and let it be known that it is
too much for our taxpayers and not be captive anymore.
Commissioner Macht agreed, and Chairman Eggert suggested they might defer it to the
20 of June so as not to conflict with the LDR hearing.
54
June 10, 1997
Commissioner Adams thought that whatever help we can get from the FAC and
Congressmen and Senators might have some bearing on when they want to have it come back
and on the recommendation.
County Attorney Charles P. Vitunac advised that the City of Vero Beach is considering
condemning the right-of-way under the railroad track, a one-time payment and then they would
be finished with payment. They have condemnation powers and so does the railroad, so it will
be a legal battle of public interest. He thought legislative resolution of the matter would be even
better.
There was a brief discussion on the urgency of the matter. Public Works Director James
W. Davis advised that the railroad was patient when we submitted a letter a month or two ago,
and in their response they simply indicated that our further handling and return of the agreement
would be appreciated.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY Commissioner
Adams, the Board unanimously deferred this item to June 24, 1997.
11.G.2. PEP REEF — EXPERIMENTAL TEST PLAN FOR SEA
TURTLE MONITORING —AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated June 3, 1997:
TO: James E. Chandler, DATE: June 3, 1997
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director
?fisl—
FROM: Jeffrey R. Tabar, Coastal Engineer
SUBJECT: Experimental Test Plan for PEP Reef Sea Turtle Monitoring -
Amendment to Contract
REF. LETTER: Dr. John R. Fletemeyer to Jeffrey Tabar dated 5/6/97
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Aquatic Research, Conservation, and Safety, Inc. is under contract with Indian River
County to provide biological monitoring, preparation of interim reports and related
professional services for the PEP Reef Test Plan(Sea Turtle Monitoring).
55
June 10, 1997
6021Y -101' HiCE 7
County staff and the consultant have been working with the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, Bureau of Protected Species Management, to develop an
acceptable protocol that will generate precise and accurate data in an efficient, cost
effective manner. Following negotiations there were several additional items needed for
the "Revised FDEP Turtle Tracking Program". The Consultant has submitted a request
for additional funding in the amount of $10,580.
Involved in the Consultants request is funding for two global positioning systems (GPS)
which would enable the user to record the position of the turtle hatchlings. The suggested
make and model of the GPS unit was determined to not have adequate features and
functions to perform the necessary tracking for the experiment.
County staff have researched several manufacturers and found an acceptable GPS unit.
This GPS unit, manufactured by Trimble Surveying and Mapping, would not only be
utilized for the turtle tracking but can be used to perform various tasks throughout the
County. Several departments have shown interest and support for a purchase of one unit
(i.e. Coastal Engineer, Surveying, Engineer, Environmental Planning, and Utilities) and are
willing to cost share. The other unit would be rented by the Consultant.
The attached Amendment to Contract provides an outline of additional items and costs
associated with the Sea Turtle Monitoring Program. The purchase of one GPS Unit and
related costs by the County would be very beneficial to many county departments.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends that the Board approve the following requests:
1) Amendment to Contract in the amount of $5,000 for additional services for
the PEP Sea Turtle Monitoring Program. Funding from Tourist Tax - PEP
Reef Project.
2) Purchase of a GPS System in the Amount of $ 9,495. Training costs of
$2,950 would be funded from Public Works Department 111-243-519-
033.19(Other Professional Services)
Funding of the GPS System would be as follows:
Vero Lake Estates MSBU Fund 185 $ 1,000
(Needed for wetland determination)
Transportation Fund 111 Contingency $ 7,495
PEP Reef Contingency Fund $1,000
Total $ 9,495
ATTACHMENT
Cost Estimate for GPS Training from Stanley S. Latimer to Jeff Tabar Dated June 4, 1997
Amendment to Contract.
Letter from Dr. John R. Fletemeyer to Jeffrey Tabar dated May 6, 1997
Trimble Surveying and Mapping products brochure
June 10, 1997
31
O
Commissioner Macht commented that Dr. Fletemeyer's letter of May 6, 1997, in the
back-up, was the most amazing thing he had ever read, especially on the first page where the
"Chevy" and "Cadillac" version is mentioned.
Commissioner Adams explained that the "Chevy" and "Cadillac" terms were used when
first negotiating with Dr. Fletemeyer, that we did not want the "Cadillac", just the "Chevy"
monitoring on the turtles. That was what had been negotiated with the State. So, what he was
saying in the letter is that we have left the "Chevy" and gone back to the "Cadillac."
Commissioner Macht felt the letter was a comedy sketch and read portions of the letter so
the public would be aware. What really got to him was the line that there probably are not
enough turtles to count here, they want to go down to Palm Beach County and count their turtles.
He could not vote for this.
Commissioner Ginn stated she could not vote for it either.
Public Works Director James W. Davis recapped what had been an "interesting"
negotiation with Florida Department of Environmental Protection in order to have them approve
the logistics and the procedures for tracking the sea turtle hatchlings as they try to maneuver over
the PEP reef. He gave history of the conceptual program that was developed originally, with
agreement that the details were to be worked out later. Coastal Engineer Jeffrey R Tabar has
been working out the details with DEP. They have come to some kind of middle ground, with
the State easing some of their requirements and we have come a little bit beyond our original
scope of work. This has been laboriously negotiated. Director Davis had a hard time
understanding some of the need for this since he was not a sea turtle -tracking biologist. But, he
assured them that some middle ground had been reached and the cost amount had been reduced.
He suggested this needed to be decided quickly because the nesting season is here and we must
do this as a part of the 3 -year test plan for the PEP Reef program. Uwe do not resolve this this
month, we will lose the July opportunity to do the work.
Commissioner Macht believed that the truth of the matter is that DEP is requiring us to
do this as a punitive action. DEP had opposed the PEP Reef at the start. He felt it was ridiculous
and a sham.
Commissioner Adams added that we did get the permit with the proviso that we worked
something out to do this summer. She advised that there is quite a bit of difference in the dollars
and what is being done, that everything in the letter is not being done.
Director Davis concurred and added that the County has reduced the consultant's scope
of work from $10,580 down to $5,000. It includes renting one GPS unit and the purchase of
another. He assured them the purchased GPS would be useful for many County projects.
Commissioner Adams felt it was important to monitor the turtles, but wanted to see what
DEP did with the information when we do all this. It was very frustrating to have to deal with
57
June 10, 1997
SOCIIII I P;,GE tl'
Y
6021, '* 0d' i�'�;UE d 5-0
them. She clarified that what was before them was an amendment to the contract, an additional
$5,000, which takes the turtle -tracking contract up to $61,000.
Chairman Eggert read staff's recommendation, pointing out the amendment to the
contract as well as the purchase of the GPS system.
There was discussion of the funding, and Director Davis pointed out that the actual costs
and amendment were on pages 150A & B in the backup
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, to approve staffs recommendation.
Under discussion, Commissioner Macht understood that their feet would be held to the
fire for accountability for the data collected and that our Legislative Delegation has been fully
informed of our objections to all of this. If so, he would vote in support.
Director Davis agreed completely with holding their feet to the fire, but advised that
Coastal Engineer Jeffrey R. Tabar will be assisting the consultant. Part of the reduction in cost
was Mr. Tabar's agreement to do some of the work with the consultant. He will be on the beach,
but probably not tracking the turtles.
Commissioner Macht explained that he wanted feedback of the data, what good it served,
and what conclusions are reached.
Commissioner Macht stressed that it is time to put an end to this nonsense.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion was carried
unanimously.
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
11.H. RFP 7025, WEST REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PLANT - CONSULTING SERVICES FOR CIVIL SITE WORK
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated May 23, 1997:
58
June 10, 1997
DATE: May 23, 1997
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR—,
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILI SERVICES
PREPARED GENE A. RAUTH
AND STAFFED OPERATIONS MANAGER WATER/WASTEWATER f_F-
BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY RFP 7025, CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR CIVIL SITE WORK AT THE WEST REGIONAL
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
On January 29, 1997, the County received six (6) responses to the
above -referenced request for proposals. On February 28, 1997,
the staff short-listed the three candidates for presentations.
On April 16, 1997, presentations were made to the staff selection
committee. The selection process was finalized and the
department is now prepared to proceed with contract negotiations.
The staff selection committee ranked the three short-listed firms
as follows:
1. Carter Associates, Inc.
2. Gee and Jenson, Inc.
3. Messler and Associates, Inc.
The firm of Carter Associates, Inc., was selected by the
committee. A copy of the firm's proposal is on file in the Board
of County Commissioners' office.
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that
the Board of County Commissioners authorize the staff to proceed
with the negotiations for a contract for consulting services for
civil site work at the west regional wastewater treatment plant
with Carter Associates, Inc.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Macht, to approve staffs recommendation.
59
June 10, 1997 +@,_ ' p�.aYI
bon1, - �i 1 P,i6E i31
Commissioner Ginn questioned why there was no backup showing the need for these
consulting services, and Chairman Eggert advised that had already come before the Board
previously.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion was
carried unanimously.
13.A.1. BUDGET WORKSHOP DATES
Chairman Eggert reviewed a Memorandum dated June 6, 1997:
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman
Date: June 6, 1997
Subject: Budget Workshop dates
Because of the July 4 holiday weekend and shortened work week, it would
help Joe Baird and his staff if we could move the workshop dates to the week
of July 14-17. It takes a lot of time to assemble all the figures after the tax rolls
come out, and get the budget packets printed and assembled. The additional
time would also give the Commissioners more time to study the information
before the budget workshop.
The following times are available:
Monday, July 14
Tuesday, July 15
Wednesday, July 16
Thursday, July 17
10:00a.m. to 5:00p.m.
1:00p.m. to 5:00p.m.
9:00a.m. to 3:00p.m.
2:00p.m. to 5:00p.m.
Please choose the dates and times that are best for you.
Following a brief discussion, the Board reached CONSENSUS and approved the dates as
stated in the Memorandum.
Al
June 10, 1997
13.A.2. APPOINTMENT TO DODGER TASK FORCE
The Board reviewed a Memorandum dated June 6, 1997:
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman
Date: June 6, 1997
Subject: Appointment to Dodger Task Force
I am requesting the Board to approve the appointment of Commissioner
Kenneth Macht to the Dodger Task Force.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Commissioner
Ginn, the Board unanimously approved the appointment of Commissioner
Ken Macht to the Dodger Task Force.
B.D. REPORT ON UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
Commissioner Ginn gave a brief report on the first Utility Advisory Committee meeting
held yesterday. She thought it went very well and was pleased with the members of the
committee. They have already scheduled trips to the Landfill and the water and sewer plant.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the Board
adjourned at 10:55 a.m.
ATTEST:
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk
Minutes Approved:� 'q Q 19 -7
61
June 10, 1997
Carolyn K LVgEgert, Ch
I �'I A "T--
Eo,ry, --U Ili r'�cE 13