HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/15/2002MINUTES ATTACHED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
County Commission Chamber
County Administration Building
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Ruth M. Stanbridge, Chairman
John W. Ttppin, Vice Chaiiinan
Fran B. Adams
Caroline D. Ginn
Kenneth R. Macht
District 2
District 4
District 1
District 5
District 3
James E Chandler, County Administrator
Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney
Kimberly Massung, Executive Aide to BCC
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
CALL TO ORDER
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
BACKUP
PAGES
James E. Chandler
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA /
EMERGENCY ITEMS
ADDITIONS: 7.S. Fred Mensing's Request Concerning Property in the North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area
7.1. Sheriff's Office Request re State Criminal Alien Assistance Program/Contingency Fee Contract
with Justice Benefits, Inc.
DELETION:
7.0. Florida Association of Counties (FACo) Request for an Ad Regarding "Cost Shifting from the
State to Counties"
5. PROCLAMATION and PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation by Senator Ken Pruitt
Presentation of Proclamation Designating January 17
thru 20, 2002 as Fellsmere Frog Leg Festival Days
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Received & Placed on File in Office of Clerk to the Board:
1) Report of Convictions, December 2001
2) Fellsmere Water Control Distnct — Schedule of
Bi -Monthly Meetings FY 2002
BACKUP
PAGES
B. Approval of Warrants
(memorandum dated January 3, 2002) 2-9
C. Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver
for Lot 16, Block 16, Vero Lake Estates, Unit 3
(memorandum dated December 27, 2001)
D. Out -of -County Travel Approval Request for
Commissioners and Staff to Attend NACo Legislative
Conference in Washington, DC
(memorandum dated January 8, 2002)
10-13
14-16
Out -of -County Travel for Commissioners to Attend
Legislative Day — February 20, 2002 17-21
F. Appointment of Joseph Petrulak to Code Enforcement
Board
(memorandum dated January 7, 2002)
G. Gifford Road Landfill; Proposed Tolling Agreement;
United Parcel Service
(memorandum dated January 8, 2002)
22-25
26-29
H. County Attorney Moving Expenses
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002) 30-30A
I. County Commissioner District Boundary Changes;
Proof of Publication
(memorandum dated January 8, 2002)
31
J. Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for
Lot 14, Block 20, Vero Lake Estates, Unit 4
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
K. Gifford Area Stoll iwater Improvement Project
Work Order No. 5
(memorandum dated January 4, 2002)
32-35
36-40
L Five (5) Year Lease for Copier
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002) 41-46
Dir [ PG i
CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd.):
M. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 004
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
Land Crab Ordinance
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
BACKUP
PAGES
47-52
Florida Association of Counties (FACo) Request for
an Ad Regarding "Cost Shifting from the State to
Counties"
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
Request Permission for Out -of -Town Travel by
Commissioner Adams to Attend the 15th Annual
National Conference on Beach Preservation Tech-
nology — January 23-25, 2002 in Biloxi, MS
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
Appointment to the Project Delivery Team for the
Development of the Indian River Lagoon North
Feasibility Study
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
Scott and Marian Riley Request for Release of a Portion
of an Easement at 156 9th Avenue (Indian River Heights
Subdivision)
(memorandum dated January 7, 2002)
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS and
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
None
PUBLIC ITEMS
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Approval of Revisions to the Indian River County
Manatee Protection and Boating Safety Compre-
hensive Management Plan regarding Marina Water
Depth Requirements and Calculation of High Water -
Craft -related Manatee Mortality (Legislative)
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
BACKUP
PUBLIC ITEMS (cont'd.): PAGES
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS (cont'd.):
2. County Initiated Request to Amend the Compre-
hensive Plan to Redesignate 10 Acres from M-2
to PUB Legislative)
(memorandum dated January 4, 2002) 106-125
PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
Request from Brian T. Heady to address the Commission
on issues that relate to history of Indian River County; and
issues that relate to the Florida Constitution; and provisions
to resolve current issues
(letter dated January 9, 2002)
PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
None
10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. Community Development
None
E mergency Services
None
G eneral Services
1. Final Payment and Release of Retainage — Siemens
B uilding Technologies, Indian River County Jail -
D etention Electronics
(memorandum dated January 8, 2002)
License Agreement for Placement of Vending
Machines at the Indian River County Public
Shooting Range
(memorandum dated January 8, 2002)
126A-130
131-137
Request for Approval Change Order #1 with Dow -
Howell -Gilmore Associates, Inc. for Redesign of
Existing Restrooms
(memorandum dated January 8, 2002)
Bid Award: IRC Bid 44021 Dental Clinic Addition
at the County Health Department
(memorandum dated January 8, 2002)
138-141
142-164
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (cont'd.):
D. Leisure Services
None
Office of Management and Budget
None
Personnel
None
Public Works
1. Unpaved Roads Program
(memorandum dated January 4, 2002) 165-218
Riverpoint Subdivision Security Gate
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002) 219-246
Approval of Change Order No. 2 for Vero Lake
Estates Stoiuiwater Improvements, Phase I
(memorandum dated January 7, 2002
247-252
Memorandum of Understanding between the St.
Johns River Water Management District and
Indian River County for sediment, flow reduction,
and other water quality improvements within the
Indian River Fauns Water Control District
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
East Indian River County Master Stoiniwater
Management Plan Amendment to Work Order
No. 1
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
Acceptance of Grant Award #NA170Z2109
Coastal Impact Assistance Program
(memorandum dated January 7, 2002)
Kings Highway Improvements
Engineering Services, Amendment No. 14
(memorandum dated December 21, 2001)
Utilities
None
253-263
264-287
288-329
330-333
Human Services
None
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY
C. N. Kirrie Proposal
(memorandum dated January 9, 2002)
BACKUP
PAGES
334-343
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. Chairman Ruth M. Stanbridge
Updates
B. Vice Chairman John W. Tippin
C. Commissioner Fran B. Adams
D. Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
Committee Appointments and Re -Appointments 2002
(memorandum dated January 7, 2002)
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS/BOARDS
A. Emergency Services District
None
344-357
Solid Waste Disposal District
None
Environmental Control Board
None
15. ADJOURNMENT
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which includes the testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal will be based.
Anyone who needs a special accommodation for this meeting may contact the County's
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinator at 567-8000 x1223 at least 48 hours in advance of
meeting.
Indian River County WebSite: http://bccl.co.indian-river.fl.us
Full agenda back-up material is available for review in the Board of County Commission Office,
Indian River County Main Library, IRC Courthouse Law Library, and North County Library
Meeting may be broadcast live on AT & T Cable Channel 13 — rebroadcast continuously Thursday 1:00
p.m. until Friday morning and Saturday 12:00 noon until 5:00 p.m.
Meeting broadcast same as above on AT & T Broadband, Channel 27 in Sebastian.
•
INDEX TO MINUTES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MEETING OF JANUARY 15, 2002
1. CALL TO ORDER 1
2. INVOCATION 1
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1
4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS 1
5.A. PRESENTATION BY SENATOR KEN PRUITT - OPENING INDIAN RIVER
COMMUNITY COLLEGE/FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY -
HALLSTROM FARMSTEAD - LOST TREE ISLANDS 2
5.B. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 17
THRU 20, 2002 AS FELLSMERE FROG LEG FESTIVAL DAYS 3
6.A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4
7. CONSENT AGENDA 4
7.A. Reports 4
7.B. Approval of Warrants 4
7.C. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 16, Block 16, Vero Lake
Estates, Unit 3 - Janice Kuhns - 8266 92nd Avenue 11
7.D. Out -of -County Travel Approval Request for Commissioners and Staff to
Attend NACo Legislative Conference in Washington, DC 12
7 E Out -of -County Travel for Commissioners to Attend Legislative Day -
February 20, 2002 13
7.F. Appointment of Joseph Petrulak to Code Enforcement Board 14
7.G. Gifford Road Landfill; Proposed Tolling Agreement - United Parcel
Service 14
7.H. County Attorney Moving Expenses 15
7.I. County Commissioner District Boundary Changes - Proof of Publication
16
1
nu F 0
•
7.J. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver - Lot 14, Block 20, Vero Lake
Estates Unit 4 - Tozzolo Brothers Construction Co. 17
7.K. Gifford Area Stormwater Improvement Project - Carter Associates, Inc. -
Work Order No. 5 19
7 L IKON Printing System - IOS Capital, Inc. - Five (5) Year Lease for Copier
(Courthouse - Clerk of Circuit Court) 20
7.M. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 004 21
7.N. Proposed Land Crab Ordinance - Public Hearing Scheduled for February 5,
2002 26
7.0. Florida Association of Counties (FACo) Request for Ad Regarding "Cost
Shifting from the State to Counties" 27
7.P. Out -of -Town Travel for Commissioner Adams to Attend 15th Annual
National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology - January 23-25,
2002 - Biloxi, Mississippi 27
7.Q. Commissioner Adams Appointed to Project Delivery Team for
Development of Indian River Lagoon North Feasibility Study (Component
of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan) 28
7.R. Resolution No. 2002-006 - Scott and Marian Riley - Release of a Portion of
an Easement at 156 9th Avenue, Indian River Heights Subdivision 29
7.S. Fred Mensing - Reject Requirement to Take Action - Lots 2 and 3 Berry's
Plan - North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area 32
7.T. State Criminal Alien Assistance Program - (Sheriff's Office) 33
9.A.1. PUBLIC HEARING -REVISIONS TO THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
MANATEE PROTECTION AND BOATING SAFETY COMPREHENSIVE
MANAGEMENT PLAN REGARDING MARINA WATER DEPTH
REQUIREMENTS AND CALCULATION OF HIGH WATER CRAFT -
RELATED MANATEE MORTALITY (Legislative) 34
9.A.2. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE NO. 2002-002 - COUNTY -INITIATED
REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO REDESIGNATE
10 ACRES FROM M-2 TO PUB (GIFFORD HEALTH CLINIC) (Legislative)
42
9.B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM - REQUEST FROM BRIAN HEADY TO
ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ISSUES THAT RELATE TO HISTORY
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; AND ISSUES THAT RELATE TO THE
FLORIDA CONSTITUTION; AND PROVISIONS TO RESOLVE CURRENT
ISSUES 55
2
3fi
• •
9.C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS 56
11.C.1. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL - DETENTION ELECTRONICS -
SIEMENS BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES - FINAL PAYMENT AND
RELEASE OF RETAINAGE 56
11.C.2.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC SHOOTING RANGE - LICENSE
AGREEMENT FOR VENDING MACHINES - VENDOR SERVICE
SPECIALISTS, INC 57
11.C.3. MAIN LIBRARY - REDESIGN EXISTING RESTROOMS - DOW-
HOWELL-GILMORE ASSOCIATES, INC. CHANGE ORDER #1 .. 58
11.C.4. AWARD BID #4021 - DENTAL CLINIC ADDITION - COUNTY
HEALTH DEPARTMENT - BARTH CONSTRUCTION, INC. 59
11.G.1. UNPAVED ROADS PROGRAM 61
11.G.2. RIVERPOINT SUBDIVISION SECURITY GATE - (TONY ESPOSITO)
70
11.G.3. VERO LAKE ESTATES STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS, PHASE I
- CHANGE ORDER NO. 2. - C E M. ENTERPRISES, INC. 75
11.G.4.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - ST. JOIINS RIVER
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT - SEDIMENT, FLOW
REDUCTION, AND OTHER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS WATER CONTROL DISTRICT
76
11.G.5. EAST INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MASTER STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN - CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC. -
AMENDMENT TO WORK ORDER NO. 1 78
11.G.6. COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - NATIONAL
OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (NOAA)
ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT AWARD #NA170Z2109 80
11.0.7. KINGS HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS - KIMLEY-HORN, INC. -
AMENDMENT NO. 14 81
3
n.,
0 ik
0
12.A. COUNTY ATTORNEY - C. N. KIRRIE PROPOSAL 83
13.A. CHAIRMAN STANBRIDGE - UPDATES - DODGERS 93
13.F. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS AND RE -APPOINTMENTS 2002 93
DOCUMENTS RECEIVED FOR THE RECORD 97
BOUND VOLUME $16,810,000 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY REVENUE
BONDS, SERIES 2001 FOR SPRING TRAINING FACILITY (DODGERS)
97
OPTION AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE OF SIMONYE
PARCEL ADDITION (FROM LOUIS SIMONYE) TO THE NORTH
SEBASTIAN CONSERVATION AREA LAAC SITE 97
14.A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT 97
14.B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT 97
14.C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD 97
4
y^
ob
• •
January 15, 2002
The Board of County Commissioners oflndian River County, Florida, met in Regular
Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on
Tuesday, January 15, 2002. Present were Ruth Stanbridge, Chairman; John W. Tippin, Vice
Chairman; Commissioners Fran B. Adams; Caroline D. Ginn; and Kenneth R. Macht. Also
present were James E Chandler, County Administrator; Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney;
and Patricia Ridgely, Deputy Clerk.
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
2. INVOCATION
Commissioner Ginn delivered the invocation.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Administrator Chandler led the Pledge to the Flag.
4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY
ITEMS
Commissioner Adams requested the deletion of Item 7.0.
Chairman Stanbridge announced the additions of Items 7.S.: Fax Received from Fred
Mensing Concerning Property in the North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area; and 7.T.:
January 15, 2002
1
A
Sheriff's Office Request re State Criminal Alien Assistance Program/Contingency Fee
Contract with Justice Benefits, Inc. (JBI)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Ginn, the Board unanimously made the above
changes to the agenda.
NOTE At the conclusion of 9.A.2., Commissioner Macht introduced Mary Jayne Kelly the
new Executive Director of the Indian River Cultural Council, our local arts agency.
Mary Jayne Kelly was very excited to be here and getting to know Indian River
County better. She came to us from Martin County.
5.A. PRESENTATION BY SENATOR KEN PRUITT - OPENING
INDIAN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLEGE/FLORIDA ATLANTIC
UNIVERSITY - HALLSTROM FARMSTEAD - LOST TREE ISLANDS
State Senator Ken Pruitt advised of having recently attended the opening of the
new Indian River Community College/Florida Atlantic University in St. Lucie West.
Concerning another partnership, he was pleased to present Chairman Stanbridge with
ceremonial checks of the Florida Communities Trust in the amount of $1,089,750 for the 99 -
acre Hallstror Farmstead, and $5,500,000 on behalf of the State of Florida for the Lost Tree
Islands. Although these contracts have not been finalized, these checks represent the
partnership commitments from the State. A similar check for $5.5 million was presented to
Indian River Shores Mayor Thomas Cadden. There was no one present to accept on behalf
of the City of Vero Beach.
Mayor Thomas Cadden thanked the Board for their efforts.
January 15, 2002
2
C\
• •
Chairman Stanbridge expressed thanks on behalf of the County, the Commissioners
and the local partners.
Senator Pruitt commended the County's professional staff, particularly Assistant
Administrator Baird, for making all the elected officials look good.
5.B. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING
JANUARY 17 THRU 20, 2002 AS FELLSMERE FROG LEG FESTIVAL
DAYS
Chairman Stanbridge read the following into the record as "Festus the Frog" looked
over her shoulder. She presented the proclamation to Beth Mitchell, Executive Director
Sebastian River Area Chamber of Commerce, who accepted it with thanks and information
that the Festival has been moved to MESA Park this year and also that a "gator dinner" has
been added to the culinary fare.
PROCLAMATION
DESIGNATING JANUARY 17 THROUGH 20, 2002
AS FELLSMERE FROG LEG FESTIVAL DAYS
WHEREAS, the 11`h Annual Fellsmere Frog Leg Festival will be held from
January 17 through January 20, 2002; and
WHEREAS, this festival showcases local culinary skills, resulting in frog legs
that are unsurpassed; and
WHEREAS, the fame of the Festival has reached beyond the borders of the
County and State; and
WHEREAS, this Festival is now in the Guinness Book of World Records, and
over the years has attracted hundreds of thousands of visitors and tourists to the area;
and
WHEREAS, the proceeds are used to further recreation and park activities in
Fellsmere; and
IWHEREAS, the City of Fellsmere has been designated as the Frog Leg Capital
of the World and
January 15, 2002
3
WHEREAS, it is appropriate to recognize this Festival as a Premier Event in
Indian River County.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the period of January 17th
through January 20th 2002 is designated as
FELLSMERE FROG LEG FESTIVAL DAYS
Adopted this 15h day of January, 2001.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Ruth M. Stanbridge, Chair an
6.A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
None.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
7.A. Reports
The following reports were received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk to
the Board:
1) Report of Convictions, December 2001
2) Fellsmere Water Control District - Schedule of Bi -monthly Meetings
FY 2002
7.B. Approval of Warrants
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 3, 2002:
January 15, 2002
4
• •
TO: , HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DATE: January 3, 2002
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 December 28, 2001 to January 3, 2002.
Attachment:
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the list
of warrants issued by the Clerk to the Board for the period
December 28, 2001 to January 3, 2002, as requested.
CHECK NAME
NUMBER
O 021534
O 021535
O 021536
O 021537
O 021538
O 021539
O 021540
O 021541
O 021542
O 021543
O 021544
O 021545
O 021546
O 021547
O 281768
O 281811
O 281812
O 281817
O 281819
O 281898
O 282218
O 282219
O 282234
O 282245
O 282252
THE GUARDIAN
AETNA LIFE INSURANCE AND
KRUCZKIEWICZ, LORIANE
BUREAU FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFOR
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
IRS - ACS
CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE
VERO BEACH FIREFIGHTERS ASSOC.
INDIAN RIVER FEDERAL CREDIT
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
NACO/SOUTHEAST
SALEM TRUST COMPANY
SAN DIEGO COUNTY OFFICE OF THE
FL SDU
TRAUTMAN, MARY ANN AND
RAY, LOIS JACKSON
PEREIRA, CLEMAN MONRON
WHITE, MARTIN
YOUNG, SAMUEL R
CINDY'S PET CENTER, INC
NORMAN, SHARON
FRIES, RAYMOND L
GARCIA, ARTURO
NICHOLS, CLIFTON AND
LEWIS, CLAUDE 5
January 15, 2002
5
CHECK
DATE
2001-12-28
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2002-01-02
2000-04-27
2000-04-27
2000-04-27
2000-04-27
2000-04-27
2000-05-04
2000-05-04
2000-05-04
2000-05-04
2000-05-04
2000-05-04
CHECK
AMOUNT
9,625.52
1,125.89
138.50
115.38
50.00
50.00
639.86
2,520.00
80,048.50
204.48
9,221.81
345.07
132.46
7,524.52
. 00
. 00
. 00
. 00
. 00
. 00
. 00
. 0D
. 00
. 00
. 00
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
CHECK
NUMBER
O 282253
O 282283
O 282284
O 282346
O 282627
O 283075
O 283078
O 283086
O 283092
O 283123
O 283516
O 283759
O 283825
O 283966
O 284080
NAME
LEVTCHENKO, ANATOLE AND
PROCTOR CONSTRUCTION CO INC
COLE, PHILIP G
BARTON, JEFFREY K
WHEELER, GARY SHERIFF
EDWARDS, WENDY N
YOUNG, JEWELL
FLACH, N W
CROOM CONSTRUCTION CO
VASQUEZ, JENNIFER
CARLTON, ALLAN R DECEASED
ROSE, NATIONAL J
SIKES, KATHIE
FT PIERCE, CITY OF
MORAVEC, JOSEPH J & LORETTA A
O 284229 BROOKS, MARILYN
O 284234 AMERITREND HOMES
O 284281 AMERITREND HOMES
O 284957 FASHIONS OF SEVENTH AVE
O 284967 CARTER, JOHN M & MICHELLE
O 284970 SCHWARTZ, JAY
O 284972 VERO CLUB PARTNERS LTD
O 284997 GHA, GRAND HARBOR LTD
O 285012 SMITH, RANDAL
0285018 MORAVEC, LORETTA A
O 285020 STUNDA, JUDITH A
0285727 WAL-MART STORE 931
O 285744 STALBA, CATHERINE
O 285752 MOXEY, KATIE
0285769 CORNERSTONE SELECT HOMES INC
O 285776 JONES, MONICA
O 285787 ALL FLORIDA REALTY SERVICES
O 285792 BUNNELL, ELIZABETH
O 285809 WASHINGTON, TALAYNA L
O 285821 CENTURY 21 SEA TREK
O 286457 JOHNSON, JOANNE
O 286460 STINSON, LUTHER G
O 286464 POWELL, TIMOTHY AND
O 286466 RODOLFO, MA ROSARIO
0286474 IAMS, CYNTHIA
0286481 MACKEY, TANESA L
O 286486 YOUNG, MARVIN
O 286487
O 286515
O 286526
0286531
0286532
O 286543
O 286634
O 286679
O 286786
0286933
0286936
O 286996
O 287000
O 287114
MENDES, BLAIR
PARK PLACE VILLAGE
PAYNE, HUFFY K
SUTTON, JOHN F
ROYALL, WILLIAM III
BROOKS, DONNA AND CITY OF VERO
YORK, DAVID
BECKETT, TRACY L
INDIAN RIVER MRI, INC
BENNETT, TRAVIS C
WENTWORTH, DONALD
BERG, MICHAEL
SYBIL INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP
FLORIDA VETERINARY LEAGUE
January 15, 2002
6
CHECK
DATE
2000-05-04
2000-05-04
2000-05-04
2000-05-11
2000-05-11
2000-05-18
2000-05-18
2000-05-18
2000-05-18
2000-05-18
2000-05-25
2000-05-31
2000-05-31
2000-06-08
2000-06-08
2000-06-08
2000-06-08
2000-06-08
2000-06-22
2000-06-22
2000-06-22
2000-06-22
2000-06-22
2000-06-22
2000-06-22
2000-06-22
2000-07-06
2000-07-06
2000-07-06
2000-07-06
2000-07-06
2000-07-06
2000-07-06
2000-07-06
2000-07-06
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-20
2000-07-21
2000-07-21
2000-07-27
2000-07-27
2000-07-27
2000-07-27
2000-07-27
2000-07-27
2000-08-03
CHECK
AMOUNT
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
.00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
.00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
•
CHECK
NUMBER
0287340
0287358
O 315439
O 315440
O 315441
O 315442
0315443
O 315444
O 315445
O 315446
O 315447
O 315448
O 315449
O 315450
O 315451
O 315452
O 315453
NAME
GALLO, JOHN B
LEWIS, JAMES A
ABC-CLIO INC
ACTION PRINTERS INC
ADVANCED GARAGE DOORS, INC
ALBERTSON'S #4357
APPLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO
AUTO SUPPLY CO OF VERO BEACH,
AMERICAN TEST CENTER, INC
A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES
ANDO BUILDING CORP
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE
ALTMAN, KRIS
ATLANTIC GULF COMMUNITIES
ATLANTIC COASTAL TITLE CORP
ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
ABS
O 315454 AMERICAN REPORTING
O 315455 A T & T
O 315456 ATLANTIC REPORTING
O 315457 ADT
O 315458
O 315459
O 315460
O 315461
O 315462
O 315463
O 315464
O 315465
O 315466
O 315467
O 315468
O 315469
O 315470
O 315471
O 315472
O 315473
O 315474
O 315475
O 315476
O 315477
O 315478
O 315479
O 315480
O 315481
O 315482
O 315483
O 315484
O 315485
O 315486
O 315487
O 315488
O 315489
O 315490
O 315491
O 315492
O 315493
ALARM PARTNERS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BUILDING OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION
BAKER & TAYLOR INC
BRODART CO
BAKER & TAYLOR ENTERTAINMENT
BOOKS ON TAPE INC
BEAZER HOMES, INC
BELLSOUTH PUBLIC COMMUNICATION
BREVARD TITLE, INC
BAKER, PAMELA A
BRIGGS EQUIPMENT
BARAJAS, ALMA ROSA
BUSINESS & LEGAL REPORTS INC
CAMERON & BARKLEY CO
CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC
CHANDLER EQUIPMENT CO, INC
COMMUNICATIONS INT'L INC
COMMUNICATIONS INT'L INC
CUSTOM CARRIAGES, INC
COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS
CLIFF BERRY,INC
CASSINARI, CHRIS
COASTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CENTER
COSNER MFG CO
CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE INC.
CALLAWAY GOLF BALL CO
CARNICELLA, JAMES
DATA SUPPLIES, INC
DAVES
DELTA
DEMCO
COMMUNICATIONS
SUPPLY CO
INC
DON SMITH'S PAINT STORE, INC
DAVIDSON TITLES, INC
DEAF SERVICE CENTER OF THE
DADE PAPER COMPANY
January 15, 2002
7
CHECK
DATE
2000-08-03
2000-08-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
CHECK
AMOUNT
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
38.52
738.54
365.00
12.87
3,160.37
1,318.34
2,215.90
21.81
500.00
83,285.55
65.47
93.60
649.00
224.02
1,108.04
111.00
68.01
425.00
82.50
35.00
1,777.00
20.00
610.71
204.42
73.77
251.48
500.00
364.97
1,204.68
300.00
133.70
80.00
320.08
154.00
9,306.47
13.97
58.00
165.75
40.85
2,971.10
100.50
1,049.04
100.00
600.45
97,843.84
2,509.96
178.77
392.12
947.95
453.42
89.21
251.04
770.29
625.00
316.45
;,!r
di; 1 L. t i✓ J s G.
•
CHECK
NUMBER
O 315494
O 315495
O 315496
O 315497
O 315498
O 315499
O 315500
O 315501
NAME
DOWNTOWN PRODUCE INC
DOUBLETREE HOTEL
DOYLE, STEVEN
D IVINE SERVICE ENTERPRISES INC
DEAN, RINGERS, MORGAN AND
ELLIS K PHELPS AND CO, INC
E BSCO SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES
E G P INC
O 315502 ERHARDT, SUSIE
O 315503 FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF
O 315504 FLORIDA COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO
0315505 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
0315506 FOOTJOY
O 315507 FLOWERS BAKING COMPANY OF
O 315508 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT
O 315509 FLORIDA EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
O 315510 BEVERAGE LAW
O 315511 FACTICON, INC
O 315512 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR &
O 315513 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT
O 315514 FLORIDA DEPT ENVIRONMENTAL
O 315515 FREIGHTLINER TRUCKS OF SOUTH
O 315516 FORT BEND SERVICES, INC
O 315517 FEDERAL EXPRESS
O 315518 FLORIDA DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
O 315519 GALE GROUP, THE
O 315520 GOODKNIGHT LAWN EQUIPMENT, INC
O 315521 GENERAL CHEMICAL CORP
O 315522 GAMETIME
O 315523 GENTGEN, JOAN 0
O 315524 GLOBAL TRANSALATIONS &
O 315525 HECTOR TURF, INC
O 315526 HERITAGE BOOKS, INC
O 315527 HARPER, MAX R
O 315528 HELD, PATRICIA BARGO
O 315529 HACH COMPANY
O 315530 HARRIS, GREGORY PHD CVE
O 315531 INDIAN RIVER BATTERY, INC
O 315532 INDIAN RIVER BLUEPRINT CO INC
O 315533 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITY
O 315534 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF
O 315535 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF'S
O 315536 IMRGLOBAL
O 315537 JOHN LLOYD BUILDERS, INC
O 315538 JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA
O 315539 JUNGINGER, GEAN CARY, JR
O 315540
O 315541
O 315542
O 315543
O 315544
O 315545
O 315546
O 315547
O 315548
O 315549
O 315550
O 315551
January 15, 2002
KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES, INC
KNIGHT & MATHIS, INC
KURTZ, ERIC C MD
KOUNS, DARLENE
K & M ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC
KEMIRON INC
LAB SAFETY SUPPLY, INC
LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC.
LANDRUM, GREGORY C PSY D
LANGSTON, HESS, BOLTON,ZNOSKO
LORMAN EDUCATION SERVICES
LUNA, JUVENAL
8
CHECK
DATE
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
u
CHECK
AMOUNT
106.35
109.00
58.00
749.00
234.60
636.31
91.21
85.68
714.70
33.50
468.35
1,666.98
98.56
82.70
8.14
215.00
991.00
1,800.00
38,226.64
2,893.27
5,800.00
20.69
7,779.24
137.35
250.00
1,151.74
32.02
2,075.70
885.00
90.00
313.00
145.43
228.08
20.00
360.50
466.95
1,423.05
314.40
32.16
39.09
100.00
9,812.96
167,674.00
500.00
2,435.84
150.00
220.00
54.74
61.00
74.68
15.12
1,136.64
328.43
1,287.19
1,125.00
1,460.01
259.00
63.00
CHECK NAME
NUMBER
O 315552
O 315553
O 315554
O 315555
O 315556
O 315557
O 315558
O 315559
O 315560
O 315561
O 315562
O 315563
O 315564
O 315565
O 315566
O 315567
O 315568
O 315569
O 315570
0315571
O 315572
O 315573
O 315574
O 315575
O 315576
O 315577
O 315578
O 315579
O 315580
O 315581
O 315582
O 315583
O 315584
O 315585
O 315586
O 315587
O 315588
0315589
O 315590
O 315591
O 315592
O 315593
O 315594
O 315595
O 315596
O 315597
O 315598
O 315599
O 315600
O 315601
O 315602
O 315603
O 315604
O 315605
O 315606
0315607
0315608
O 315609
O 315610
LATORTUE,
LEXIS
LOWTHER
MEDICAL
MORNING
EVENS
CREMATION SERVICES INC
RECORD SERVICES, INC
STAR/NEW WAVE
MATTINGLY, JOSEPH B
MIDWEST TAPE EXCHANGE
MGB CONSTRUCTION INC
MCNEAL, PATRICK
MCCLEARY, MILDRED
MEDICAL SERVICES COMPANY, INC
MITCHELL TRAINING, INC
MURPHY, DEBBIE
METTLER-TOLEDO FLORIDA, INC
MARINE RESCUE CONSULTANTS
MORTON SALT
MUNNINGS, WANDA
MCCUISTON, JAMES A
MONROE, RICHARD
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
NORTHERN SAFETY COMPANY
NORTHSIDE AGAPE MINISTRIES
NATIONAL RESIDENTIAL
OFFICE PRODUCTS & SERVICE
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS,
OFFICE DEPOT, INC
ODYSSEY MANUFACTURING CO
PARKS RENTAL INC
PERKINS MEDICAL SUPPLY
PORT CONSOLIDATED
PAK-MAIL
PEEK TRAFFIC SYSTEMS, INC
PETERSON, COLLEEN
PUBLISHERS CONSOLIDATED
PALM TRUCK CENTERS, INC
P B S & J
P INECREST MILLS, INC
PREFERRED GOVERNMENTAL CLAIM
PETERSON & ASSOCIATES, INC
ROBINSON EQUIPMENT COMPANY,INC
RICHMOND HYDRAULICS INC
ROBERTS & REYNOLDS PA
RAYSIDE TRUCK AND TRAILER
RELIABLE POLY JOHN SERVICES
ROYAL CUP COFFEE
REXEL CONSOLIDATED
ROGER DEAN CHEVROLET
R S MEDICAL
SCOTT'S SPORTING GOODS
SOUTHERN EAGLE DISTRIBUTING,
ST LUCIE BATTERY & TIRE, INC
STURGIS LUMBER & PLYWOOD CO
SHADY OAK ANIMAL CLINIC
SHERATON ORLANDO NORTH
SOUTHERN SEWER EQUIPMENT SALES
S UBSTANCE ABUSE COUNCIL
S EARS COMMERICAL ONE
SEBASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
SOUTHERN/ALARM PARTNERS
January 15, 2002
9
CHECK
DATE
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
Bv
CHECK
AMOUNT
80.00
110.00
300.00
88.75
467.00
75.00
108.95
500.00
62.64
74.90
6.50
2,250.00
152.25
200.00
1,050.00
1,186.25
49.50
500.00
500.00
517.24
44.29
3,043.13
18,144.00
405.08
52.62
1,684.64
2,272.50
156.10
55.00
13,561.88
6.60
371.00
33.99
55.88
215.78
3,432.00
840.60
2,070.00
1,349.27
751.23
269.03
13,428.64
619.60
118.68
273.60
954.40
53.50
160.00
93.06
346.65
58.30
9.63
33.89
679.32
496.38
7,139.52
52.16
797.12
110.00
•
CHECK
NUMBER
O 315611
O 315612
O 315613
O 315614
O 315615
O 315616
O 315617
O 315618
O 315619
0315620
O 315621
O 315622
0315623
O 315624
0315625
0315626
O 315627
O 315628
0315629
O 315630
O 315631
O 315632
O 315633
O 315634
O 315635
O 315636
O 315637
O 315638
O 315639
O 315640
O 315641
O 315642
O 315643
O 315644
O 315645
O 315646
0315647
O 315648
O 315649
O 315650
O 315651
O 315652
0315653
O 315654
O 315655
O 315656
O 315657
O 315658
O 315659
O 315660
O 315661
O 315662
O 315663
O 315664
O 315665
O 315666
O 315667
O 315668
O 315669
O 315670
NAME
S AFETY PRODUCTS INC
S UNCOAST COUNSELING &
S TATE ATTORNEY OFFICE
S TEPHENS, LARRY
TITLEIST
TEAM EQUIPMENT, INC
TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN
TARGET STORES COMMERCIAL
T K SMITH CONTRACTING
S S FILTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
VELDE FORD, INC
VERO BEACH LINCOLN MERCURY INC
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
VERO LAWNMOWER CENTER, INC
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
VERO BEARING & BOLT
VERO BEACH POWERTRAIN
WILLHOFF, PATSY
WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR
WALGREEN COMPANY
W W GRAINGER INC
YELLOW PAGES DIRECTORY SERVICE
GARNER, SYLVIA BERRY
DEVINE, DON
ZUGELTER CONSTRUCTION CORP
AMERON HOMES
HOLIDAY BUILDERS
ROSS, NELSON
CAMPBELL, MICHAEL F
GHO VERO BEACH INC
O CONNELL, DAVID G
MGH CONSTRUCTION INC
B EAZER HOMES CORP
BUTLER, JERRY
D URSO, GERALDINE L
L IETZ, DAVID R
ROOT BROS INC
LANAHAN, SANDRA W
AMERITREND HOMES
DAY, TERRIE, AND
KELLY CONSTRUCTIION
STEPHEN FIELDS CO INC
BELLEZZA, ROSALEE DONATO
LURIA IMPROVEMENTS LLC
TRAUTMAN, MARY ANN AND
BJ'S BBQ INC
RODRIGUEZ, ETHEL
GRIFFITH, SHARON L
FENDER, NANCY E
PEARCE, MARY C
WOLFENDEN, LEE
DIERKES, SANDRA
MOSS, STEPHANIE
PARKS, LOREN
DUNLAP, KARA
S CHMIDT, TED
FLORES, JOSEPH
O ILER, JAMIE L
PRADO, LAURO
January 15, 2002
10
CHECK
DATE
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
CHECK
AMOUNT
369.90
687.50
175.00
154.00
1,155.36
233.98
135.00
80.89
6,687.40
33.20
65.04
283.36
1,611.79
3,070.59
200.15
1,683.74
138.40
68.12
52.00
294.00
3,010.67
130.33
249.00
43.28
84.63
68.61
39.63
124.71
83.24
13.96
55.92
32.74
68.22
69.96
19.94
32.96
66.77
103.97
28.03
65.37
19.96
46.76
51.06
67.35
68.81
44.85
127.73
106.73
33.18
5.01
44.48
27.22
34.23
121.58
34.80
37.55
55.44
4.74
34.47
27.05
• •
CHECK
NUMBER
O 315671
0315672
O 315673
O 315674
O 315675
O 315676
NAME
DOUGLAS SCOTT CONSTRUCTION INC
SIDMAN, RACHEL
TAYLOR, KEITH
VALENTINE, MARY WOODS
FAUGHN, LIANNE
ROWE, ROBERT M
CHECK
DATE
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
2002-01-03
CHECK
AMOUNT
27.01
32.52
31.32
34.15
43.27
125.00
694,006.20
7. C. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 16, Block 16,
Vero Lake Estates, Unit 3 - Janice Kuhns - 8266 92nd Avenue
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of December 27, 2001:
TO:
THROUGH:
James Chandler
County Administrator
James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Direct
AND
Christopher J. Kafer, Jr
County Engineer
FROM: David B. Cox, P.E., Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 16, Block 16,
Vero Lake Estates Unit 3
REFERENCE: Project No. 2001120055-29425
DATE: December 27, 2001
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
CONSENT AGENDA
Janice Kuhns has submitted a building permit application for a single family residence on the subject
property. The site is located in an AE special flood hazard zone, base flood elevation 22.3 ft.
N.G.V.D. In the attached letter from the applicant's engineer dated November 14, 2001 a waiver of
the cut and fill requirements is requested The lot area is 1.08 acres. The volume of the 100 year
floodplain displaced by the proposed grading plan is estimated to be 298.4 cubic yards.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The waiver request has been reviewed by staff and appears to meet the criteria of Section
930.07(2)(d)4. of the Stormwater Management and Flood Protection Ordinance for lots located in the
Vero Lake Estates Municipal Services Taxing Unit.
January 15, 2002
11
i
Alternative v o. 1
Grant the cut and fill balance waiver based on the criteria of Section 930.07(2)(d)4.
Alternative No. 2
Deny the cut and fill waiver. Require an on site retention area be provided to compensate for the
proposed floodplain displacement.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of Alternative No. 1.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter from Ronald G. Keller, P.E., dated November 14, 2001.
2. Calculations for cut and fill
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously granted the cut
and fill balance waiver based on the criteria of Section
930.07(2)(d)4, as recommended in the memorandum.
7.D. Out -of -County Travel Approval Request for Commissioners and
Staff to Attend NACo Legislative Conference in Washington, DC
The Board reviewed a memorandum of January 8, 2002:
To: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
Date: January 8, 2002
Subject: Out -of -County Travel Approval Request for Commissioners
and Staff to Attend NACo Legislative Conference in Washington, DC
From. Kimberly E. Massung
Executive Aide to the Commission
Permission is requested for out of county travel for Commissioners and staff to attend the NACo
Legislative Conference to be held March 1-5, 2002 in Washington, DC.
Attachment
January 15, 2002
12
• •
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved out -of -
county travel for Commissioners and staff to attend the NACo
Legislative Conference to be held March 1-5, 2002, in
Washington, DC, as requested.
7.E. Out -of -County Travel for Commissioners to Attend Legislative
Day - February 20, 2002
The Board reviewed a memorandum of January 4, 2002:
Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
Date: January 4, 2002
Subject: OUT OF COUNTY TRAVEL FOR COMMISSIONERS
TO ATTEND LEGISLATIVE DAY — FEBRUARY 20, 2002
From: Kimberly Massung
Executive Aide to the Commission
Request permission for out of county travel for all Commissioners to attend the annual
Legislative Day in Leon County on February 20 2002.
Attachment
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved out -of -
county travel for Commissioners and staff to attend the annual
Legislative Day in Leon County, on February 20, 2002, as
requested.
January 15, 2002
13
7.F. Appointment of Joseph Petrulak to Code Enforcement Board
The Board reviewed a memorandum of January 7, 2002:
TO: Code Enforcement Board Members
FROM: Reta Smith, Assistant to the Executive Aide
DATE: January 7, 2002
SUBJECT: New Board Member
When Mr. Tony Gervasio resigned from the Code Enforcement Board, he
suggested I contact Mr Joseph Petrulak a co-worker at Daniel Electrical
Contractors, Inc.
As per the attached letter and resume, Mr. Petrulak has agreed to serve on
the Code Enforcement Board as the Subcontractor Representative. If the
Board approves his appointment, he will attend the next meeting on
Monday, January 28, 2002.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously appointed
Joseph Petrulak as the Subcontractor Representative to the
Code Enforcement Board, as recommended in the
memorandum.
7. G. Gifford Road Landfill; Proposed Tolling Agreement - United
Parcel Service
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 8, 2002:
January 15, 2002
14
Vi =„
LEA t_
• •
January 8, 2002
MEMORANDUM
To: Board of County Commissioners
From. Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney
Re: Gifford Road Landfill; Proposed Tolling Agreement; United Parcel Service;
CAO File No. 1103-2
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners reject the Tolling
Agreement proposed by United Parcel Service.
Discussion:
Attached is a copy of correspondence from Linda K. DiSantis, United Parcel
Service's in-house counsel, and her proposed Tolling Agreement, in connection with
alleged contamination from the Gifford Road Landfill. There does not appear to be
sufficient justification to compromise a statute of limitation defense, if applicable.
PGB
Attachment
cc W. Erik Olson, Director of Utility Services
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously rejected the
Tolling Agreement as proposed by United Parcel Service, as
recommended in the Memorandum.
7.H. County Attorney Moving Expenses
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
January 15, 2002
15
January 9, 2002
MEMORANDUM
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney `i kli
Re: County Attorney Moving Expenses
Recommendation:
It is respectfully requested that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
payment to the county attorney of moving and travel expenses in the amount of $946 33.
Discussion:
The county attorney's employment contract provides, in part:
Moving expenses, which shall include those associated with
moving from ATTORNEY's residence, storage, moving
expenses from temporary housing, mileage, and lodging
expenses incurred in connection with visits to Indian River
County, not to exceed $2,000.00 shall be provided by County.
My request of $946.33 includes travel and lodging expenses incurred up to July 10, 2000,
when I became the county attorney, and subsequent moving expenses. Copies of receipts
are available for review in my office. The receipts will be forwarded to the Budget Office.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously authorized
payment of the County Attorney's moving expenses in the
amount of $946.33, as requested in the memorandum.
COPY OF APPROVED PAYMENT REQUEST IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
7.1 County Commissioner District Boundary Changes - Proof of
Publication
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 8, 2002:
January 15, 2002
16
• •
January 8, 2002
To
From:
Re:
MEMORANDUM
Board of County Commissioners
Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney (r2-
County
2County Commissioner District Boundary Changes: Proof of Publication
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners enter on its minutes
Affidavits of Publication of county commissioner district boundary changes showing
publication dates of December 9, 2001, December 22, 2001, and December 29, 2001.
Discussion:
Entry on the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners of proof of publication
of county commissioner district boundary changes is pursuant to Section 124.02(3),
Florida Statutes (2001) Considering the size of two of the legal notices, the proofs of
publication will be available in the office of the Executive Aide to the Board of County
Commissioners for your and the public s review, and are incorporated herein by reference,
instead of being included in the agenda book.
PGB
cc: Kimberly Massung, Executive Aide to the Board of County Commissioners
Patricia L 'P.J." Jones, Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners
ENTERED FOR THE RECORD. NO ACTION REQUIRED OR TAKEN.
AFFIDAVITS (2) OF PUBLICATION ARE ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
7.J. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver - Lot 14, Block 20, Vero
Lake Estates, Unit 4 - Tozzolo Brothers Construction Co.
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
January 15, 2002
17
j
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH:
FROM: David B. Cox, P.E., Civil Enginee
James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director`
AND
Christopher J. Kafer, Jr., P
County Engineer
SUBJECT: Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 14, Block 20,
Vero Lake Estates Unit 4
REFERENCE: Project No. 2001120083-29525
DATE: January 9, 2002
CONSENT AGENDA
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Tozzolo Brothers Construction Co. has submitted a building permit application for a single family
residence on the subject property The site is located in an AE special flood hazard zone, base flood
elevation 23.0 ft. N.G.V.D. In the attached letter from the applicant's engineer dated January 7
2002, a waiver of the cut and fill requirements is requested. The lot area is 1.08 acres. The volume
of the 100 year floodplain displaced by the proposed grading plan is estimated to be 825 cubic yards.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The waiver request has been reviewed by staff and appears to meet the criteria of Section
930.07(2)(d)4. of the Stoi thwater Management and Flood Protection Ordinance for lots located in the
Vero Lake Estates Municipal Services Taxing Unit.
Alternative No. I
Grant the cut and fill balance waiver based on the criteria of Section 930.07(2)(d)4.
Alternative No. 2
Deny the cut and fill waiver. Require an on site retention area be provided to compensate for the
proposed floodplain displacement.
RECOMME\DATIONS
Staff recommends approval of Alternative No. I .
ATTACHMENTS
Letter from Ronald G. Keller, P.E., dated January 7, 2002.
Calculations for cut and fill
January 15, 2002
18
D
o
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously granted the cut
and fill balance waiver based on the criteria of Section
930.07(2)(d)4, as recommended in the Memorandum.
7.K. Gifford Area Stormwater Improvement Project - Carter
Associates, Inc. - Work Order No. 5
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 4, 2002:
TO: James Chandler, County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Direct
FROM: W. Keith McCully, P.E., Esq., Stormwater Engineer
SUBJECT: Gifford Area Stormwater hnprovement Project — Work Order No. 5
DATE: January 4, 2002
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On August 4, 1998, at their regular meeting, the Board of County Commissioners authorized the
Chaiiuian to execute the Professional Civil Services Master Agreement, between Carter Associates,
Inc. and Indian River County, for the Gifford Area Stormwater Improvement Project. Attached
Work Order No. 5 is necessary to secure additional technical assistance for wetland mitigation
permitting, permitting through the Federal Aviation Administration, coordination with proposed
development plans, and engineering services related to the U.S. Highway No. 1 drainage system as
required by Florida Department of Transportation. The lump sum cost for this work is $12,939.50.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the Board of County Conunissioners authorize the Chairman to approve Work
Order No. 5.
FUND EN G
Funding to be from Account No. 315-243-538-068.11
ATTACHMENTS
1. Work Order No. 5 to the Professional Civil Services Agreement Between Carter
Associates, Inc., and Indian River County, Florida, dated August 4, 1998 (two copies)
January 15, 2002
19
'� i `3
`ii c_
.41
J `j
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved Work
Order No. 5 with Carter Associates, Inc., for the Gifford Area
Stormwater Improvement Project, as recommended in the
Memorandum.
WORK ORDER NO. 5 IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO TFIE BOARD
7.L. IKON Printing System - IOS Capital, Inc. - Five (5) Year Lease
or Co
1
ier Courthouse - Clerk o Circuit Court
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
T0: Honorable Board of County Commissioners
DATE: January 9, 2002
RE: 5 Year Lease for Copier
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton _�
Attached find the proposed lease documents for an IKON printing system which will replace an
existing leased system used in our department that transcribes court trials and appeals
The new equipment costs virtually the sante as the equipment whose lease has expired, but will
function on a higher level, will be more efficient and will be a time saver.
Please approve the five year lease.
January 15, 2002
20
nil
OR
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the
proposed five-year lease with IOS Capital, Inc., for an IKON
printing system for the Clerk of the Circuit Court, as requested.
LEASE WILL BE ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHFN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
7.M. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 004
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 8, 2002:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: January 8, 2002
SUBJECT: Miscellaneous
B udget Amendment 004
THROUGH: Joseph A. Baird
Assistant County Administrator
FROM: Jason E. Brown
B udget Manager
Description and Conditions
J
The attached budget amendment is to appropriate funding for the following:
1. The Honda Department of Labor has invoiced the County for unemployment compensation claims
in various departments. The attached entry appropriates funding for these charges.
2. On January 8, 2002, the Board of Commissioners approved the use of funds from the Law
Enforcement Trust Fund to support the Drug Abuse Resistance Education Program (D.A.R.E.).
The attached entry appropriates funding in the amount of $7,444 from the Law Enforcement Trust
Fund.
3. On May 2, 2000, the Board of Commissioners authorized the Chamber of Commerce to solicit
proposals for a tourism study on behalf of the County. The attached entry carries forward the
remaining funds for completion of this project to the current year.
4. Several departments have received trucks and other equipment during the current fiscal year that
were budgeted last year. The attached entry appropriates funding for these items.
5. On November 29, 2001, the County completed the issuance of the Series 2001 General Obligation
Land Acquisition Bonds. As a result of this issuance, there will be a debt service payment on July
1, 2002. The attached entry appropriates funding from Land Acquisition Bond Fund cash forward.
January 15, 2002
21
r
•
During fiscal year 2000/2001, the Board of Commissioners approved grant agreements totaling
$477 904 for the implementation of an electronic document technology system for the Nineteenth
Judicial Circuit. The attached entry is necessary to move these funds forward to the current year
for the completion of this project.
7. In 1995, the City of Sebastian established the Sebastian Riverfront Redevelopment District. Indian
River County pays tax incremental values on properties within this district. The final calculation
from the Property Appraiser was higher than the original calculation received during the
development of the 2001/2002 budget. A budget amendment is necessary to provide for this
difference. Funding in the amount of $26,206 will be provided from General Fund contingencies.
8. On August 31, 2001 Indian River County received a Born to Read Grant under the Library
Services and Technology Act in the amount of $53,493. The attached entry appropriates these
grant funds.
9. The Budget Office underestimated sick incentive for the Law Library. The attached entry
appropriates funding from General Fund contingencies.
10. Youth Guidance has received donations totaling $9,107.53 to fund a part time temporary clerk
position. These donations will fund the position for the entire 2001/2002 fiscal year.
11. On January 8, 2002, the Board of Commissioners approved the fiscal year2001/2002 EMS County
Awards grant agreement. The attached entry appropriates these grant funds in the amount of
$43,569.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached budget amendment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved
Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 004, as recommended in the
memorandum.
January 15, 2002
22
r!d ! 1 i i-•
CI\ IL.I
• •
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Jason E. Brown
Budget Manager
BUDGET AMENDMENT: 004
DATE: January 8, 2002
January 15, 2002
23
Entry
Number
Fund/De�arnent/
Accoun}'t
ame
Account
Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
EXPENSES
GENERAL FUND/ Recreation/
Unemployment Compensation
001-108-572-012.15
$50
$0
GENERAL FUND/
Unemployment Compensation
Main Library/
001-109-572-012.15
$142
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Parks Division/
Unemployment Compensation
001-210-572-012.15
$2,000
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Purchasing/
Unemployment Compensation
001-216-513-012.15
$500
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Clerk of Court/
Unemployment Compensation
001-300-513-012.15
$726
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Reserve for
Contingencies
001-199-581-099.91
$0
$3,418
TRANSPORTATION FUND/ Road &
Bridge/ Unemployment Comp.
111-214-541-012.15
$1,925
$0
TRANSPORTATION
Engineering/ Unemployment
FUND/
Comp.
111-244-541-012.15
$831
$0
TRANSPORTATION FUND/
Reserve for Contingencies
111-199-581-099.91
$0
$2,756
2.
REVENUES
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST
FUND/ Confiscated Property
112-000-351-020.00
$7,444
$0
EXPENSES
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST
FUND/ Sheriff/ Law Enforcement
112-600-586-099.04
$7,444
$0
3.
REVENUES
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT FUND/
Cash Forward - October 1
119-000-389 040.00
$35,315
$0
EXPENSES
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT FUND/
Tourism Study
119-144-572-033.49
$35,315
$0
January 15, 2002
23
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Jason E. Brown
Budget Manager
BUDGET AMENDMENT: 004
DATE: January 8, 2002
January 15, 2002
24
Entry
Number
Fund/DeRar�ment/
Account
ame
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
4.
REVENUES
TRANSPORTATION FUND/ Cash
Forward - October 1
111-000-389-040.00
$103,014
$0
EXPENSES
GENERAL FUND/ Recreation/ Other
Machinery & Equipment
001-108-572-066.49
$19,397
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Reserve for
Contingencies
001-199-581-099.91
$0
$19,397
TRANSPORTATION FUND/ Traffic
Engineering/ Automotive
111-245-541-066.42
$103,014
$0
5.
REVENUES
LAND ACQUISITION BOND/ Cash
Forward - October 1
225-000-389-040.00
$750,979
$0
EXPENSES
LAND ACQUISITION BOND/
Principal - Debt Service
225-117-517-077.11
$480,000
$0
LAND ACQUISITION BOND/
Interest - Debt Service
225-117-517-077.21
$265,979
$0
LAND ACQUISITION BOND/ Other
Debt Service Costs
225-117-517-077.31
$5,000
$0
6.
REVENUES
COURT FACILITIES FUND/ Edward
Byrne Memorial Grant
106-000-331-202.00
$171,404
$0
COURT FACILITIES FUND/ National
Criminal History Improvement Grant
106-000-331-203.00
$246,500
$0
COURT FACILITIES FUND/ Cash
Forward - October 1
106-000-389 040.00
$60,000
$0
EXPENSES
COURT FACILITIES
Electronic Document
FUND/
Equipment
106-914-713-066.47
$477,904
$0
January 15, 2002
24
• •
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Jason E. Brown
Budget Manager
BUDGET AMENDMENT: 004
DATE: January 8, 2002
January 15, 2002
25
Entry
Number
Fund/De�paitment/
Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
7.
EXPENSES
GENERAL FUND/ Sebastian
Redevelopment District
001-137-519-088.22
$26,206
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Reserve for
Contingencies
001-199-581-099.91
$0
$26,206
8.
REVENUES
GENERAL FUND/ Born -to -Read
Library Grant
001-000-331-717.00
$53,493
$0
EXPENSES
GENERAL FUND/ Main Library/
Born to Read Expenditures
001-109-572-038.61
$51,743
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Contingencies
001-199-581-099.91
$1,750
$0
9.
EXPENSES
GENERAL FUND/ Law Library/ Sick
Incentive
001-119-714-011.15
$175
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Reserve for
Contingencies
001-199-581-099.91
$0
$175
10.
REVENUES
GENERAL FUND/ Reimbursements
001-000-369-040.00
$9,108
$0
EXPENSES
GENERAL FUND/ Youth Guidance/
Temporary Employees
001-213-523-011.17
$7,888
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Youth Guidance/
Social Security
001-213-523-012.11
$493
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Youth Guidance/
Retirement Contribution
001-213-523-012.12
$581
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Youth Guidance/
Worker's Compensation
001-213-523-012.14
$31
$0
GENERAL FUND/ Youth Guidance/
Medicare
001-213-523-012.17
$115
$0
January 15, 2002
25
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Jason E. Brown
Budget Manager
BUDGET AMENDMENT: 004
DATE: January 8, 2002
7.N. Proposed Land Crab Ordinance - Public Hearing Scheduled for
February 5, 2002
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FROM. FRAN B. ADAMS 7'6-A
RE LAND CRAB ORDINANCE
DATE January 9, 2002
With the Board s concurrence, I request that we set a Public Hearing date of
February 5, 2002 for a hearing on the harvesting of land crabs from public rights -of -ways
in Indian River County. A copy of the proposed ordinance is attached. From both a
traffic safety and species protection standpoint, we should bring this forward. While the
plight of the land crabs may seem unimportant now, in the long run it could impact
negatively our food chain. Thank you.
January 15, 2002
26
n1�
LA
Entry
Number
Fund/Deprment/
Account
Name
Account
Number
Increase
Decrease
11.
REVENUES
EMERGENCY SERVICES/EMS
Grant
114-000-334-290.00
$43,569
$0
EXPENSES
EMERGENCY SERVICES/
Advanced Life Support/ EMS Grant
114-253-526-066.91
$27,550
$0
EMERGENCY SERVICES/
Advanced Life SupporU Cash Fwd.
114-253-526-099.92
$16,019
$0
7.N. Proposed Land Crab Ordinance - Public Hearing Scheduled for
February 5, 2002
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FROM. FRAN B. ADAMS 7'6-A
RE LAND CRAB ORDINANCE
DATE January 9, 2002
With the Board s concurrence, I request that we set a Public Hearing date of
February 5, 2002 for a hearing on the harvesting of land crabs from public rights -of -ways
in Indian River County. A copy of the proposed ordinance is attached. From both a
traffic safety and species protection standpoint, we should bring this forward. While the
plight of the land crabs may seem unimportant now, in the long run it could impact
negatively our food chain. Thank you.
January 15, 2002
26
n1�
LA
• •
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved
scheduling the proposed "land crab ordinance" for public
hearing on February 5, 2002, as requested.
7.0. Florida Association of Counties (FACo) Request for Ad
Regarding "Cost Shifting from the State to Counties"
Deleted.
7.P. Out -of -Town Travel for Commissioner Adams to Attend 15th
Annual National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology
Januar 23-25 23-25, 2002 - Biloxi, Mississippi
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
To: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
Date: January 9, 2002
Subject: REQUEST PERMISSION FOR OUT OF TOWN TRAVEL BY
COMMISSIONER ADAMS TO ATTEND THE 15TH ANNUAL NATIONAL
CONFERENCE ON BEACH PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY—JANUARY
23-25, 2002 IN BILOXI, MS
From: Kimberly E. Massung
Executive Aide to the Commission
Permission is requested for out of county travel for Commissioner Adams to attend the 15th
Annual National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology on January 23-25, 2002
in Biloxi, Mississippi.
Attachment
January 15, 2002
27
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved out-of-
town travel by Commissioner Adams to attend the 15`h Annual
National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology,
January 23-25, 2002, in Biloxi, Mississippi, as requested in the
memorandum.
7. Q. Commissioner Adams Appointed to Project Delivery Team for
Development of Indian River Lagoon North Feasibility Study
(Component of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan)
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
To: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
D ate: January 9, 2002
S ubject APPOINTMENT TO THE PROJECT DELIVERY TEAM FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON NORTH FEASIBILITY
STUDY
From. Ruth M. Stanbridge
Chairman
The St. Johns River Water Management District and the Jacksonville District of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers are initiating the Indian River Lagoon North Feasibility Study
component of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.
would like to appoint Commissioner Adams to represent Indian River County on this
P roject Delivery Team and myself as her Alternate The initial meeting will be held on
Wednesday, January 23, 2002.
Attachment
January 15, 2002
28
• •
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously confirmed the
appointment of Commissioner Adams, as the Indian River
County representative, and Chairman Stanbridge, as alternate,
to the Project Delivery Team for the development of the Indian
River Lagoon North Feasibility Study, as requested in the
memorandum.
7.R. Resolution No. 2002-006 - Scott and Marian Riley - Release of
a Portion of an Easement at 156 9th Avenue, Indian River Heights
Subdivision
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 7, 2002
T0:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
TMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keat g IC
Community Development Dire for
THROUGH: Roland M. Dei . , AICP
Chief, Environmental Planning
& Code Enforcement
FROM: Kelly Zedek
Code Enforcement Officer
Z
DATE: I/7/Cyt"
RE
SCOTT AND MARIAN RILEY REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF A PORTION
OF AN EASEMENT AT 156 9TH AVENUE (INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS
SUBDIVISION)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 15, 2002.
January 15, 2002
29
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The County has been petitioned by Scott A. Riley and Marian H. Riley, owners of a lot at 156 9th
Avenue, for release of a 2 1/2 foot portion of a 12 foot -wide rear yard drainage and utility
easement. The purpose of the easement release request is to allow construction of a pool, wooden
deck and fence in the western 2 1/2 feet of the easement (see attached maps).
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The request has been reviewed by Bell South Communications; Florida Power & Light Corporation;
T.C.I. Cable Corporation; the Indian River County Utilities Department; the County Road & Bridge
and Engineering Divisions; and the County surveyor. None of the utility providers or reviewing
agencies expressed an objection to the requested release of easement. Therefore, it is staff's
position that the requested partial easement release would have no adverse impact to utilities being
supplied to the subject properties or to other properties.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board, through adoption of the attached resolution, release the portion
of the drainage and utility easement as more particularly described in said resolution.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Proposed County Resolution Abandoning Easement
2. Map(s) depicting easement proposed for release
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution No. 2002-006 releasing a portion of an easement on
Lot 9, Block P, Indian River Heights Subdivision Unit 8.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002 - 006
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELEASING
A PORTION OF AN EASEMENT ON LOT 9, BLOCK P, INDIAN RIVER
HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION UNIT 8
WHEREAS, Indian River County has an interest in a drainage and utility easement on Lot
9, Block P, of INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION UNIT 8; and
WHEREAS, retention of a portion of the easement, as described below, serves no public
purpose;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida that:
January 15, 2002
30
•
This release of easement is executed by Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State
of Florida, whose mailing address is 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, Grantor, to
SCOTT A. RILEY and MARIAN H RILEY
156 9TH AVENUE
VERO BEACH, FL 32962
their successors in interest, heirs and assigns, as Grantee, as follows:
Indian River County does hereby release and abandon all right, title, and interest that it may
have in the following described easement(s):
the westerly two and one-halffeet of the easterly twelve foot wide drainage and utility
easement of Lot 9, Block P, Indian River Heights Subdivision Unit 8, according to the pkat thereof
as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 31 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner Macht
by Commissioner Adams , and adopted on the 15th day of
January 2002, by the following vote:
Commissioner Ruth M. Stanbridge
Commissioner John W. Tippin
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
Commissioner Fran B. Adams
Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn
Aye
Aye
Ay
Aye
Aye
,seconded
The Chairman declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 15th day of
January , 2002.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Ruth M. Stanbridge, C iirrman
Attested By:G� tem -O�f
Deputy Clerk
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 15th day of January
2001, by RUTH M. STANBRIDGE, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, and byPATRICIA M. RIDGELY , Deputy Clerk for JEFFREY K.
BARTON, Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, who are
personally known to me.
NOTARY PUBLIC
Printed Na Kimberly E Massung
Commission No.: CC855436
Commission Expiration: July 15, 2003
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
C.
William G. Collins II
Deputy County Attorney
January 15, 2002
31
Kimberly E. Massung
__ MY COMMISSION b CC855436 EXPIRES
July 15, 2003
S. BONDED THREE TROY FAIN INSURANCE INC
•
7.S. Fred Mensing - Reject Requirement to Take Action - Lots 2 and
3 Berry's Plan - North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area
The Board reviewed Memoranda of January 11 and 14, 2002:
January 11, 2002
MEMORANDUM
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney - pi -47
7 t `tart"
Re: Fred Mensing
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners reject Mr. Mensing's
requirement that the County take additional action to own property that he claims lies
between lots 2 and 3, A.A. Berry's Plat, in the North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area,
and reject Mr. Mensing's request that the Board direct staff to report back on a plan to
settle all issues in writing within 30 days as set forth in his correspondence of January 11,
2002.
Discussion:
Attached is a copy of Mr. Mensing's fax of January 11, 2002. Keith McCully has
confirmed with Mr. Mensing on the telephone that Mr. Mensing's reference to "property
. between lots 3 & 4" should be lots 2 & 3.
PGB
Enclosure
January 14, 2002
MEMORANDUM
•
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney %ID i 11q Iz
Re: Fred Mensing
Attached is a communication from Mr. Mensing dated January 14, 2002, that was
conveyed by C.N. Kirrie, together with a communication from Mr. Kirrie dated January 14,
2002, conditioned on Mr. Mensing's proposal.
PGB
Enclosures
cc: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
January 15, 2002
32
1)1/
L';
• •
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously rejected 1) Mr
Mensing's requirement that the County take additional action to
own property that he claims lies between Lots 2 and 3, A.A.
Berry's Plat, in the North Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area,
and 2) Mr. Mensing's request that the Board direct staff to
report back on a plan to settle all issues in writing within 30
days as set forth in his correspondence of January 11, 2002, as
recommended in the memorandum.
7. T. State Criminal Alien Assistance Program - (Sheriff's Office)
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 11, 2002:
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
RE:
Board of County Commissioners
Michael C Zito, General Counsel
Indian River County Sheriff's Office
Roy Raymond, Indian River County Sheriff
January 11, 2002
State Criminal Alien Assistance Program
The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) is a payment program that is administrated
by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). This program provides funding
to participating jurisdictions for the partial reimbursement of costs incurred by incarcerating
undocumented criminal aliens in their correction systems. The SCAAP Program is authorized
through Section 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990.
The BJA provides funding to participating jurisdictions based on a formula determined by an
applicant's percentage of the total SCRAP funding for that fiscal year. The FY -2002 SCAAP budget
is $585 million dollars. The BJA will provide funds to assist in the payment of costs incurred from
housing those foreign born inmates that are in the Indian River County jail facility for more than 72
consecutive hours. The revenue generated from participating in this program would be directly
wired by the BJA to the Indian River County general fund as unrestricted dollars that can be used by
the County for any lawful purpose.
January 15, 2002
33
The process of filing for the SCAAP Program is complex and very time consuming. Out of
approximately 3,200 counties in the United States, only 550 file for this entitlement program. More
than 500 of these 550 counties utilize the services of Justice Benefits, Inc (JBI) to obtain these
funds. JBI does the research, inputs the data in the proper format and verifies all records to
maximize the return to Indian River County. JBI gets paid on a 22% contingency basis, so they only
get paid when Indian River County gets paid. There are no other charges or administrative costs
beyond the 22% contingency fee on the dollars they find for Indian River County.
The Sheriff seeks permission to enter into a contingency fee contract with JBI for the coordination
and application of SCAAP funds The attached grid shows monies generated from the program to
other southeastern counties. The duration of the agreement between JBI and the Indian River
County Sheriff would be four years however, the contract may be terminated annually by giving 30 -
days' written notice prior to the beginning of the County's fiscal year.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously granted
permission for the Sheriff to enter into a contingency fee
contract with JBI for the coordination and application of
SCAAP funds for a term of four years with a termination
clause, as requested the memorandum.
AGREEMENT WILL BE ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
9.A.1. PUBLIC HEARING -REVISIONS TO THE INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY MANATEE PROTECTION AND BOATING SAFETY
COMPREHENSIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN REGARDING MARINA
WATER DEPTH REQUIREMENTS AND CALCULATION OF HIGH
WATER CRAFT -RELATED MANATEE MORTALITY (Legislative)
PROOF OF PUBLICATION IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
Environmental & Code Enforcement Chief Roland DeBlois rendered a
comprehensive review of a Memorandum of January 9, 2002 using a visual of the plan on
the overhead projector and projected maps and charts to further aid in his presentation.
January 15, 2002
34
• •
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DEPMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Rob 'rt M. Keating, AICP
Community Development Dire° or
FROM: Roland M. DeBlois,r'ICP
Chief, Environmental Planning
DATE: January 9, 2002
RE•
Approval of Revisions to the Indian River County Manatee Protection and Boating
Safety Comprehensive Management Plan regarding Marina Water Depth
Requirements and Calculation of High Watercraft -Related Manatee Mortality
It is requested that the Board of County Commissioners formally consider the following infoi'nation at the
Board's regular meeting of January 15, 2002.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On November 20, 2001, staff advised the Board of proposed revisions to the County's Manatee Protection
and Boating Safety Comprehensive Management Plan (MPP) relating to:
• Water depth requirements for new or expanded marinas
• Calculation of "high watercraft -related manatee mortality"
The revisions are to address issues brought to light by a proposal by Tom Collins to expand the Sebastian
Inlet Marina in the City of Sebastian. The proposal is a first "test case" for implementation of the MPP.
Although the Sebastian Inlet Marina does not fall under the County's regulatory purview, the State requires
that marina projects within the ovdall county be consistent with the MPP.
Revisions to the MPP are subject to formal adoption by the Board at an advertised public hearing. Revisions
are also subject to ratification by the State Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Since the
November Board meeting, county staff has received input from FWC staff (see Attachment 1) and is now
proposing that the Board formally adopt the revisions.
ANALYSIS
Four -Foot Water Depth Requirement
As presented to the Board at the November 20, 2001 Board meeting, the MPP currently requires a minimum
water depth of four feet in areas of new or expanded marinas. A revision is proposed to allow an applicant
the opportunity to either meet the four -foot water depth requirement or comply with a one -foot clearance over
submerged bottom and aquatic resources, as applicable (See Attachment 4). The MA\WAC has reviewed
this Language and recommends that the Board adopt the revision. FWC staff, in a letter dated December 19,
2001 (see Attachment 1), indicates that it finds the proposed water depth revision acceptable.
High Manatee Watercraft Mortality Calculation
As presented to the Board at the November meeting, the MPP prohibits new marinas or marina expansions
in areas of the Indian River Lagoon with both "hieh manatee abundance" and "high watercraft -related
January 15, 2002
35
l!r
Di\ I f
manatee mortality (see minutes, Attachment 5). In reviewing the MPP as it is applied to the "test case" of
the Sebastian Inlet Marina, an issue has arisen as to the appropriateness of how high water -crafted related
manatee mortality is calculated in the MPP as it applies to marina projects.
At the November Board meeting, staff presented an overview of four alternative methods for calculating high
watercraft -related manatee mortality. As discussed at that meeting, there is a consensus among reviewing
entities, including the Marine Advisory / Narrows Watershed Action Committee (MANWAC) and the Save
the Manatee Club (SMC), that the existing method ("Method 1") is too restrictive to marina development,
particularly in the Sebastian area However, there is disagreement among those entities as to which alternative
method is the most appropriate for a revised calculation (see minutes, Attachment 5).
Following is a summary of the four alternative methods discussed at the November Board meeting for
calculating high manatee watercraft—related mortality, including recommendations by reviewing entities
(County staff, FWC staff, MANWAC, SMC) on each method.
• Method 1 (Existing formula)
Reviewing, Entities Recommendations: All of the reviewing entities agree that this existing method
warrants revision.
The existing foinrula compares, proportionately, manatee watercraft -related deaths (since 1974) within a
three-mile radius of a project to the County's goal of one watercraft -related manatee death per year
countywide. An issue with this formula is that it projects the County's goal of one watercraft -related manatee
mortality per year into the past, such that the goal -side of the equation is based on one death per year dating
back to 1974, the year that manatee mortality data became available. This approach creates an inequity that
results in a prohibition on new or expanded marinas in the Sebastian area for at least 35 years. When this was
explained to the MANWAC, it was the consensus of those at the MANWAC meeting that the current foi niula
warrants revision.
• Method 2 (Tune modification of existing formula)
Reviewing, Entities Recommendations: this method is supported by SMC and is the "preferred method"
of FWC staff It is not recommended by county staff, and is not supported by the majority ofApL4NWAC.
"Method 2" modifies the existing formula's timeframe, changing the calculation to date back to 1993 - the
year manatee protection speed zones were imposed in the County - instead of dating back to 1974. While staff
feels this revised timeframe is more equitable than the current founula, it stills projects the goal of one
manatee death per year into the past, which from staff's perspective is not appropriate.
• Method 3 (Actual proportionate average)
Reviewing Entities Recommendations: the SMC and FWC oppose this method. MANWAC voted 5 to 3
to supported this method, but without consideration of 'Method 4". County staff recommends a modified
version (Method 4) that incorporates certain aspects of this method.
"Method 3," which was recommended by staff to the MANWAC as a preferred alternative, compares the
average of manatee deaths per year within a three-mile radius of a marina project to the actual countywide
proportionate average, instead of using the goal of one manatee death per year. Under this altemative,
average annual deaths are calculated dating back to 1993. As previously indicated, the MANWAC ultimately
voted 5 to 3 to support this alternative.
Although staff recommended "Method 3" to MANWAC as the preferred alternative (to Methods 1 and 2),
points were raised at the MAIC -WAC meeting that led staff to rethink the calculation. More specifically, a
problem with Method 3 is that it does not serve to promote the MPP goal of one watercraft -related manatee
death per year. That is because, if actual proportionate averages are used to determine high modality, an area
of the lagoon can be determined to have "low" mortality in the future even during a high countywide manatee
mortality trend, since it is all relative. As a result, although Method 3 resolves the discrepancy of projecting
a goal into the past (since it doesn't do that), it fails to project the County's goal of one manatee death per
year countywide into the future.
January 15, 2002
36
• •
• Method 4 (Combination of actual and goal mortality)
Reviewin2- Entities Recommendations: the SMC opposes this method. FWC does not oppose this method,
but it is not FWC's preferred method. County staff recommends that the Board adopt this method.
MANWAC has not considered this alternative, which is a modification of the method (Method 3) that
MANWAC supports.
To resolve the problem with Method 3, which does not account for the County's manatee mortality goal,
county staff supports this combination of Methods 2 and 3. This combination method ("Method 4") uses
actual proportionate annual average mortality dating back to 1993 to assess the current status of high
watercraft -related mortality. However, Method 4 uses the one -manatee death per year countywide average
from hereon out, into the future. What this combination approach accomplishes (that the other methods don't)
is that it does not punish riparian landowners for what has happened in the past, but it does set reasonable
limits on development in the future to promote the County's goal of keeping watercraft -related manatee
deaths to a minimum.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners foiuially adopt the following revisions to the
MPP:
1. Replace the current "high manatee watercraft -related mortality" calculation with Method 4 described
herein; and
2. Revise the four -foot water depth requirement as set forth in Attachment 4.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 12/19i01 letter from the FWC commenting on proposed revisions to the MPP
2. Altemative methods for calculating "high watercraft -related manatee mortality"
3. Table summarizing implications of alti,rnative manatee mortality calculation methods
4. Proposed revised four -foot depth requirement language
5. 11/20/0 BCC minutes excerpt
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in
this matter.
City of Sebastian Mayor Walter Barnes speaking for himself and not the City
Council, thought this was a good project and would be good for business in Sebastian. He
questioned the mortality calculations. He supported Method 4, which he felt was fair, and
suggested that if the mortality rate increases, the plan could always be revised in the future.
Mike Keefer, speaking as a resident of the County and as a member of the Marine
Industries Association of the Treasure Coast and the State of Florida, complimented staff's
January 15, 2002
37
work. He was concerned about the reasonableness of the goal of one death per year,
particularly the effect this goal would have on future activities which might result with
continued protection of the manatees and their increase in numbers. He thought existing
facilities, particularly those near the inlets throughout the state, should be encouraged to
make improvements to their facilities and to expand.
Tom Collins, 989 Island Club Square, Vero Beach, pointed out that the hearing was
not about Captain Hiram's current renovation application but inconsistencies were found in
the Plan because of the application. He credited the County with having their Plan early and
believed that many parts of it have proved effective, particularly because of enforcement of
the speed zones. The portions of the Plan which deal with expansion and development of
marinas, however, have proven too restrictive especially in light of the Plan's stated desire
to encourage marina development and expansion in Zone 3. Zone 3 is the logical area
because of the proximity to the Sebastian Inlet yet the existing regulations prohibit that
growth. He pointed out there are two issues, the 4 -foot depth and mortality calculations.
Because there seemed to be no controversy on the depth issue, he kept his remarks to the
mortality calculations. He handed out copies of an article in the morning paper concerning
St. Lucie County embarking on a manatee plan and commented on it. (Copy is on file with
the backup for the meeting in the Office of the Clerk to the Board.) He requested adoption
of Method 4 because it eases the restrictions and will allow marinas to expand and be
developed.
Sandra Clinger, 2680 Bobcat Trail, Titusville, speaking on behalf of Save the
Manatee Club, did not oppose changes in the Plan because of the limitation of the goals.
She spoke in opposition to Method 3 because it could allow for exponential mortalities. She
asked if staff had done any future forecasting of mortality and at what point the goal would
be applied.
January 15, 2002
38
BK 1
Mr. DeBlois advised that projections into the future for multiple scenarios had not
been done.
Ms. Clinger noted that she had figured future projections very late into the night and
she was stunned at what she found in Method 4. She explained that her undergraduate
degree is in math and because of the averaging aspect in Method 4, there is an exponentially
decreasing value for criteria and projecting into the year 2100. The goal is still not being
applied. Thirty-five years is too long for a project to come into compliance under the
present goal and 100 years is too long for the goal to be applied. She supported Method 2
for the reasons set out in her letter (letter and attachments have been filed with the backup
for the meeting in the office of the Clerk to the Board) which she read aloud. She did not
oppose the water depth recommended by staff She referred to inaccuracies that exist in the
Plan concerning Zone 3 and felt the zone information also needs to be revised.
Martin Carter, partner of Tom Collins in Captain Hiram's and resident of Indian
River Shores, thought Ms. Clinger's numbers needed to be verified on something this
important. He stated that Captain Hiram's marina had received the State's "Clean Marina"
citation which takes a lot of effort from everyone involved. The number of boats has been
reduced since they took it over and it makes sense to be able to expand existing facilities.
Bruce McIntyre, Vero Beach resident and owner of Vero Beach Marine Center,
thought MANWAC had worked hard and long. He felt certain if they had the opportunity
to vote on Method 4 it would have been a unanimous vote and asked Commissioner Ginn
if she agreed.
Commissioner Ginn believed the members of MANWAC would favor the corrections
made with Method 4 but could not speak for them.
Mr. McIntyre agreed that staff's recommendation was "solid". Regarding
projections, he thought no one realized a year ago how prolific manatees were. In one year,
January 15, 2002
39
BR
159
the count went up 50%. If that number is run out to 2100, we will have a lot of manatees
round and this discussion would be moot.
Commissioner Ginn remarked there is probably not enough sea grass to support them.
Tim Glover, 9660 Estuary Way, Sebastian, president of the Friends of the St.
Sebastian River, gave brief reasons for opposition to Methods 1, 3, and 4, and supported
Method 2.
There was discussion as to pinpointing the location of mortalities in the statistics and
Commissioner Macht felt the deaths were being caused by the large boats traveling south
during the time period when numbers of manatees are greater due to the warm water. The
location of the bodies would depend on wind and tide. He felt the assumption that these
deaths were attributable to local boaters was a fallacy.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the Chairman closed the
public hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED
by Commissioner Adams, to approve staffs recommendation.
Under discussion, Charman Stanbridge thought some criteria concerning the 4 -foot
water depth was needed and she also wanted the results under Method 4 to be continuously
monitored so we don't have to wait 100 years if a revision is required.
After a clarification on the measuring of the 4 -foot water depth, Commissioner Macht
recalled and supported Mayor Barnes' comment about Sebastian's businesses which help
support their largely residential tax base.
January 15, 2002
Commissioner Ginn believed the Plan supports the expansion of existing marinas
rather than new.
Commissioner Adams thought the MANWAC's vote which led to Method 4 was a
compromise.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION
and the motion carried unanimously. (Staff s
recommendation: Adoption of the following
revisions to the MPP: 1) Replace the current
"high manatee watercraft -related mortality"
calculation with method 4 described in the
backup; and 2) Revise the four -foot water depth
requirement as set forth in Attachment 4 in the
backup.)
AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE ABOVE ITEM AT 10:02
A.M., THE CHAIRMAN DECLARED A SHORT RECESS.
THE MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 10:12 A.M.
WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT.
January 15, 2002
9.A.2. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE NO. 2002-002 - COUNTY -
INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO
REDESIGNATE 10 ACRES FROM M-2 TO PUB (GIFFORD HEALTH
CLINIC) (Legislative)
PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR HEARING
IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
Community Development Director Robert Keating reviewed a Memorandum dated
January 4, 2002 with the aid of a Power Point presentation (on file with the backup in the
Office of the Clerk to the Board):
TO: James E. Chandler; County Administrator
TMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE
f
Robert M. Keating, AIC
THROUGH: Sasan
i
et ;fr,A/
ommun ty evelopment Director
ohani, AICP; Chief, Long- ange Planning `
•
FROM: hn Wachtel; Senior Planner, Long -Range Planning
DATE: January 4, 2002
RE: County Initiated Request to Amend The Comprehensive Plan to Redesignate 10
Acres From M-2 to PUB
PLAN AMENDMENT NUMBER: LUDA 2001-10-0142
It is requested that the data herein presented be given founal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 15, 2002.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
This is a request to redesignate 10 acres from M-2, Medium -Density Residential -2 (up to 10
units/acre), to PUB, Public Facilities. The subject property, depicted in Figures 1 and 2, is owned
by the county and is located at the northwest corner of 45' Street (North Gifford Road) and 28`h
Avenue. The purpose of the request is to secure the necess'iry land use designation to allow a portion
of the subject property to be developed with a public Medical Clinic (the Gifford Health Clinic). The
request does not involve rezoning the site at this time Staff anticipates that a rezoning request for
a PD, Planned Development District, will be submitted in early 2002, as part of the site development
process.
On December 13, 200U the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7 to 0 to recommend that the
Board of County Commissioners approve this request to redesignate the subject property from M-2
to PUB.
January 15, 2002
42
Location and Land Use Designation of the Subject Property
1
•
1
1
I
■
L
e
0
2
11.
7
•
ie
I
■
•
e•
Background
Currently, a public medical clinic known as the Gifford Health Clinic is operated on land east of the
subject property on the east side of 28th Avenue. That clinic is housed in a building owned by the
Indian River County School District and leased by the Indian River County Hospital District. The
clinic is operated by the Indian River Health Department. The School District has informed the
clinic that the clinic must vacate the existing facilities by December 2003.
On Tuesday, August 21, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners voted 5 to 0 to authorize staff
to take the following actions:
• Negotiate with the Hospital District for the Hospital District to lease or purchase the subject
property for a clinic; and
• Initiate a land use amendment to allow a medical clinic on the site. The existing M-2 land use
designation does not allow medical clinics.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review Procedures
The state allows local governments to use alternative adoption procedures for "small scale" plan
amendments that meet certain criteria. Section 163.3187(1)(c) of the Florida Statutes sets the
following criteria for small scale amendments:
The proposed amendment involves 10 or fewer acres;
The cumulative effect of the acreage for all small scale amendments in the jurisdiction does
not exceed 80 acres in a calendar year;
The proposed amendment does not involve the same property granted a land use designation
change within the prior 12 months;
4. The proposed amendment does not involve the same owner's property within 200 feet of
property granted a land use designation change within the prior 12 months;
5. The proposed amendment does not involve a change to the comprehensive plan's text;
6. The subject property is not within an area of critical state concern, and
7. The proposed amendment does not involve increasing residential density above 10 units/acre.
Small scale plan amendments are deemed to have fewer impacts than typical plan amendments and
are eligible for a streamlined adoption process. In contrast to typical plan amendments which require
review and approval by the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA), local governments
may adopt small scale plan amendments without review or approval by DCA.
In this case, the procedures for reviewing the subject comprehensive plan amendment will be as
follows. First, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducts a public hearing to review the
request. The Commission has the option to recommend approval or denial of the comprehensive
plan amendment request to the Board of County Commissioners. Following Planning and Zoning
Commission action, the Beard takes final action to approve or deny the land use amendment request.
January 15, 2002
Besides being exempt from DCA review, small scale amendments are also exempt from the state's
statutory limitations on the frequency of adopting comprehensive plan amendments. For example,
although the number of standard plan amendments that a local government may consider is not
limited, the frequency with which local governments can amend their comprehensive plan is
regulated by state law. According to Honda Statutes, standard plan amendments are limited to twice
per calendar year. For that reason, the county accepts standard plan amendment applicationz only
during the two "window" months of January and July. All requests submitted during each window
month are processed simultaneously. That method ensures that standard plan amendments will be
adopted no more than twice per calendar year.
State law, however, provides several exceptions to the twice per calendar year limitation. One of
those exceptions is for small scale plan amendments. Consequently, a local government may adopt
small scale amendments, such as the subject plan amendment, without regard for the twice per
calendar year limitation. For that reason, the proposed amendment is exempt from the twice per
calendar year adoption limit.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property, formerly known as the DuBose Cemetery, has been checked to confirm that
currently, it is unlikely that there are any burials on the site. The site and nearly all surrounding
properties are zoned RM -10, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 10 units/acre). The
exception is land abutting the south 200 feet of the subject property's western boundary. That land
is zoned CL, Limited Commercial District.
Most of the site consists of heavily wooded scrubby flatwoods. The southern approximately 250 feet
of the subject property, however, contains the historic Macedonia Baptist Church and Museum.
Single-family homes exist to the north, south, and west of the subject property. To the east of the
site is Gifford Middle School.
Future Land Use Pattern
The subject property and most surrounding properties are designated M-2, Medium -Density
Residential -2 on the county's future land use map The M-2 designation permits residential uses
with densities up to 10 units/acre. The land abutting the south 200 feet of the subject property's
western boundary is designated C/l, Commercial/Industrial, on the county's future land use map.
That designation permits various commercial and industrial zoning districts.
Environment
Except for the portion of the site containing the historic church and museum, the site consists of
scrubby flatwoods, a native upland plant community. Gopher Tortoises, a listed species, may exist
on the site. According to Flood Insurance Rating Maps, the subject property is not within a flood
hazard area.
Utilities and Services
Water lines extend to the site from the North County Reverse Osmosis Plant, while wastewater lines
extend to the site from the Central Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant.
January 15, 2002
46
BK
•
Transportation System
The subject property's southern boundary is 45`h Street, a two lane paved road with 35 feet of
existing public road right-of-way. That portion of 45`h Street is programmed for expansion to 80 feet
of public road right of way by 2020, and is classified as an urban collector roadway on the future
roadway thoroughfare plan map.
The site is bounded on the north and east by 47th Street and 28th Avenue, respectively. Those streets
are paved local roads with 50 feet of existing public road right-of-way.
ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the land use amendment request will be
presented. Specifically, this analysis will address:
• the proposed amendment's impact on public facilities;
• the proposed amendment's consistency with the county's comprehensive plan;
• the proposed amendment's compatibility with the surrounding area; and
• the proposed amendment's potential impact on environmental quality.
Concurrency of Public Facilities
This site is located within the county Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale
development. The Comprehensive Plan establishes minimum development standards for:
Transportation, Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Stoiinwater Management and Recreation
(Future Land Use Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the
continued quality of life enjoyed by the community The Comprehensive Plan and Land
Development Regulations (LDRs) require that new development be reviewed to ensure that the
minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained.
Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it
is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements
Element. For Comprehensive Plan amendment requests, conditional concurrency review is required.
Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a
proposed project. Since Comprehensive Nan amendment requests are not projects county
regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the subject
property based upon the requested land use designation. For PUB, Public Facilities, several land
uses may be applicable. In this case, the most intense use is medical office with 15,250 square feet
of gross floor area per acre of land proposed for redesignation.
Due to site development constraints, the concurrency analysis for the subject request will be
conducted for only the northern 3.5 acres of the site. The remainder of the site is either developed
(the church/historic museum on the southern 2 acres) or unlikely to be developed due to the
possibility of burials on the site.
The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows:
1. Size of Area:
3.5 acres
2. Existing Land Use Designation: M-2, Medium -Density Residential -2 (up to 10
units/acre)
January 15, 2002
•
47
6
3. Proposed Land Use Designation: PUB, Public Facilities
4. Most Intense Use of Subject Property
under Current Land Use Designation: 35 Single -Family Units
5. Most Intense Use of Subject Property
under Proposed Land Use Designation: 53,375 sq. ft. of Medical Office
Transportation
The county's Traffic Engineering Division has determined the number of peak hour/peak
season/peak direction trips that would be generated by the most intense use of the subject property
under the proposed land use designation, and assigned those trips to impacted roads. Impacted roads
are defined in section 910.09(4)(b)3 of the county's Land Development Regulations as roadway
segments which receive five percent (5%) or more of the project traffic or fifty (50) or more project
trips, whichever is less.
According to the above analysis, the existing level of service on impacted roadways would not be
lowered by the traffic generated by development of 53,375 square feet medical offices on the subject
property
Water
A medical office use of 53,375 square feet on the subject property will have a water consumption
rate of 16 Equivalvent Residential Units (ERU), or 4,000 gallons/day. This is based upon a level -of -
service standard of 250 gallons/HRU/day. Water lines extend to the site from the North County
Reverse Osmosis Plant which currently has a remaining capacity of approximately 1,500,000
gallons/day and therefore can accommodate the potable water demand associated with the proposed
amendment.
Wastewater
Based upon the most intense use allowed underthe proposed amendment, development of the subject
property will have a wastewater generation rate of approximately 16 Equivalent Residential Units
(ERU), or 4,000 gallons/day. The subject property is served by the Central Regional Wastewater
Treatment Plant which has a remaining capacity of approximately 1 100,000 gallons/day Therefore,
the Centra] Regional Wastewater Treatment Plan can accommodate the additional wastewater
generated by the proposed amendment.
Solid Waste
Solid waste service includes pick-up by private operators and disposal at the county landfill. For a
53,375 square foot medical office development on the subject site, solid waste generation will be
approximately 267 waste generation units (WGU) annually. A WGU is a Waste Generation Unit
Measurement equivalent to one ton (2,000 pounds) of solid waste. Using the accepted conversion
rate of one cubic yard for every 1,200 pounds of compacted solid waste generated, the 53,375 square
feet of commercial development would be expected to generate 445 cubic yards of waste/year.
A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the county landfill indicates the
availability of more than 800,000 cubic yards. The active segment of the landfill has a three year
capacity, and the landfill has expansion capacity beyond 2010. Based on the analysis, staff
determined that the county landfill can accommodate the additional solid waste generated by the site
under the proposed land use designation.
January 15, 2002
48
I00
•
Stormwater Management
All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stornrwater regulations which require
on-site retention. preservation of floodplain storage and minimum finished floor elevations In
addition, development proposals must meet the discharge requirements of the county Stormwater
Management Ordinance. The site is located within the R-2 Drainage Basin
In this case, the minimum floor elevation level -of -service standards do not apply, since the properties
do not lie within a floodplain. However, both the on-site retention and discharge standards apply.
With the most intense use of this site under the proposed amendment, the maximum area of
impervious surface would be approximately 129,591 square feet, or 2.975 acres. The maximum
runoff volume, based on that amount of impervious surface and the 25 year/24 hour design storm
would be approximately 105,366 cubic feet. In order to maintain the county's adopted level -of -
service the applicant would be required to retain approximately 68,991 cubic feet of runoff on-site.
With the soil characteristics of the subject properties, the estimated peak pre -development runoff rate
is 9 2 cubic feet/second.
Based upon staff's analysis, the drainage level -of -service standards will be met by requiring retention
of the 68,991 cubic feet of runoff for the most intense use of the property. As with all development,
a more detailed review will be conducted during the development approval process
Recreation
Recreation concurrency requirements apply only to residential development. Therefore, this
comprehensive plan amendment request would not be required to satisfy recreation concurrency
requirements.
Concurrency Summary
Based upon the analysis conducted, staff has determined that all concurrency -mandated facilities,
including stormwater management, roads, solid waste, wastewater, and water, have adequate
capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject properties under the proposed land use
designation. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request.
Compatibility with the Surrounding Area
Given the subject property's location, between a residential neighborhood and a middle school,
compatibility with the surrounding area is an important concern associated with this request.
Although the middle school has a residential designation, the school is a public use. For that reason,
the request is for an expansion of an existing use pattern. Although the requested PUB designation
allows a variety of uses, the site characteristics indicate that the most likely uses would be public
office and service related uses on the north 3.5 acres of the site. Such uses are usually busiest during
daytime working hours when many residents are away from home. In contrast to retail uses, office
type uses operate during fewer hours, and generate less traffic, noise, and other impacts.
Any potential impacts associated with development of the site would most directly affect the
residences abutting the site's western boundary However given the rectangular shape of the site
and the location of existing streets, buildings on the site are likely to be located towards the eastern
portion of the site, away from adjacent residences. Similarly, other "soft" features such as required
open space and stomrwater management areas are likely to be located close to the subject property's
•
January 15, 2002
49
western boundary. Additionally, planning staff would recommend a type "B" buffer with a six foot
opaque feature along the site's west boundary for any PD proposal for the site. That is consistent
with the buffer requirements where commercial zoning districts abut single-family uses.
For those reasons, development of the subject property under the proposed land use designation will
be compatible with surrounding areas.
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
Land use amendment requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive
plan. As per section 800 07(1) of the county code, the "comprehensive plan may only be amended
in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to Section 163.3177(2)
FS." Amendments must also show consistency with the overall designation of land uses as depicted
on the Future Land Use Map, which includes agricultural, residential, recreational, conservation, and
commercial and industrial land uses and their densities.
The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan. Policies
are statements in the plan which identify actions which the county will take in order to direct the
community's development. As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the
basis for all county land development related decisions --including plan amendment decisions. While
all comprehensive plan objectives and policies are important, some have more applicability than
others in reviewing plan amendment requests. Of particular applicability for this request are the
following policies.
Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3
In evaluating a land use amendment request, the most important consideration is Future Land Use
Element Policy 14.3. This policy requires that one of four criteria be met in order to approve a land
use amendment request. These criteria are:
• The proposed amendment will correct a mistake in the approved plan;
• The proposed amendment will correct an oversight in the approved plan;
• The proposed amendment is warranted based on a substantial change in circumstances
affecting the subject property; or
• The proposed amendment involves a swap or reconfiguration of land use designations at
separate sites and, that swap or reconfiguration will not increase the overall land use density
or intensity depicted on the Future Land Use Map.
The proposed land use amendment meets the policy's second criterion. Because this property was
publicly owned when the land use map was originally prepared, the property should have been
designated PUB at that time. For that reason, the proposed amendment meets the second criterion
of Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3 and is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy
14.3.
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.28
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.28 states that the PUB, Public Facilities, land use designation
shall be applied to land used for public facilities and services. Since the use of the subject property
will be limited to public facilities and services, the request is consistent with Future Land Use
Element Policy 1.28.
January 15, 2002
50
170
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.40
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.40 states that, to the extent feasible, the county shall collocate
public facilities with schools. Since the subject property will be the location of a public facility and
the subject property is adjacent to a school, the request implements Future Land Use Element Policy
1.40.
Summary of Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
While the referenced policies are particularly applicable to this request, other Comprehensive Plan
policies and objectives also have relevance. For that reason, staff evaluated the subject request for
consistency with all plan policies and objectives. Based upon that analysis, staff determined that the
request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Potential Impact on Environmental Quality
Environmental impacts of development on the subject property would be essentially the same under
either the existing or the proposed land use designation. The county's 10-15% native upland plant
community set aside requirement would apply to development on the subject property, regardless
of land use designation and zoning district. If an environmental survey indicates that wetlands exist
on the site, federal, state and county wetland protection regulations would apply. Given the
predominantly scrubby habitat of the site, gopher tortoises may be present on the site. The Florida
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission will regulate any gopher tortoise relocations that may
be necessary. For these reasons, no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this
request are anticipated.
CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis, staff has determined that the requested land use designation is compatible with
the surrounding area, consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan,
and meet all applicable concurrency criteria. Finally, the subject property is located in an area
deemed suitable for public facility uses. The request meets all applicable criteria. For these reasons,
staff supports the request.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis, staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the Board
of County Commissioners approve the proposed amendment to change the site's land use
designation from M-2 to PUB by adopting the attached ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Summary Page
2. Land Use Designation Amendment Application
3. Unapproved Minutes of the December 13, 2001, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
4. Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Designation Amendment Ordinance
January 15, 2002
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 Ginn, SECONDED BY Vice
Chairman Tippin, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance
No. 2002-002 amending the Future Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan by changing the land use designation for
ten acres located at the northwest corner of 45th Street and 2e
Avenue from M-2, medium -density residential -2 (up to 10
units/acre) to PUB, public facilities; and providing for
severability and an effective date.
ORDINANCE NO. 2002- 002
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND
USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FOR TEN ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 45Th
STREET AND 28T" AVENUE, FROM M-2, MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -2 (UP TO 10
UNITS/ACRE) TO PUB PUBLIC FACILITIES; AND PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND
EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan on February 13, 1990, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners substantially revised and updated the
Indian River County Comprehensive Plan, based on the recommendations of the county's Evaluation
and Appraisal Report, on March 17, 1998, and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency held a public hearing on this comprehensive plan
amendment request on December 13, 2001, after due public notice, and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency voted 7 to 0 to recommend approval of this
comprehensive plan amendment to the Board of County Commissioners, and
January 15, 2002
•
WHEREAS, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment meets the criteria established in Chapter
163.3187(1)(c), FS, for "small scale development amendments", and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County held a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Adoption Public Hearing on January 15, 2002, after advertising
pursuant to Chapter 163.3187(1)(c), FS and Chapter 125.66(4), FS; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, that:
SECTION 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Adoption and Transmittal
The amendment to the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan identified in Section 2 is
hereby adopted as a small scale development amendment and one (1) copy is directed to be
transmitted to the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs and one (1) copy is directed
to be transmitted to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council.
SECTION 2. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
The land use designation of the following described property situated in Indian River County,
Florida to wit:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 32
SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST RUN WEST 330 FEET FOR A POINT OF
BEGINNING THEN RUN WEST 330 FEET, THEN RUN NORTH 1,320 FEET,
THEN RUN EAST 330 FEET, THEN RUN SOUTH 1,320 FEET TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 10 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, AND BEING A
PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY FLORIDA.
ALSO KNOWN AS:
ALL OF VERO BEACH BURIAL PARK, ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT
THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK I, PAGE 90, PUBLIC RECORDS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
is changed from M-2, Medium -Density Residential -2 (up to 10 units/acre), to PUB, Public Facilities,
and the Future Land Use Map is hereby revised accordingly.
SECTION 3. Repeal of Conflicting Provisions
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida which conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed
to the extent of such conflict.
SECTION 4. Severability
ktr
•
It is declared to be the intent of the Board of County Commissioners that if any provision of
this ordinance and therefore, the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan Amendment is for any
reason finally held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction such provision
January 15, 2002
53
BR
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the
validity of the remaining provisions.
SECTION 5. Effective Date
Unless challenged, the effective date of this ordinance, and therefore, this plan amendment,
shall be February 15, 2002. If challenged, the effective date of this ordinance, and therefore, this
plan amendment, shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs
or Administration Commission finding the amendment in compliance with Section 163.3184, Florida •
Statutes, whichever occurs earlier
This ordinance was advertised in the Press -Journal on the 2nd day of January, 2002, for a
public hearing to be held on the 15'h day of January, 2002, at which time it was moved for adoption
by Commissioner Ginn , seconded by Commissioner Ti ppi n
and adopted by the following vote:
Chairman Ruth M Stanbridge Aye
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye
Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTEST B
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
William G. Collins II, Deputy County Attorney
APPROVED AS TO PLANNING MATTERS
Robert M. Keating, AICP
Community Development Director
January 15, 2002
9.B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM - REQUEST FROM BRIAN HEADY
TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ISSUES THAT RELATE TO
HISTORY OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; AND ISSUES THAT RELATE
TO THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION; AND PROVISIONS TO
RESOLVE CURRENT ISSUES
The Board reviewed a letter of January 9, 2002:
January 9, 2002
Chairman, County Commission
Margaret Gunter
Indian River County Commission
Vero Beach Florida 32960
Dear County Commission Commissioners:
Please place me on the citizen input public discussion portion of your
agenda for the next meeting.
I would appreciate time to address the County Commission on issues
that relate to the history of Indian River County. I would also request time
to speak to issues that relate to the Florida Constitution and provisions
therein as well as ways to reduce the time necessary to resolve current issues
before the Commission. I do not expect my remarks to last much longer than
five minutes in total.
If you have arty questions 1 can be reached by telephone at 778-1028.
Sincerer;,
January 15, 2002
Brian Heady spoke of government as a servant to the people, the Declaration of
Independence, our inalienable rights, and about Hitler's rise to prominence. He also spoke
of Robin Hood's premise of stealing from the rich to give to the poor; he believed the
opposite was true concerning the Dodger deal. It appeared that to him that the
Commissioners were acting inappropriately In their roles as servants of the people because
history tells us that first government takes their money, then their freedom, and then their
lives. He concluded by saying "the choice is yours".
9.C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
None. (Clerk's Note: See item 7.N. above)
11.C.1. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL - DETENTION
ELECTRONICS - SIEMENS BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES - FINAL
PAYMENT AND RELEASE OF RETAINAGE
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 8, 2002:
Date: January 8, 2002
To: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Thru: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
,
From: Thomas W. Frame, General Services Director—Zczccc.�l
Subject: Final Payment and Release of Retainage — Siemens Building Technologies,
Indian River County Jail — Detention Electronics
BACKGROUND:
Attached is a memorandum from Lynn Williams regarding the release of the retainage and final
payment to Siemens Building Technologies for the installation and replacement of detention
electronics at the Indian River County Jail.
All work contracted for has been satisfactorily completed and the final payment of the ten
percent retainage is now due to the contractor The adjusted contract as approved by the Board is
for $289,010. The amount retained (10%) is $28 901.
RECOMMENDATION:
With all work having been properly installed, staff recommends the release of the retainage and
the final payment of $28,901 to Siemens Building Technologies.
January 15, 2002
56
r
7 '6
•
Ts
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved release
of the retainage and final payment of $28,901 to Siemens
Building Technologies, as recommended in the memorandum.
DOCUMENTS WILL BE ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
11.C.2. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC SHOOTING RANGE -
LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR VENDING MACHINES - VENDOR
SERVICE SPECIALISTS, INC.
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 8, 2002:
Date:
To:
Thru:
From.
Subject:
January 8, 2002
The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
James E. Chandler, County Administrator Li )
Thomas W. Frame, General Services Director .�GCdf c�4, IJ
License Agreement for Placement of Vending Machines at the Indian River
County Public Shooting Range
BACKGROUND:
The attached license agreement is for the location of vending machines at the shooting range.
The propose agreement would be with Vendor Service Specialists, Inc., which currently
maintains an agreement with Indian River County to provide vending services at the Courthouse.
Vendor Service Specialists, Inc. were approached based on their exemplary service at the
Courthouse
Based on the good working relations we have with Vendor Service Specialists, Inc. staff requests
that they be the vendor to provide services at the shooting range. The agreement would provide
that the vendor would compensate the County in the amount of 20 % of gross sales after
deducting sales tax. The payment would be made on or before the tenth day of each month.
This agreement also provides for approval by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board approve the proposed agreement between Vendor Service
Specialists, Inc., and authorize the staff to forward a County and vendor executed agreement to
the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for their approval and execution.
January 15, 2002
57
177
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved the
proposed agreement with Vendor Service Specialists, Inc. and
authorized staff to forward a County and Vendor executed
agreement to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission for the approval and execution, as recommended
in the memorandum.
COPY OF PARTIALLY EXECUTED LICENSE AGREEMENT IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
11.C.3. MAIN LIBRARY - REDESIGN EXISTING RESTROOMS
DOW-HOWELL-GILMORE ASSOCIATES, INC. CHANGE ORDER #1
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 8, 2002:
Date: January 8, 2002
To: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Thru: James E. Chandler, County Administrator J
From. Thomas W. Frame, General Services Director '' a).
Subject: Request for Approval Change Order #1 with Dow -Howell -Gilmore -
Associates, Inc. for Redesign of Existing Restrooms
BACKGROUND:
This request is to authorize a change order with the architect for the Main Library, Dow -Howell -
Gilmore -Associates, Inc. for a redesign of the first floor restrooms. The redesign would allow
for the reconstruction of these facilities to be ADA compliant. The attached memo from Mr.
Lynn Williams outlines the background and the need for this change order in the amount of
$2,835 and reflects revisions to architectural, electrical mechanical and plumbing documents.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Change Order #1 with Dow -Howell -Gilmore -Associates, Inc. in
the amount of $2,835.
January 15, 2002
58
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Ginn, the Board unanimously approved Change
Order #1 with Dow -Howell -Gilmore Associates, Inc. in the
amount of $2,835, as recommended in the Memorandum.
CHANGE ORDER WILL BE ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
11.C.4. AWARD BID #4021 - DENTAL CLINIC ADDITION
COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT - BARTH CONSTRUCTION, INC.
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 8, 2002:
DATE:
TO:
THROUGH:
January 8, 2002
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONFRS
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Thomas Frame, General Services, Director-1ol.4c,e)
SUBJECT: Bid Award: HZC Bid # 4021 Dental Clinic Addition at the County Health
Department
BACKGROUND:
This project is to provide an increase to the dental services offered by the Health Department by
providing an addition approximately 37 feet by 60 feet which will include 6 operatories, a lab, an
administrative office and a new waiting area. The Board of County Commissioners funded the
project at $350,000 from sales tax proceeds.
Bid Opening Date:
Advertising Dates:
DemandStar Broadcast to:
Specification's Requested by:
Replies:
December 19, 2001 at 2:00 p.m.
November 5,& 12, 2001
695 Vendors
Twelve (12) vendors
Eight (8) vendors
January 15, 2002
BID TABULATION:
ESTIMATED BUDGET: $318,800.00
With the allocation of architectural fees and plan review fees, there remains $318,800 available
to apply to the construction costs. With the bid of $341,000 to construct the facilities, a shortfall
of $22 900 to meet the minimum bid.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID: $341,000.00
SOURCE OF FUNDS: 315-220-519-068.42
(Health Dept. Dental Lab Addition)
With a shortfall of $22,900 and a reduction in available sales tax revenues, Jean Kline,
Administrator of the Health Department, has indicated that she will set aside $54,000 from the
Trust Fund for construction and contingency. The sum of $22,900 will be available to insure a
contract amount of $341,000 and $31,100 will be available as a construction contingency.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Barth Construction Inc as the lowest most
responsive and responsible bidder meeting the specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid
subject to the appropriate funds being provided from the Heath Department Trust Fund to make
up the funding shortfall.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Ginn, the Board unanimously awarded Bid
#4021 to Barth Construction, Inc., as the lowest most
responsive and responsible bidder meeting the specifications as
set forth in the Invitation to Bid subject to the appropriate funds
being provided from the Health Department Trust Fund to make
up the funding shortfall, as recommended in the Memorandum.
January 15, 2002
60
Bidder's Name
Lump Sum Bid
Barth Construction Inc
$341,000.00
Vero Beach, FL
McTeague Construction Company
Stuart, FL
$369,361.00
Speegle Construction
Cocoa, FL
$370,000.00
Summit Construction Management
Vero Beach, FL
$383,104.00
Bill Bryant and Associates Inc
Vero Beach, FL
$389,800.00
Hennis Construction Co Inc
Port St Lucie ,FL
$423,000.00
MGM Contracting Inc
$424,700.00
Cocoa, FL
Paul Jacquin & Sons Inc
Ft Pierce, FL
$446,000.00
ESTIMATED BUDGET: $318,800.00
With the allocation of architectural fees and plan review fees, there remains $318,800 available
to apply to the construction costs. With the bid of $341,000 to construct the facilities, a shortfall
of $22 900 to meet the minimum bid.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID: $341,000.00
SOURCE OF FUNDS: 315-220-519-068.42
(Health Dept. Dental Lab Addition)
With a shortfall of $22,900 and a reduction in available sales tax revenues, Jean Kline,
Administrator of the Health Department, has indicated that she will set aside $54,000 from the
Trust Fund for construction and contingency. The sum of $22,900 will be available to insure a
contract amount of $341,000 and $31,100 will be available as a construction contingency.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Barth Construction Inc as the lowest most
responsive and responsible bidder meeting the specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid
subject to the appropriate funds being provided from the Heath Department Trust Fund to make
up the funding shortfall.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Ginn, the Board unanimously awarded Bid
#4021 to Barth Construction, Inc., as the lowest most
responsive and responsible bidder meeting the specifications as
set forth in the Invitation to Bid subject to the appropriate funds
being provided from the Health Department Trust Fund to make
up the funding shortfall, as recommended in the Memorandum.
January 15, 2002
60
•
11.G.1. UNPAVED ROADS PROGRAM
Public Works Director James Davis rendered a comprehensive review of his
Memorandum of January 4, 2002 using an outline/photographic/visual display to aid in his
presentation. A copy of the visual aids are on file with the backup in the Office of the Clerk
to the Board.
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Directof
SUBJECT: Unpaved Roads Program
DATE: January 4, 2002
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
During the March 6, 2001 Board of County Commissioners meeting, the
Grovenor Estates (34th Avenue SW and 35th Avenue SW) Petition Paving
projects were not approved due to escalating construction and
assessment costs for paving roads. Also, requests have been
received to pave 11th Street SW in Oslo Park and 63`d Avenue in
P inetree Park. As a result of these issues, the Board authorized
staff to scrutinize and evaluate the current County Road Paving
P rogram and make recommendations to provide a cost-effective
solution to pave roads.
BACKGROUND
Currently, the County has six motor graders whicn grade 244.68
miles of unpaved roads at an average yearly cost of $481,111.13
(from data collected by the Road and Bridge Division from 1-1-96
t hrough 4-19-01). The cost for grading one mile of road per year
is $1,966.25. The yearly cost to fund one grader route is
approximately $80,815.19. Each year, the County Road and Bridge
Div. spreads 65,000 tons of marl/shell on the dirt roads. Much of
t his material washes into the drainage system and is deposited in
t he Indian River.
For analysis purposes, the County should best be divided in three
regions to identify specific goals associated with paving roads.
Region # 1 - East of the FEC Railroad Right -of -Way
G oal #1.1 Eliminate direct suspended solid loading and unpaved road
runoff pollution of the Indian River Lagoon.
G oal #1.2 Eliminate motor grader operation in urban areas with
heavy traffic conditions.
G oal #1.3 Eliminate unpaved roads in grader routes where excessive
t ravel times between short sections of unpaved roads
e xist
G oal #1.4 Eliminate 1 grader route
January 15, 2002
•
61
Bit
3'
G rader routes affected by the above and included in Region #1 are
North County #1 (NC#1), NC#3, and South County #1 (SC #1.)
Particular roads included in this region are:
REGION #1
S ubdivision From To Distance
63rd Street US 1
Wabasso Manor Subd.
Winter Beach area
Hobart Road (77th St) US1
G ifford area
73rd Street Old Dixie
Quay Dock Road US 1
H obart Landings Subd
G ifford area
63rd Street US 1
Roseland area
Weona Park Subd
Massey Road 87th Street
Donna Merle Subd.
G ranada Gdns. Subd.
Oslo Road (9th St SW) 300 Block SW
S hady Grove Park Subd.
Miller Subd.
S outh Side Park Subd.
O ld Dixie 415'
9,416'
1,805'
39th Avenue 527'
630'
US 1 527'
O ld Dixie 2,503'
1,595'
5,515'
D /E E. to D/E 2,500'
690'
2,385'
N . to D/E 2,686'
615'
1,923'
River 2,245'
530'
870'
545'
37,922 1.f.
7.2 miles
Cost to Pave @ $90/1.f.= $3,412,980
P ossible Revenue Sources
1. St. Johns River Water Management District Cost -Share Grant
Program
2. Indian River Lagoon Program Initiative
3. State Revolving Infrastructure Loan Program
4. Special Assessment Program or MSBU for area east of FECRR to the
west bank of Indian River, excluding development where existing
paved roads exist (see page 5 and 6 for Special Assessment
options).
Possible Pavement Options - on low volume roads, it may be possible
t o pave existing shell roads by reinforcing the base with coquina
rock and paving with 11i" asphalt, thereby reducing costs to
$2,500,000.
Region #2
S outh County east of 43rd Avenue, Roseland, all roads east of 66th
Avenue in North County (north of SR60) except for Jungle Trail -
These roads are located in Grader Routes NC #1, NC #3, SC #1, &
S C #2.
G oal 2.1 Pave roads in urbanizing area where motor grader travel
is hazardous on higher traffic count roadways.
G oal 2.2 Reduce stormwater pollution by eliminating unpaved road
runoff and suspended solids that track on paved roads.
G oal 2.3 Eliminate 1 grader route
P articular roads are as follows:
January 15, 2002
62
REGION #2
Subdivision From
Distance
G rovenor Est. Subd.
Emerson Park Subd.
Citrus Gardens Subd.
O slo Park Subd.
✓ alencia Subd.
Clearview Terrace Subd.
Emerson Villa Subd.
Florida Ridge Subd.
✓ ero Pines Subd.
Clemans Est. II Subd.
Ridge Acres Subd.
L one Palm Park Subd.
Moreland Subd.
Clemans Est. I Subd.
IR Heights Subd.
Melaluka Gardens Subd.
✓ ero Park Subd
G ranada Gdns. Subd.
Ridgewood Subd.
Albrecht Subd.
H ickory Sands Subd.
Sun Acres Subd
Royal Poinciana Subd.
Rosedale Manor Subd.
L at J
(7th Road SW)
9th Street SW
✓ ero Bch Homesites Subd.
K elly Road (13th Street SW)27th Ave SW
1st Street SW 12th Avenue
H amilton Rd (25th St SW) 30th Ave SW
IR Highlands Subd.
Pine Metto Subd.
L incoln Park Est. Subd.
N aomi Place Subd.
El Vero Villa Subd.
Sunnyland Subd.
H argrove Subd.
Cherry Ln (33 St) 58th Ave
L incoln Park Est. Subd.
W inter Beach Transfer 65 Street
Carver Colony Subd.
Floral Park Subd.
Cavalier Est. Subd.
K ings Highlands Subd.
E ucalyptus Place Subd.
Palm Gardens Subd.
H illcrest Subd
H illside Subd.
17th Street SW
39th
20th
43rd
Avenue SW
Avenue
Ave SW
Begin Pavement
23,144'
5,938'
4,658'
78, 576'
715'
1,569'
5,940'
852'
460'
5,242'
562'
2,361'
919'
3,857'
5,628'
3,739'
3,100'
541'
1,625'
475'
737'
820'
1,964'
1,293'
5,690'
7,756'
3,960'
2,548'
4,128'
635'
245'
255'
1,519'
148'
2,386'
313'
1,617'
242'
604'
2,178'
977'
600'
592'
644'
5,085'
775'
790'
January 15, 2002
REGION #2 (continued)
S ubdivision From
Distance
Anita Park Subd,
N C Colony Subd.
W inter Bch Highlands Subd.
Ramona Park Subd.
K ings Musicland Subd.
JC Acres Subd.
Cemetery Road (44 St)69th Street
H obart Road (77th St) 58th Avenue
S torm Grove Rd(57 St) 58th Avenue
L indsey Road (49th St) 5 8th Avenue
K ingsbury Rd (53 St) 58th Avenue
P ecan Road (61 St) 58th Avenue
B arber Street (37 St)58th Avenue
Douglas School Subd.
81st Avenue 58th Avenue
P onderosa Subd.
Roseland area
Woodmere Road
86th Place
Whitfield Subd
86th Lane
87th Place
N oCR510/63 Av
No CR510/58 Av
64th Avenue
71st
66th
66th
Street
Avenue
Avenue
Avenue
Avenue
Avenue
Avenue
66th Avenue
Old Dixie
63rd Avenue
63rd Avenue
63rd Avenue
85th St
CR510
8900 Av
D/E
64th Avenue
64th Avenue
W . to D/E
N . to D/E
J I Golf Course
80 Av
7,801'
1,343'
1,300'
1,235'
6,321'
1,300'
1,306'
5,188'
5,262'
6,132'
5,208'
5,221'
5,194'
1,030'
5,180'
1,280'
17, 375'
674'
660'
150'
654'
450'
1,643'
1,280'
1,530'
278,873'
The above roads total 52.817 miles, 9.1 miles of which are
collector roads. Estimated cost at $90/ft is $25,098,570
P ossible Revenue Sources:
1 Developer Contribution along new development frontage
2 Special Assessment to benefited property owners/MSBU's (see
page 5 and 6 for Special Assessment Options)
3. Stormwater/Water Quality grants to eliminate suspended
solid loading to Indian River Lagoon.
4. Future Gas Tax Revenue (could implement 9C discretionary
gas tax and/or 1-5 additional Local Option Gas Tax)
5. Possible future It Local Option Sales Tax
6. Possible DOT grants.
Region #3
Rural areas in South County (South of SR60) west of 43rd Avenue,
North County (North of SR60) west of 66th Avenue, including Blue
Cypress Lake Road, Vero Lake Estates, and Fellsmere areas. These
areas include all of Grade Routes NC -2 (Vero Lake Estates), Most of
Route SC -3 (South West County), a small portion of NC -1 and NC -3,
and most of SC -2.
January 15, 2002
• •
G oal 3.1 Reduce stormwater pollution by eliminating unpaved road
runoff and suspended solid loading to Indian River
Lagoon.
G oal 3.2 Eliminate 4 grader routes.
This area has the greatest number of unpaved roads with a total of
160.4 miles. The remaining 24.2 miles are either already paved,
are park roads, or are programmed to be paved. Also, extensive
right-of-way acquisition is needed in this sector. Since there are
too numerous roads to list, they are labeled Sector 3 on the
attached grading route sheets.
The total cost to pave all 160.4 miles (not including right of way
costs) is $80,200,000 under conventional paving methods. It is
possible to reduce this cost (possibly by 50%) if alternate methods
such as open graded asphaltic concrete, are used. The possible
revenue sources are as follows:
1. MSBU or Special Assessments for rural areas - all property
owners benefit
2. Stormwater grants for water quality treatment.
3. Gas Tax Revenue
4. Local Option Sales Tax
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The current Indian River County Special Assessment Road Paving Program
provides for the County funding 25% of the cost of paving and drainage
improvements and benefiting property owners funding the remaining 75%
(37.5% each side of a street when two sides benefit.)
Until recent cost increases, this funding program has resulted in 124
projects being completed since 1981, or approximately 45 miles. In the
1980's, the cost for a typical 14 acre lot owner was less than $1,000.
Currently, this cost is as much as $3,500 or approximately $35/FF. Much
o f the increase is stormwater related. Staff has been aware of Water
Management District grants available for road paving (Clay County has
✓ eceived substantial funding).
FUNDING OPTIONS TO REDUCE YEARLY ASSESSMENT COSTS
There are several options to reduce the yearly payment costs to
benefited property owners for road and drainage improvements as
follows:
Option 1 - INCREASE THE PAYMENT PERIOD
For special assessments by establishing Municipal Service
Benefit Units (MSBU's) or increase the current Special
Assessment pay back program to five years.
This option is currently being used in Palm Beach Ccu,Ly
w here six MSTU's (Municipal Service Taxing Units) were
e stablished in 1994. Projects within a MSBU are approved
at a public hearing after petitions are received. The
benefited property owners are assessed a percentage of
the cost and based on a front footage or benefited area
January 15, 2002
65
1
V 3
charge. The special assessment funds are placed in the
MSBU Trust fund for payment of costs. Alternatively, the
existing Indian River County Special Assessment program
can be used by extending the 2 -year payback period to 5
or 10 years. In this case, MSBU's would not be
necessary. An interest charge would be applied to unpaid
balances. Currently, the County pays 25% of the costs
for local road paving and 50% of the cost for Collector
or Arterial Road Paving. This percentage could remain.
An MSBU currently exists in the Vero Lakes Estates
Subdivision to fund a portion of the costs of paving,
drainage, and street light improvements. A small front
footage assessment is charged to fund a portion of the
costs. At one time, the MSBU assessment in Vero Lake
Estates for two years was $50/year/parcel acre. This
generated funds to pave four roads (approx 6 miles). A
similar program could be used for the Fellsmere area,
Oslo Park Subdivision, and other large rural areas. This
option results in a smaller cost over a large area for a
reasonable time frame. Due to low interest costs, funds
could possibly be borrowed from the State Infrastructure
Bank.
Option #2 - REDUCE ASSESSMENT COSTS BY CONSTRUCTING ALTERNATIVE
PAVEMENT (OPEN GRADED ASPHALTIC CONCRETE,
TYPES
SHELL/MARL BASE, ETC) This alternative can reduce costs
by as much as 5Q%, however, a higher maintenance paved
road may result in greater future costs for some roads.
For very low volume local roads serving less than 50
lots, the option should be highly considered.
Option #3 - LEVY A 1C GAS TAX KNOWN AS "THE 9TH CENT FUEL
TAX"
DINGEach lfi of gas fax levied generates
approximately $475,000 (Local Option Gas Tax) - $582,000
(9C gas tax)in annual revenue. If the paving program
becomes more aggressive, the County's obligation will
increase and more funds will be needed. The current low
price of fuel makes timing of this option favorable. St.
Lucie County currently levies the 9C gas tax and 11C of
Local Option Gas Tax whereas Indian River County only
levies 6t of Local Option Gas Tax. Martin County levies
8C of Local Option Gas Tax. Brevard County levies 6C of
Local Option Gas Tax.
INCREASE THE LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX BY 1C TO 5 TOPROVIDE
FUN -
DE
Option #4 - CHARGE ONLY DIRECT MATERIAL EXPENSE TO BENEFITED OWLNt,Kb
FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PAVING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
BUILT BY IN-HOUSE CREWS - Currently the County charges
all applicable costs to a Special Assessment Project
(including surveying, engineering, administration, Road
January 15, 2002
66
•
and Bridge Division labor and equipment, etc.) Most of
t hese expense items are budgeted in the Public Works
Department budgets. Anticipated revenues from these
charges are also budgeted. Assessments could be reduced
by approximately 60% if only direct materials were
charged. This would only apply if the Road and Bridge
D ivision performs the work. If the work is contracted,
t his could not apply.
RECOMMENDATIONS
In order to rejuvenate the road paving program, staff recommends the
following options in priority as listed:
1. Apply for stormwater grants for road paving, focusing o those roads
closest to the Indian River Lagoon. St. Sebastian River, and
surface waters of State concern.
2. Extend the special assessment payment program from two years to
five years for paving local and collector roads where MSBU's are
n ot established.
3. Apply alternative pavement technologies including open graded
asphaltic concrete with a coquina/shell mixes base in rural areas
w here appropriate (e.g. Fellsmere and western county). This would
apply to low volume roads.
4. Establish Municipal Service Benefit Units (MSBU's) for large areas
such as Oslo Park Subdivision, Vero Lake Estates (already
e stablished), unincorporated Fellsmere area, Pinetree Park,
Paradise Park, etc. A yearly charge would be included on the
annual tax bill to spread the cost over a longer period of time. A
small front footage assessment would also apply.
5. Reduce assessment costs by not charging in-house engineering,
county equipment and labor, and charges already budgeted in the
Public Works Department budget.
6. Increase Gas Tax Revenue by Adding 1 cent (the ninth cent gas tax)
and 1 cent of additional Local Option Gas Tax - Generates
Approximately $1 million dollars a year.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Article from August Florida Technology Transfer Quarterly
2. Paving Assessment questionnaire from Pasco County
3. Excerpts from Palm Beach County Ordinance No. 94-11, pages 1-2
4. Indian River County 'Petition Paving Projects completed as of March,
2001
5. Indian River County Grading Routes average costs
6. Information on gas tax revenue and county levy.
January 15, 2002
67
DA
r
•
Commissioner Adams was pleased to see the estimates because unpaved roads are
such a large issue. She pointed out that the Board is looking at over $100,000,000 of road
paving that needs to be done to existing roads and it does not include new roads or ditch
roads out west. She wanted to see an aggressive program to try to catch up and would favor
the MSBU's for the large areas to address the grading problems and existing rights-of-way
issues. She suggested using the alternative pavement wherever possible and creating some
minimum criteria in order to use it. She thought thinking "out of the box" would be very
important on this in order to put it together. She did not favor doing it all in-house because
of time and costs. She felt if some revenue sources and MSBU's can be established, it
would allow a "jump-start" by using some outside work. The program charge has to be
figured into the cost of the benefitted owners. She thanked staff for all their work.
Commissioner Macht felt it would be unfair not to charge for in-house work on one
project and charge for that type of work on outside work. He felt it should be all of one or
the other.
Commissioner Adams agreed and added that some of the equipment would not be
necessary unless a certain type of work was being done.
Commissioner Ginn liked the first five recommendations but was concerned about
adding the additional one -cent gas tax.
Director Davis responded that if the program is accelerated and the County continues
to participate by cost-sharing (25% for local roads and 50% for collector roads) we would
have a problem in funding the County's share, unless more of those costs were passed on
to the benefitted owners. Also in receiving grants, many times there would be a County
contribution. Many counties do not contribute when paving a local road. There is a benefit
to the general public because the silt is not being put into the Indian River.
Commissioner Adams pointed out another benefit was for driving to visit someone.
January 15, 2002
68
•
She supported sharing the cost, not putting it all on the benefitted owner.
Vice Chairman Tippet complimented staff on this compilation and commented that
roadwork is past due. Also, Commissioner Adams' district was not the only one to have this
severe and agitating problem. It was time to take some action and face this very costly issue.
He supported recommendations #1, #2, and #3. He believed #4 needed to be studied as well
as #6.
MOTION WAS MADE by Vice Chairman Tippin,
SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, to begin immediately
with recommendations 1, 2, and 3.
Discussion was held and there appeared to be consensus that recommendations 4 and
6 needed more study but the first three could start quickly.
Chairman Stanbridge thought she was hearing consensus on #5 that the County
needed to charge ``real world prices" particularly because of the equipment.
Commissioner Ginn thought that on number 5 some costs could be removed/not
charged, such as staff time.
Chairman Stanbridge thanked Director Davis for thinking outside the box and for
seeing the water -quality issues as a way to get some grants.
THE CI IAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion
carried unanimously. (Approved: 1) apply for stormwater
grants for road paving, focusing on those roads closest to the
Indian River Lagoon, St. Sebastian River, and surface waters of
State concern, 2) Extend the special assessment payment
program from two years to five years for paving local and
January 15, 2002
•
69
rot r
11
1.1. a
1 U a
collector roads where MSBU's are not established; and 3) apply
alternative pavement technologies including open graded
asphaltic concrete with a coquina/shell mixes base in rural areas
where appropriate [e.g. Fellsmere and western county]. This
would apply to low volume roads.)
11.G.2. RIVERPOINT SUBDIVISION SECURITY GATE - (TONY
ESPOSITO)
Public Works Director James Davis reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Riverpoint Subdivision Security Gate
DATE: January 9, 2002
It is requested that the information presented herein be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at the
✓ egular meeting of January 15, 2002.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At the October 16, 2001, Board of County Commissioners meeting, Mr.
and Mrs. Tony Esposito, 624 23rd Street SE, and Mrs. Linda Huber,
653 23 St. SE, addressed the Board of County Commissioners
✓ egarding problems with the entrance gate at the adjacent
Riverpoint Subdivision. According to the Espositos and Mrs Huber,
the entrance gate adversely affects their properties by blocking an
adjacent fire hydrant, opening onto private property, requiring
vehicles denied entry to turn around in the Espositos' and Hubers'
driveways, requiring oversized vehicles to park on 23rd Street SE
where they block_ access to property, and causing other problems.
While many subdivisions throughout the County are gated, most of
t hose gates are on private roads which intersect public roads at a
90 -degree angle. Riverpoint's gate, however, is located where a
public road terminates and a private road begins. Because of the
issues involved with the Riverpoint gate, the County has changed
its land development regulations. Now, entrance gates must be
designed such that off-site problems will not occur.
January 15, 2002
70
nOAths_d
�
0
• •
Regardless of current regulations, the Riverpoint gate was properly
permitted and does not violate applicable regulations. To address
the referenced concerns, the Board, at its Cctober 16th meeting,
directed staff to meet with the Espositos, Mrs. Huber, anc
Riverpoint property owners' representatives to develop a solution
to the traffic impacts associated with the Riverpoint gate. At the
Board meeting, it was mentioned that a turn around might be
agreeable to the Vero Shores Property owners if the details could
be resolved.
Subsequent to the Board meeting, staff developed several
alternatives to resolve the traffic impacts and presented them to
Mr. & Mrs. Esposito and Mrs. Huber on November 9, 2001. Among the
alternatives was the option of constructing a cul-de-sac at the end
o f the public right-of-way. This option would regiire acquisition
o f a small area of additional right-of-way, probably 0'-15', along
a 35' frontage of both the Esposito property and the Huber property
for pavement and swale drainage. Neither the Espositos nor the
Hubers want to give up this area. Of the staff alternatives, only
o ne, the alternative which involved relocating the gate to the
e ast, was agreeable to the Espositos and Mrs. Huber.
As a result, staff met with the Riverpoint property owners on
November 29, 2001. Cal Browr, representing the Riverpoint
homeowners, stated that the cost to relocate the gate would be
approximately $25,000, and the property owners were not acreeable
t o that. Although relocation of the gate was not agreeable to the
property owners, the property owrers did propose leaving the
eastbound ingress gate open during the daytime hours, thereby
allowing vehicles to enter and turn around within Riverpoint
subdivision. The ingress gate would be closed after dark for
security. As proposed, the egress gate would be closed when
vehicles were not exiting. Also, the Riverpoint property owners
suggested paying for a chain across Mr. and Mrs. Esposito's
driveway, conditioned upon the existing metal fence and current
gate that opens at the current edge of pavement being removed. The
County could allow the chain to be located in the 23rd Street, SE
right-of-way if placed at least 6 feet from edge of pavement.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
D espite having met with the Espositos, Mrs. Huber, and Riverpoint
property owners, staff has been unable to get agreement on a plan
t o resolve the gate issues.
While Mr. Esposito is not satisfied with the Riverpoint property
owrers' offer to leave the ingress gate open and requests that the
gate be relocated, the Riverpoint property owners are not agreeable
t o expend approximately $25,000 (their estimate) to relocate the
g ate easterly.
Although there does not appear to be a resolution that will
completely satisfy all parties, the Riverpoint property owners have
proposed several actions that will lessen the gate impacts. These
include leaving the ingress gate open during the day, leaving the
egress gate closed during the day, paying for an Esposito property
driveway chain, relocating the 23rd Street SE fire hydrant, and
January 15, 2002
71
CV
ii
t
performing internal road widening improvements to allow emergency
vehicles to maneuver.
If the ingress gate is left open during daylight hours, vehicles
can access the subdivision and turn around within Riverpoint
Subdivision. This will lessen 23rd Street SE parking and
turnarounds. Keeping the egress gate closed and installing.,an
Esposito driveway chain would resolve the issue of blocking the
Esposito driveway. The hydrant relocation would eliminate the fire
hazard.
Although these improvements will not satisfy all parties, they will
resolve most of the existing problems.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Board accept the Riverpoint property
owners' proposal.
ATTACHMENT
Commissioner Ginn commented that closing the gate at 4 pm was reasonable. In
response to her concerns about whether a fire engine could get through the gate as presently
configured, Director Davis advised that it was very tight both on ingress and egress. He
deferred further comments to Chief Dietz.
Fire Prevention Plan Review/Inspection Bureau Chief Dan Dietz advised
Riverpoint's entry is very narrow; the fire trucks can enter but must do so very carefully.
The turning radius for the immediate left-hand turn is a problem. Riverpoint's
representatives have agreed to expand the pavement on that road and build a shunt on the
right-hand side of the gate in order to increase the turning radius A fire hydrant will be
added within the subdivision and they will relocate the one close to Mr. Esposito's property
to the west where it will serve the residents of existing homes in Vero Shores on that street.
He advised that his office has signed off on Riverpoint's last site plan. He pointed out that
if this were a new subdivision, the department would not allow their current configuration.
January 15, 2002
72
•
There was a brief discussion to determine what property, whether County right-of-
way or Mr Esposito's, was encroached when the gate was open. It was understood that the
gate only opened when a vehicle exited from the subdivision.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED
by Commissioner Macht, to approve staff's recommendation.
Chairman Stanbridge advised this was not a public hearing but the Commission
would hear brief public comments.
Tony Esposito, 624 23`d Street SE, claimed he knew nothing of this plan until about
an hour ago when Mr. Davis gave him the paperwork. He claimed Director Davis' secretary
told him she would mail it to him on Friday but he did not receive it. He called what he had
been hearing ridiculous because there are insufficient clearances. What is important to him
is that the gate in front of his property prevents him from utilizing his property the way he
built it; he was also concerned about the safety of his grandchildren. He believed the gate
was not to Code; he would accept if it were even close to Code, but nothing else. The time
the gate will be open and closed is irrelevant because it is in the wrong place; according to
State law it should not be in an intersection and he will provide a copy of that law.
Cal Brown informed the Commissioners that he represented the homeowners'
association and is a member there. He recalled the permit was issued in 1998; the gate has
existed over 3 years, has functioned properly, and was in compliance with then -existing
laws. The members expected a private subdivision with a gate and they are not disposed to
move the gate; over $30,000 as been invested in the gate. He thought the members are
happy to leave the gate open during the business hours of the day during this construction
period because it makes for a free flow of traffic. Huge cranes, larger than the County's
biggest fire truck, as well as cement trucks, have gotten into the subdivision Leaving the
January 15, 2002
73
Bi( i '5 E
f
•
exit gate closed now is not a viable situation because if a driver sees the exit gate closed and
the entrance gate open, they exit through the open gate which is more of a potential safety
hazard than leaving both gates open. If the exit gate is open, it goes 4' 21/4" into the county's
right-of-way but does not affect Mr Esposito's driveway ingress or egress or anything else.
If the Board wants the exit gate closed, they will comply, but it did not work when they tried
it before. Seventeen houses are finished inside the subdivision. Four more have been
approved. It is expected those will be finished in about 18 months after which the
homeowners will expect the gate to be closed on a regular basis at all times. Traffic after
completion will be minimal. A transitional period of more than normal traffic is now
occurring because of the construction. The safety issues presented to them by Chief Dietz
have been addressed; the turning radius will be increased, a fire hydrant will be added, and
the existing hydrant will be moved. They are waiting for the permit to be issued so action
can commence; they are happy to try to work things out during this construction period with
the resulting extra traffic.
Mrs. Esposito, 624 SE 23`d Street, agreed the gate was permitted but the clerk who
okayed the plans was not shown anything about the Vero Shores subdivision and did not
know of the existing driveways in front of that gate. So, from "day one" there have been
problems. A meeting to include the Espositos was supposed to have been set up, but never
happened. Moving the gate was estimated at $25,000. She felt $1,000 to each of the 25
homes costing "a half a million dollars" was not a lot of money. She suggested the gate be
made right for safety purposes and the Espositos would contribute.
Commissioner Macht questioned the estimate of $25,000 to move the gate if it only
cost $30,000 to build.
Director Davis responded that the demolition would cost from $3,000 to $5,000 and
then all the other parts would need to be reconstructed and the electronics reinstalled. He
January 15, 2002
74
Pr'
•
clarified that he had explained the proposed solution to Mr Esposito on the telephone the
previous Wednesday and also explained it all to Mr Esposito on Friday after an Indian River
Farms Water Control District meeting. He had forgotten to bring the typed version with
him, but he believed Mr Esposito was given a complete understanding of what would be
done.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion
carried unanimously. (Accepted the Riverpoint Property
Owners' proposal.)
11.G.3. VERO LAKE ESTATES STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS,
PHASE I - CHANGE ORDER NO. 2. - C.E.M. ENTERPRISES, INC.
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 7, 2002:
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
James Chandler, County Administrator
James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director
� /j
W. Keith McCully, P.E., Esq., Stormwater Engineer �jip" "
APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 FOR VERO LAKE
ESTATES STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS, PHASE I
DATE: January 7, 2002
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On November 20, 2001, the County Commission executed a construction contract with C. E. M.
Enterprises, Inc. of Apopka, Florida, to construct Phase I stormwater improvements to the Vero Lake
Estates subdivision. The Commission also approved Change Order No. 1, reducing the project cost
from $1,777,000 to $1 356,657.44. We now ask the Commission to approve Change Order No. 2.
Change Order No. 2 reduces the project cost from $1,356,657.44 to $1,345,433.44.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to approve and sign
Change Order No. 2, with C.E.M. Enterprises, Inc.
January 15, 2002
75
r'•
•
FUNDI\ G
Indian River County's share of the funding will come from account No. 185-214-541-
066.34
A breakdown of all the funding follows:
a. 319(h) Grant = $400,000
b. Vero Lake Estates Municipal Service Taxing Unit = $250,000
c. Indian River County Local Option Sales Tax = $661,550
d. Indian River Lagoon Program — $250 000
e. St. Johns River Water Management District Cost -Share Grant = $30,000
f Florida Yards & Neighborhoods — IFAS = $8,450
ATTACHMENTS
1. Four copies of Change Order No. 2
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved
Change Order No. 2 with C E M Enterprises, Inc., as
recommended in the Memorandum.
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF TIIE CLERK TO THE BOARD
11.G.4. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - ST. JOHNS
RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT - SEDIMENT, FLOW
REDUCTION, AND OTHER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS WATER CONTROL DISTRICT
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
January 15, 2002
76
BK
• •
TO: James Chandler, County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director
FROM: W. Keith McCully, P.E., Esq., Storiirwater Engineer
SUBJECT:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE ST.
JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY FOR SEDIMENT, FLOW REDUCTION, AND
OTHER WATER QUALITY DYJPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE INDIAN
RIVER FARMS WATER CONTROL DISTRICT
January 9, 2002
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Florida legislature has approved $4.33 million for design and construction of stormwater
improvements in Indian River County within the Indian River Fauns Water Control District
(IRFWCD). Until recently, the county and St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD)
have disagreed on how this money is to be passed through from the state to the county, and on which
entity will have control over the design and construction of improvements recommended by the
Stounwater Master Plan. The attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) addresses these
issues and was negotiated on the County's behalf by Conunissioner Stanbridge with assistance from
the Stormwater Engineenng Department. It has been signed by the SJRWMD Governing Board and
is now presented to the County Commission for its approval and signature. The MOU favorably
deals with all of the county's concerns. It gives the county control over the design and construction
of the recommended Stormwater Master Plan improvements, and allows SIRWMD to act in its
traditional role as a regulatory permitting agency. As the projects are approved by SJRWMD, it will
release the pertinent funding from the $4.33 million legislative allocation. (In a related agenda item
the Board will consider approving a Work Order between the county and its stormwater consultant
which will lead to the conceptual design of the projects covered under the MOU.)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to execute the
attached Memorandum of Understanding between SJRWMD and Indian River County.
FUNDG
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
1. Memorandum Of Understanding Between the St. Johns River Water Management
District and Indian River County for Sediment, Flow Reduction, and Other Water Quality
Improvements Within the Indian River Fauns Water Control District — 2 copies.
January 15, 2002
77
El(
y
r
i
13 •
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, to approve staff's
recommendation.
Under discussion, Chairman Stanbridge thanked Public Works Director James Davis
and Stormwater Engineer Keith McCully for their work on this project. She noted that
Indian River Farms Water Control District is also part of our partnership. She recalled it had
been three years ago that she asked that this project be started.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion
carried unanimously. (Approved and authorized the Chairman
to execute the proposed Memorandum of Understanding
between the SJRWMD and Indian River County.)
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WILL BE ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
11.G.5. EAST INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MASTER STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN - CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC. - AMENDMENT
TO WORK ORDER NO. 1.
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 9, 2002:
TO: James Chandler, County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director
THROUGH: W. Erik Olson, Director of Utility Services
FROM: W. Keith McCully, P.E., Esq., Storm�'`
water Engineer A
SUBJECT: EAST INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MASTER STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN — AMENDMENT TO WORK ORDER NO. 1
DATE: January 9, 2002
January 15, 2002
78
1
•
•
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On May 8, 2001, the County and an engineering team led by Carter Associates, Inc. entered into a
contract (Professional Engineering Services Agreement and Work Order No. 1) for professional
engineering services for the East Indian River County Master Stounwater Management Plan (Master
Plan). The completion of the Master Plan as described in Work Order No. 1, contemplated that by
the time the analysis portion of the project was to be performed, St. Johns River Water Management
District (SJRWMD) would have purchased property for the consulting team to evaluate with respect
to stounwater treatment and storage alternatives. This has not occurred and therefore, the initial
emphasis of the study is shifting to focus on in -canal solutions and sites owned by the County that
are adjacent to Indian River Fauns Water Control District (IRFWCD) canal right-of-way. The
Amendment to Work Order No. 1, attached hereto, covers this new study emphasis. Additionally,
the project scope is being expanded to include the \orth Relief Canal drainage basin, over 10,000
acres. The study involving the North Relief Canal will investigate the feasibility of placing
demineralization concentrate from Utility Services' North County Reverse Osmosis Plant into the
canal, in accordance with Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) requirements and
Indian River Farms Water Control District. Therefore, Utility Services is participating in the cost
of the study.
The time to perfoini certain phases of this project is critical because the Governor has expressed a
desire to release state funds to help stimulate the economy. Therefore, we are asking the Board of
Commissioners to approve this Amended Work Order before it is formally approved by SJRWMD
in order to allow the consulting team to fast track the design of specific projects. We cortinue to
communicate our intent with SJRWMD and have transmitted the scope of services for the
Amendment to Work Order No. 1 to SJRWMD for inclusion in a new Cost -Share Agreement
between it and the county for this project.
Also, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been prepared by SJRWMD and the County,
giving the County complete design and construction control over projects that result from the Master
Plan, and allowing SJRWMD to assume its traditional role as a permitting agency for the projects.
The MOU also allows the county to receive $4.33 million that the Florida legislature has allocated
for stormwater improvement projects within the IRFWCD drainage basin.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to execute the
Amendment to Work Order No. 1 for the East Indian River County Master Stor niwater Management
Plan.
FUNDG
Total contract amount $307,870.00.
Funding to be from the following Accounts:
1. Account No. 111-243-519-033.19
2. Account No. 111-243-519-033.49
3. Account No. 109-214-541-03119
4. Account No. 109-214-541-033.49
5. Account No. 111-214-541-033.19
6. Account No. 001-210-572-033.19
7. Dept. of Utility Services Account No. 472-000-169-392
ATTACHMENTS
1. Amendment to Work Order No. 1 to the Professional Engineering Services Agreement
Between Carter Associates, Inc., and Indian River County, Florida, Dated May 8, 2001
for the East Indian River County Master Stointwater Management Plan. (Two copies)
January 15, 2002
79
•
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, to approve staff's
recommendation.
Under discussion, Vice Chairman Tippin quipped that Chairman Stanbridge was the
only person he knew who could run water uphill.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion
carried unanimously. (Approved and authorized the Chairman
to execute the Amendment to Work Order No. 1 for the East
Indian River County Master Stormwater Management Plan, as
recommended in the Memorandum.)
AMENDMENT TO WORK ORDER NO. 1 IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
11.G.6. COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - NATIONAL
OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (NOAA)
ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT AWARD #NA170Z2109
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 7, 2002:
TO:
James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
FROM: Jonathan C. Gorham, Ph.D.
Environmental Analyst
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Grant Award #NA170Z2109
Coastal Impact Assistance Program
DATE: January 7, 2002
January 15, 2002
80
at
L0
•
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
In May of 2001, the County Public Works Department applied for
funds from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP). The funding was
sought to assist in the implementation of the County's Habitat
Conservation Plan for sea turtles in accordance with the attached
grant application. The attached Application includes budgeting for
a full time temporary position. Staff has not determined at this
time whether the position would be needed or if outside consultants
should be used. The Grant Agreement would allow either course of
action. NOAA has recently announced Award #NA170Z2109 in the Amount
of $57,102 to the County for this purpose. Acceptance by the Board
and acknowledgement of the Terms and Conditions is required for the
Funds to be transferred to the County. No cost matching from the
County is required.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends the acceptance of NOAA Award # NA170Z2109. Funds
to be credited to Beach Preservation Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
CIAP Award Notification
CIAP Proposal Application
Budget Office Grant Form
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Ginn, the Board unanimously (4-0, Vice
Chairman Tippin temporarily away from the table) accepted the
NOAA award #NA 170Z2109; funds to be credited to the Beach
Preservation Fund, as recommended in the Memorandum.
AWARD NOTIFICATION IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
11.G.7. KINGS HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS - KIMLEY-HORN,
INC. - AMENDMENT NO. 14
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of December 21, 2001:
January 15, 2002
81
•
TO: James Chandler, County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director
Erik Olson, P.E., IRC Utilities Directo
FROM: Terry B. Thompson, P.E., Capital Projects Mana
SUBJECT: Kings Highway Improvements
Engineering Services
Amendment No. 14
DATE: December- 21, 2001
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Kimley-Horn, Inc. is under contract with Indian River County to provide professional
engineering and surveying services for improvements to Kings Highway. The attached
Amendment No 14 provides for design and permitting of 500 feet of 16" water main and
3,200 feet of 6" force main from the Citrus Springs Development.
Design and construction of this water main and force main are included in the Citrus
Springs Developer's Agreement with the County. Said water main and force main are
County Master Plan Lines and 100 percent of the Developer's cost would be billed to the
IRC Utility Department. To avoid conflicts with two construction projects in the same area,
staff would like to delete this work from the Developer's Agreement and add it to the Kings
Highway project. Incorporating this work into the road construction project will save on the
cost of plan production, construction and site restoration.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends approval of Amendment No. 14 in the amount of $12,625.00. Funding
is from Account Number 472-000-169-231.00.
ATTACHMENT
Amendment No. 14
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED BY
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Vice
Chaiiman Tippin temporarily away from the table) approved
Amendment No. 14, in the amount of $12,625.00, as
recommended in the Memorandum.
January 15, 2002
AMENDMENT NO 14 IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
82
•
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED A BRIEF RECESS AT 11:26
A.M. THE MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 11:33 A.M.
WITH ALL MEMBERS PRESENT.
12.A. COUNTY ATTORNEY - C. N. KIRRIE PROPOSAL
County Attorney Paul Bangel reviewed Memoranda of January 9 and 14, 2002:
January 9, 2002
To
From:
Re:
MEMORANDUM
Board of County Commissioners
Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney
C.N. Kirrie Proposal
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners give consideration to
the proposal presented in Mr. Kirrie's letter of January 9, 2002, and give preliminary
conceptual approval subject to additional feasibility study, cooperation of the City of
Sebastian and the Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service negotiation
and approval of an appropriate agreement, a release of claims from Mr. Kirrie, and
compliance with Section 125.37, Florida Statutes (2001), inter alia.
Discussion:
Presented herewith is a letter from C.N. Kirrie, dated January 9 2002, proposing
an exchange of property Inasmuch as there are many variables affecting the proposal,
I suggest that the Board of County Commissioners consider the proposal, subject to
additional feasibility study and other governmental cooperation/approval, etc.
January 15, 2002
83
L11
rn
•
January 14, 2002
MEMORANDUM
To: Board of County Commissioners
From. Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney ?go 114 12,
Re: Fred Mensing
Attached is a communication from Mr. Mensing dated January 14, 2002, that was
conveyed by C.N. Kirrie, together with a communication from Mr. Kirrie dated January 14,
2002, conditioned on Mr. Mensing's proposal
PGB
Enclosures
Attorney Bangel explained Mr. Kirrie had brought this proposal to his office.
Attorney Bangel was looking to the Board for direction as to whether or not they wanted his
office to expend time and effort on it. The Board has many options such as conceptual
approval, deferral of consideration, or a different proposal. Mr. Kirrie was present to
explain that proposal in greater depth.
Chairman Stanbridge thought the conditions for conceptual approval seemed major
and it is a very complicated issue which involves other departments and agencies. Chairman
Stanbridge thought it was premature to bring this matter to the Board without this
information.
Attorney Bangel agreed that a lot of questions had to be answered before a final
decision can be made. He characterized this as being exploratory to see if the Board is
willing to talk to Mr Kirrie about his proposal. He had copied Administrator Chandler and
Public Works Director James Davis and has worked closely with Keith McCully (County's
Stormwater Engineer) on the issue.
Chairman Stanbridge inquired where a preliminary or conceptual approval would be
January 15, 2002
84
•
taken, and Attorney Bangel understood that Mr Kirrie was working on issues with the City
of Sebastian and that he needed something from the Board in order to go forward.
Commissioner Macht asked if this matter could be considered a "real estate deal"
since it did not involve permitting, zoning or anything of that nature which would be in the
City's bailiwick.
Attorney Bangel agreed there are many contingencies including conservation/habitat
issues also outside the County's purview. He explained that the incidental take permit does
involve the County and the County's application with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USF&WS) and he understood the City would have to join in that.
Chairman Stanbridge added that also the Florida Communities Trust (FCT) is
involved and that is why she wanted other staff involved. There are conditions within some
of the agreements with the FCT and the USF&WS that have not been addressed. Having
been out in the field, Chairman Stanbridge noted that there would be a wetland issue as well.
She stressed that this is more than dust a land swap, it is a very complicated matter.
It appeared to Commissioner Macht that the Board might be doing what it has never
done before, that is, acting without a staff recommendation.
Chairman Stanbridge apologized to Mr. Kirrie for any inconvenience but she felt his
appearance before the Board today would be premature.
Commissioner Adams asked ifthe Commissioners wanted to listen to what Mr. Kirrie
had to say and determine some kind of direction.
Commissioner Ginn thought it would provide a forum for the Commissioners to be
able to exchange ideas on the matter. Having visited the area, she agreed that staff's review,
input and recommendation were important.
Commissioner Macht thought the appropriate time for public input would be when
it comes back, not now.
•
January 15, 2002
85
Chairman Stanbridge asked if she understood the Board wished to hear Mr. Kirrie's
presentation and take no action.
Commissioners indicated their interest in hearing Mr Kirrie and having a quick
resolution to the issue.
Attorney Bangel counseled that this is really a business decision, a proposal to
exchange land. One of his recommendations included a release, which would be drafted by
he County Attorney's office. He also had some other legal considerations in mind.
Commissioner Adams understood that the Board would be listening to only a
roposed land swap, and after reassurance, she indicated she did not mind listening to that,
nothing else.
Attorney Bangel pointed out that a land swap would involve many other things.
Chairman Stanbridge stressed that County staff needed to consider this "land swap"
in relationship to all the other complexities. She was opposed to a preliminary conceptual
approval, with all the conditions. She suggested the Board hear the proposal, refer it to staff
for investigation, and then the Board can hear staff's recommendations.
C. N. Kirrie of Roseland explained he was not looking for an absolute decision, dust
was trying to "get the ball rolling" so he can proceed further. He was frustrated since the
City of Sebastian is waiting for the County, and the County is waiting for the City, and he
is caught in the middle. Mr. Kirrie presented his proposal which is set out in his letter of 9
January 2002 as follows:
9 January 2002
t
p
C.N. Kirrie
12855 79`h Ave
Roseland, FL 32957
(561) 589-5547
Re: Access to Sembler Property
Paul Bangel
Chief Indian River County Attorney
January 15, 2002
86
1/4
JqN 0 V �®
9
CpUN� FTT�/V2 ��'` r �
/CE�Fys i J_t
tictr
•
Note: All offers, presentations and proposals, prior to this date are no
longer available and are not to be considered.
Proposal: C.N. Kirrie will trade ',1:.• acre from the southerly end of the
Sembler Tract, Lots 27 & 28, AA Berry Subdivision in the Fleming Grant,
for a strip of land 60' wide to access the Sembler Tract Lots 16, 27 & 28 of
the AA Berry Subdivision in the Fleming Grant. The 60' strip will abut the
130th Street (Gibson Street) right-of-way and cross Lot 20 of the AA Berry
Subdivision at the most practical and least intrusive location 011 the
Northerly end of said Lot 20, to contact Lot 28 of the Sembler Tract.
It is suggested that the trade to Indian River County, be taken as a strip from
the southerly ends of Lots 27 & 28, in that the land is already clear and
would provide the cleared buffer strip required by the Management Plan for
the North Sebastian Conservation Area(N.S.C.A) 1/29/98, page 6.
Since the management plan for the N.S.C.A., does not include the
cleared portion of the 130th Street right-of-way, see page 6 & 7 (exhibits 4 &
5), the use of approximately 700' of the right-of-way may well be obtained
under minor modification to the ITP/HCP No. TE026007-0 dated 8/31/2000,
which was subsequent to the need for access to the Sembler Tract. Also see
letter from the City of Sebastian (exhibits 6 & 7) referring to out parcels in
the N.S.C.A., dated 8/24/2000 and letter from R. Keating, IRC Planner to
Ray Eubanks, D.C.A., dated 3/28/2000. The 700' access from the present
gate southerly, may be considered as the second access to the N.S.C.A.. If
desired, some parking can be included on the southerly end as part of the
construction of 130th Street.
The construction of the road, on the 700' of 130th Street right-of-way, will be
done by Mr. Kirrie, modification of the I.T.P./H.C.P. will be a joint effort
between Indian River County and the City of Sebastian. Any private entities
or groups (other than recop-rriaed conservation groups) using the Kirrie
constructed portion of 130t Street, shall reimburse Mr. Kirrie through the
county on a fair share based on the final cost of construction.
Mr Kirrie presented a brief history of the location from 1973 using aerial
photographs displayed on the overhead and pointed out the strips of land he was proposing
to be involved in the trade. He believed his proposal to be of minimal impact but would be
willing to listen to any other proposal.
Commissioner Adams asked why he wanted to do this swap, and Mr. Kirrie explained
he needed access from 130`x' Street to the Sembler property. While he has access on the
January 15, 2002
87
sJ
•
southern strip, the title is in doubt.
Commissioner Adams asked if there was any willingness on his part to rezone the
location of the Knights of Columbus building (west side of 130th Street) to residential, and
Mr Kirrie responded that he had just gone through having it zoned industrial but he was
quite willing to sell it to anyone.
Chairman Stanbridge asked if Mr Kirrie had seen any of the department heads about
the conditions Mr. Bangel had listed concerning his proposal.
Mr. Kirrie responded that he had not, that there has been an on-going conflict. He
indicated his willingness to work with them provided he did not get "stonewalled".
Chairman Stanbridge asked if Mr Kirrie realized that there are a number of
conditions that staff definitely needs to address.
Mr. Kirrie advised that he was painfully aware that it is not an easy chore to get this
moving. He was trying to minimize the impact on conservation land by this particular
proposal. He agreed it was a complex issue but believed that when eating an elephant you
must start with the first bite.
In response to Commissioner Ginn's questions, Keith McCully explained there was
a 20' wide right-of-way on the northerly end of Lot 19. He believed it was deeded to the
County from General Development Corporation a number of years prior to the County's
purchase of Lot 19, and was for road egress, drainage, and the like. He believed the right-
of-way was merged into Lot 19 after the County purchased it.
Because of its complexities, Chairman Stanbridge believed it would take more than
Mr Kirrie, the County Attorney, and a land swap to get it straightened out.
In closing, Mr Kirrie indicated his intention to continue pursuing this since he has
a February 27th deadline with the City of Sebastian at which time his request for a major
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan will be reheard. He explained the City had already
January 15, 2002
88
L1\
fl
•
approved it once but then it was denied by the State.
Chairman Stanbridge noted there were others who wished to speak but reminded
everyone this was not a public hearing. She asked the speakers to be very brief and to
confine their remarks to the land swap issue.
Kathleen Coley, Roseland, believed this proposal was being made to circumvent a
previously rejected decision. In her opinion, it would not be an equitable exchange of
property since it had already been identified as being in an already dwindling wetland area.
It is also a recharge area for the shallow aquifer that runs directly under that area of the
county. To begin a fill process to achieve a road bed would further erode and swallow up
this most precious resource. She was advised that three scrub jay families have been
identified in the general location with one nest right on the area proposed for swap. These
scrub jays already are located in their minimum area for breeding. She was opposed to even
a conceptual approval.
Cye Carlson, Bay Street in Roseland, Chairman of the Roseland Neighborhood Task
Force, advised that the Task Force is opposed to this project because the land is surrounded
by residential and conservation. She advised that Pelican Island Elementary students were
in the audience because of their interest in preserving the habitat of the scrub jay.
Commissioner Adams asked if this project had been discussed by the Task Force and
whether it was reflected in the minutes, and Ms. Carlson explained the Task Force meetings
have minutes, but their workshops have all been taped and the opposition was noted in their
letter which was accompanied by a letter of Community Development Director Robert
Keating dated March 28, 2000.
Several Commissioners indicated they had the letter.
McKenzi Gye and Kaitlin Thompson, co -presidents of the Senior Ecotroop, hoped
to not lose any more property from conservation. They urged the Commission to think about
•
January 15, 2002
89
�j1
sor
it and try to buy the property for preservation so industrial does not go there.
Barbara Banfield, Roseland, wished this would be the last time this issue comes up.
If this property is rezoned industrial, from residential, agricultural, and conservation, it will
not be good for Roseland. She asked that if the Board goes forward that they do so very
carefully. She would like this situation to go away, but knew that would not happen.
Chairman Stanbridge outlined the Board's options as set out in the memorandum.
County Attorney Paul Bangel added that the Board could also take no action.
Commissioner Ginn thought it needed to be deferred. She understood the adjacent
property was zoned for 6 units/acre and knew industrial would be preferred, not
conservation. There is also an airport which could possibly generate future noise
complaints. She wanted the opportunity to talk with staff about some alternatives.
Commissioner Adams thought the Board needed to take action or give some definite
direction to staff, or perhaps break it into pieces and look at it that way. Continually putting
it off is not good.
Commissioner Ginn asked if the County was obligated to provide access.
Chairman Stanbridge believed there were other issues to be addressed first. The
Florida Communities Trust (FCT) and the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) with US Fish
& Wildlife Service (USF & WS) are all tied to this. The County has to do first things first.
In her opinion, the first issue to be addressed is for staff to look into the FCT funding used
to purchase the property. Staff needs to find a better way to do this.
Commissioner Adams replied that staff has not found a better way because the matter
keeps coming back to the Board in a public discussion format. The County Attorney had
it because staff has chosen not to try to work with this.
Administrator Chandler understood that as late as yesterday, there have been a couple
of property owners working with the County Attorney's office and that has not involved
January 15, 2002
90
fl
lJ � r
•
Community Development Department staff He did not fault the Attorney's office but
thought the Attorney's office and Community Development could look at it together and
bring it all back. A few months ago the focus was on ownership, so that was what was being
investigated by our Attorney's office. But Mr. Kirrie's issue is much broader than that
individual ownership.
Commissioner Macht felt the Board owed Mr. Kirrie a fair look but needs full
information and staff's recommendation. Then the Board can consider it and vote.
Vice Chairman Tippin agreed with Commissioner Macht. He pointed out that it is
also an economic development matter which has the potential for expansion. It deserved to
be given fair treatment.
Commissioner Adams recalled that the Board sent it to the County Attorney the last
time, and Vice Chairman Tippin brought out that another property owner (Item 7.S.) was
threatening the County with a lawsuit.
Attorney Bangel stated that a few alternatives have been proposed with possibilities
of cooperation and an alternate route. This is Mr Kirrie's proposal. Just as recently as
yesterday Mr Kirrie conveyed something from Mr. Mensing which was copied to the
Commissioners. There are several different proposals, several different options, several
different routes, and different players.
Administrator Chandler got a copy yesterday of what the Board received, but it had
not been transmitted to staff; he was unsure whose proposal it was. He was trying to get to
the facts in order to assist in reaching a solution. He had sat in on a meeting several months
ago concerning what he thought was the ownership of another piece ofproperty. He felt the
entire matter needed to be looked at and brought back to the Board.
January 15, 2002
91
El/iLi10
•
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED
by Vice Chairman Tippin, to refer this matter to staff for their
review and recommendation. (This includes environmental
issues, the relationship with FCT, the propriety of putting a
right-of-way where it has been proposed, and any other
concerns. This should be on one proposal.)
Under discussion, Commissioner Ginn referred to the map on page 340 in the back
up and wanted to see superimposed on that the outline of Lots 19 and 20 so the
Commissioners will know exactly what type of land will be affected and what its
relationship is to other types.
Time frame was discussed and there was CONSENSUS to bring it back early in
February. (Clerk's Note: This matter was considered again on Feb. 5, 2002.)
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion
carried unanimously.
Commissioner Adams wanted it on record that she was alarmed at the threat on Item
7.S. in the Consent Agenda. It sounded like a veiled physical threat and she thought it
should be sent on to an appropriate authority.
Commissioner Ginn and Chairman Stanbridge were also concerned.
Chaimian Stanbridge had spoken with Attorney Bangel and understood it was not
something that should come to the Board until he has a lawsuit against the County.
January 15, 2002
92
n,^ 0 �]
(0 f F
•
•
13.A. CHAIRMAN STANBRIDGE - UPDATES - DODGERS
Chairman Stanbridge asked for any updates on the Dodger matter, and Administrator
Chandler advised there was nothing new to report.
13.F. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS AND RE -APPOINTMENTS
FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2002
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 7, 2002 and Vacancy Listing as
follows:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: January 7, 2002
SUBJECT: COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS AND RE -APPOINTMENTS 2002
FROM: Kimberly E Massung
Executive Aide to the Commission
Description and Condition
The attached listing represents County Committees, Advisory Committees, Boards and Councils that require
appointments to fill vacancies coming into 2002, or have members who need to be re -appointed for terms that
expired the end of 2001.
Recommendation
Staff requests the Board approve the members up for re -appointment and seek replacements for those
positions marked "Vacant" on the attached listing.
Attachments: 2000/2001 Attendance Report
Vacancy Listing
January 15, 2002
93
COMMITEE APPOINTMENTS AND RE -APPOINTMENTS 2002
Affordable Housing Advisory Committee - (Terms are at the discretion of the Board)
Vacant (Residential Building Industry Representative)
Vacant (Homebuilding -Labor Representative)
Agriculture Advisory Committee (2 -year term)
Vacant (Vegetable)
Ralph Sexton (Cattle)
Ralph Lindsey (Irrigation)
Billy Thompson (Horticulture)
Beach & Shore Preservation Advisory Committee (2 -year term)
Vacant
Virginia Mann
George Gross
Board of Trustees of Law Library (2 -year term)
Caroline Ginn
Board of Zoning Adjustment (2 -year term)
Vacant (Stanbndge/District 2)
Ralph Lindsey (Tippin/District 4)
Building Code Board of Adjustments & Appeals (4 -year term)
Vacant (Member -at -Large)
Vacant (General Contractor)
Leon Walton (Building Industry)
F. M. (Pete) Clements, III (Building Industry)
Children's Services Advisory Committee (4 year term)
Vacant (Member -at -Large)
Judy Jones (Member -at -Large)
Code Enforcement Board (3 -year term)
Vacant (Subcontractor) *
Cliff' Suthard (Member -at -Large)
George Glenn (Businessman)
*Name submitted for approval under Consent on the January 15, 2002 agenda.
County Public Safety Coordinating Council (Terms are at the discretion of the Board)
Vacant (State Probation Circuit Administrator or his designee)
January 15, 2002
94
61
f�. i2
• •
Economic Development Council (Terms are at the discretion of the Board)
Vacant (Fellsmere Representative)
Vacant (Banking Representative)
Economic Opportunities Council (1 -year term - State committee)
Joyce Johnston -Carlson
Jerry Morgan
Norma Mooney
Emergency Services District Advisory Committee (4 -year term)
Ernie Polverari (Town of Orchid Representative)
Terrence Moore (City of Sebastian Representative)
Art Neuberger (City of Vero Beach Representative)
Indian River County Extension Advisory Council (3 -year term)
Vacant (4-H Council)
Vacant (Family and Consumer Sciences)
Vacant (Water Quality)
Vacant (Marine/Aquaculture)
Scott Lambeth (Macht/District 3)
Martha Willoughby (Native Plant Society)
Torn Hill (Farm Bureau)
Ralph Sexton (IRC Cattlemen's Association)
Chris Smith (Florida Nurserymen and Growers' Association)
Norm Neagle (Master Gardener Advisory Committee)
Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (2 -year term)
Art Neuberger (City of Vero Beach Representative)
Ernie Polverari (Town of Orchid)
Jack Chestnutt (Board of Realtors)
Adam Bolinger (Development Community)
Metropolitan Planning Organization Citizens Advisory Committee (1 -year term)
Leonard Miller (County Representative)
Richard Woodard (County Representative)
Juliana Young (County Representative)
Robert Johnson (County Representative)
Parks and Recreation Committee (1 -year term)
Vacant (City of Sebastian Representative)
John Capra (City of Vero Beach Representative)
Susan Wilson (City of Fellsmere Representative)
Thomas Cadden (Indian River Shores Representative)
Dale Klaus (IRC School Board Representative)
Bill Wilson, Sr. (Gifford Representative)
Billie Minnis (North County Representative)
Scott Chisholm (South County Representative)
January 15, 2002
95
tm i
O1
fl fl I 1
IU I
Planning & Zoning Board (4 -year term)
Dr. David Cox (Stanbridge/District 2)
Professional Services Advisory Committee (2 year term)
Peter Robinson (Developer)
Alan Schonuner (Builder/Contractor)
Todd Smith (Engineer)
Randy Mosby (Civil Engineer)
Stephen Mohler (Engineer)
David Hankie (Banker)
Warren Dill (Law)
Public Library Advisory Board (4 -year term)
Vacant (Member -at -Large)
Tourist Development Council (4 -year term)
•
•
RobertTenbus (Tourist Development)
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council —Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (1-yearte.rm
Ray Coniglio (Adams/District 1)
Frank Coffey (Stanbridge/District 2)
George Watson (Macht/District 3)
James Kretsch (Tippin/Distict 4)
Neil Nelson (Ginn/District 5)
Utility Advisory Committee (2 -year term)
Adam Kubik (Tippin/District 4)
Craig McGarvey (Ginn District 5)
Carlton Miller (Member -at -Large)
Chairman Stanbridge asked Commissioners to encourage citizens to apply for the
vacancies noted.
Vice Chairman Tippin commented that on the Tourist Development Council there can
be up to 3 but no more than 4 members representing the County according to State law.
(Clerk's Note: Corrected pages 348 and 357 were received subsequent to the meeting and
placed with the backup in the office of the Clerk to the Board.)
January 15, 2002
96
1'976
r
DOCUMENTS RECEIVED FOR THE RECORD
BOUND VOLUME $16,810,000 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001 FOR SPRING TRAINING
FACILITY (DODGERS)
This large bound volume, dated as of August 29, 2001, Closing Documents, has been
placed on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board.
OPTION AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE OF
SIMONYE PARCEL ADDITION (FROM LOUIS SIMONYE)
TO THE NORTH SEBASTIAN CONSERVATION AREA
LAAC SITE
A copy of this agreement (along with other pertinent documentation/information) is
on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board.
14.A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT
None.
14.B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
None.
14.C.
None.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD
January 15, 2002
97
U 17 1 f' 21 7
•
There being no further business, upon motion duly made and seconded, the Chairman
adjourned the meeting at 12:26 p.m.
ATTEST:
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk Ruth M. Stanbridge, Chairman
Minutes approve d���� / % 0700
January 15, 2002