HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 04-20-99
~
..."",
ßOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
www.stlucieco.gov
John D. Bruhn
Doug Coward
Paula A. Lewis
Frannie Hutchinson
Cliff Barnes
District 1
District 2
District 3
District 4
District 5
AGENDA
April 20, 1999
7:00 P.M.
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. MINUTES
Approve the minutes of the meeting held April 13, 1999.
2. PROCLAMATION
Resolution No. 99-97- Proclaiming the week of April 14-24, 1999 as "Infant Immunization
Awareness Week" in St. Lucie County.
3. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
4. CONSENT AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS
UTILITIES
SA. Holiday Pines Service Corporation- Consider staff recommendation to acknowledge that the
purchase of this utility is in the best interest of the public and direct staff to proceed with the
acquisition.
COMMUNITY DEVEI.OPMENT
5B. Resolution No. 99-10/ Petition of Father Michael SajdalQuasi-.Judicial- This public hearing is
continued from April 6, 1999. Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution
granting a change in zoning from the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) zoning
district to the I (Institutional) zoning district. Location: North side of Delaware Avenue,
approximately 500 feet east of Hartman Road
NOTICE: All proceedings before this Board are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal any action taken
by the Board at these meetings wiU need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made. Upon the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during a hearing will
be sworn in. Any party to the proceedings will be granted an opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a
hearing upon request.
~
"WI
REGULAR AGENDA
APRIL 20, 1999
PAGE TWO
PUBLIC HEARINGS (CON'T)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (CON'T)
5C.
6.
7.
Resolution No. 99-15/Petition of St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners/Quasi-
Judicial- Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution granting a change in zoning
from the AG-5 (Agricultural - 1 du/5 acres) zoning district to the I (Institutional) zoning
district. Location: Southwest corner of the intersection of Okeechobee Road and West
Midway Road, the new Fairgrounds.
AIRPORT
Airport DRI- Consider staff recommendation to authorize staff to rank the Airport's General [j ¡t. .-' (; ß
Consultants for preparation of an Airport DRI including the projects listed in the Airport /1/ Þ!'-
Business and Marketing.,Plan exclnding leugtheuing runway 9R-27~ {/ T r/
COUNTY ATTORNEYP '. --: .
Resolution No. 99-96- Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution supporting
a new Post Office to be located in the northern area of St. Lucie County.
8. PUBLIC WORKS
A.
Unsafe Structure- Consider staff recommendation to declare the building at 5004 Elm
Avenue, White City to be unsafe and hold a public hearing on June 15, 1999 at 7 PM
or as soon thereafter as possible to take further action.
v
Unsafe Structure- Consider staff recommendation to declare the building at 501
Weatherbee Road to be unsafe and hold a public hearing on June 15, 1999 at 7 PM or
as soon thereafter as possible to take further action.
/
o
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
South AlA Bike Path- Consider staff recommendation to approve the work authorizations
with Glatting, Jackson, Kercher, Anglin, Lopez and Rinehart for this project.
'-'
.....,
CONSENT AGENDA
April 20, 1999
.-.,,'0"'.-
1. WARRANTS LIST
Approve warrants list No. 29.
2. PURCHASING
A. Bid No. 99-40- Consider staff recommendation to award the bid for disposal of scrap
metal to Trademark Metals Recycling. Authorize the Chairman to sign the contract
as prepared by the County Attorney.
B. Bid No. 99-41- Consider staff recommendation to award the bid for construction of
hurricane walls to Adnan Investment in the amount of $17,265 to include the Public
Construction Bond. Authorize the Chairman to sign the contract as prepared by the
County Attorney.
C. Bid No. 99-51- Consider staff recommendation to award the bid for publication of
delinquent tax notices to The Tribune in the amount of $.35 per square inch for the
first insertion and $.16 per square inch for the second and third insertion.
3.
PUBLIC WORKS
/rvL
A. Engineering- Consider staff recommendation to approve the release of Maintenance
Bond in its entirety to Bev Smith Toyota and accept the public right-of-way for
maintenance.
B. Engineering- Consider staff recommendation to approve the agreement extensions
with Hazen and Sawyer and Lindahl, Browning, Ferrari and Hellstrom to provide
stormwater/drainage engineering services for one additional year. Authorize the
Chairman to sign.
C. Resolution No. 99-95/Anita Street MSBU- Consider staffrecommendation to approve
the resolution amending the preliminary assessment roll to lower the preliminary
assessment amount for a property owner.
D. Engineering- Consider staff recommendation to approve the plat and Subdivision
Maintenance Agreement for Pod 26, Phase II at The Reserve and authorize the
Chairman to execute the documents subject to final review and approval by the
County Attorney.
E. Engineering- Consider staff recommendation to approve the plat and Subdivision
Maintenance Agreement for Pod 33, Phase I at The Reserve and authorize the
Chairman to execute the documents subject to final review and approval by the
County Attorney.
4. INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE
Orange Avenue Canal Stormwater System Improvements- Consider staff recommendation
to approve the work authorization for Hazen and Sawyer to perform additional surveying
services for the project. Approve the project budget in the amount of $3,500 and authorize the
Chairman to sign.
....
'-wi
CONSENT AGENDA
APRIL 20, 1999
PAGE TWO
5. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Agreement Amendment- Consider staff recommendation to approve the first amendment to
the agreement with Dawn G. Kirk, P.A. and Stuart A. Webb, Esquire, for legal representation
of indigents for dependency cases.
6. AIRPORT
Fire Equipment- Consider staff recommendation to authorize payment of 50% of the costs,
not to exceed $750, for the purchase and installation of a self-educting foam nozzle for
equipment owned by the Fire District, to be considered a donation to the District.
'-'
THANK YOU TO:
St. Lucie County
City of Port St. Lucie
City of Fort Pierce
Division of Forestry
Red Cross
Salvation Army
Florida Power and Light
National Guard
..."
Fire District
Sheriff's Office
Public Works Department
Utility Division
Mosquito Control Division
Community Development Dept.
Public Safety
School District
Property Appraisers Office
Chamber of Commerce
Police Department
Public Works Department
Building Department
Public Works Department
And to all of the Volunteers, local businesses and outside agencies
who came to our aid during last week's devastating fire in Port St.
Lucie.
~
....."
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
REGULAR MEETING
~
Date: April 13, 1999
Tape: 1
Convened: 9:00 a.m.
Adjourned: 10:30 a.m.
Commissioners Present: Chairman, Paula A. Lewis, John D. Bruhn, Frannie Hutchinson, Cliff
Barnes, Doug Coward,
Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator; Phil Freeland, Asst. County
Administrator; Dan McIntyre, County Attorney, Julia Shewchuk, Community Development
Director; Ray Wa:my, Public Works Director; Paul Phillips, Airport Director; Jack Doughney,
Leisure Services Director; Bill Blazak, Utilities Director; Jim David, Mosquito Control Director;
Harvey Lincoln, M & B Manager; Nick Dragash, Central Services Manager; Joe Finnegan,
PersonnellRisk Manager; Charlie Bicht, Purchasing Manager; Don Cole, Acquisitions Manager;
Don West, County Engineer; Deputy Nickel; A. Millie Delgado, Deputy Clerk
1. MINUTES (1-029)
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve the minutes of the meeting
held April 6, 1999; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
2. PRESENTATIONIPROCLAMATIONS (1-086)
A. Marine Safety Officers- The Board presented certificates to MSO Brad Greathouse and
and MSO Gerard Trouven in recognition for saving the life of a swimmer at \Vaveland
Beach.
B. Library Advisory Board- The Chairman presented certificates of appreciation to Carnell
Clifton, Lois Dickerson and Anthony DiSalvo (Mr. DiSalvo was not present due to an
illness in the family)for their contributions to the Library Advisory Board.
C. Resolution No. 99-93- Proclaiming April 14, 1999 as "Kick Butts Day" in St. Lucie
County .
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve Resolution No. 99-93; and,
upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
3. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS (1-259)
Mr. Bob Bangert, resident of Holiday Pines, addressed the Board and asked for their support by
sending a letter to the U.S. Postal Services requesting a postal facility be considered for the North
County area.
Com. Barnes directed staff to draft a resolution supporting Mr. Bangert's request.
"....
~
"wtI
Mr. Mayfield representing St. Lucie County Schools addressed the Board regarding the Regional
Sports Stadium and expressed their support in expediting the project.
4. CONSENT AGENDA (1-402)
C-5B PARKS IMPACT FEES
Com. Barnes requested clarification on item C-5B and stated he would not be in favor of
spending money on a project that the state would not be funding and the county wind up funding
the vast majority of the project.
The County Administrator advised Com. Barnes ofthe total project cost which would be
$750,000.00. There is approximately $200,000 appropriated so far in the state budget this year
for this project and corporate sponsors will be obtained.
Com. Coward stated he supports the project, however, when the fair market value or the
appraised value of$940,000 for an 8 acre piece of property, you're looking at $117,000 per acre
and he feels this would be an expensive project.
The County Administrator addressed Com. Coward's concerns.
Com. Lewis questioned the amount of park impact fees to be utilized for this project.
The Asst. Community Development Director addressed Com. Lewis' question.
The city of Port St. Lucie has not taken any action, but are aware of the project.
It was the consensus of the Board to pull this item until further information can be obtained.
CONSENT AGENDA
It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve the Consent Agenda
with items C-5B pulled until more information is obtained; C-IO pulled; and the approval of
Additions A-I; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
1. Warrant List
The Board approved Warrant List No. 28
2. LEISURE SERVICES
Budget Resolution No. 99-82/ Equipment Request EQ 99-206- The Board approved the
amendment transferring $29,987 and the equipment request to purchase a replacement truck
totaled due to an accident.
3. MOSQ'lJITO CONTROL
Queens Island Acquisition- The Board approved the Acquisition and Ownership
Agreement with the South Florida Water Management District and the Board of Trustees of the
Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida, and authorized the Chairman to execute
the Agreement.
4. MANAGEMENTIBUDGET
A. Resolution No. 99-89- The Board approved the resolution correcting an error in Budget
Resolution No. 99-28 and reallocating the funds between account numbers for furniture
for the new Fort Pierce Library.
'-"
....,¡
B. Transfer of Funds- The Board approved the transfer of $40,138 to connect the Agriculture
Center to existing FPUA '.:vater lines.
5. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
A. Tourism- The Board approved payment ofthe March invoices to MBI Advertising in the
amount of$13,l48.73.
6. LIBRARY
A. Ft. Pierce Library- The Board approved the fourth amendment to the contract with Phillip
Steel and authorized the Chair to sign the amendment.
B. Equipment Request EQ99-48- The Board approved the equipment request to purchase a
postage scale.
7. PURCHASING
A. Bid No. 99-42- The Board approved awarding the bid for slide-in dump beds to Rayside
Truck and Trailer in the amount of $8,500 for Leisure Services.
B. Bid No. 99-10- The Board approved rescinding the award of bid for resurfacing tennis
courts to Accurate Tennis Courts and award the bid to the second low bidder, D & B
Tennis in the amount of $8,035. and authorized the Chairman to sign the contract as
prepared by the County Attorney.
8. INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE
A. Bid No. 99-08- The Board approved awarding the bid for bridge replacement on Orange
Avenue at the C-24 canal to the second lowest bidder Johnson-Davis, Inc., in the amount
of $1 ,078,925, establish the budget and authorize the chairman to -sign the contract as
prepared by the County Attorney.
B. South 25th St. Widening - The Board approved the third work authorization with
American Consulting Engineers, PLC for construction inspection and an additional two
month post-construction period to finalize the quantity calculations and project
documentation.
9. COUNTY ATTORNEY
A. Treasure Coast Sports Commission- The Board approved the facilities use agreement
with the Treasure Coast Sports Commission for office space at Thomas J. White stadium
and authorized the Chairman to sign the agreement upon receipt of the signed originals.
B. Easement Conveyance- The Board approved the conveyance of a 50 year easement from
TIITF t9 St. Lucie County for the University of Florida Indian River Research &
Education Center Experimental Station road widening and improvement project.
C. Indrio North Savannas Project- The Board approved the option ag_reements for Parcels
202 and 218 and authorized the Chairman to execute the agreements.
D. Resolution No. 99-94- The Board approved the resolution authorizing the acquisition and
construction of paving and drainage improvements in the Ideal Holding Road MSBU and
providing for the issuance of not to exceed $320,000 special assessment improvement
bonds.
. _.. __~·W-___
'-'
'-'
10. UTILITIES/RECYCLING
This item was pulled.
11. PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE/RECOMMENDED FOR A NIGHT MEETING
.~
Community Development- The Board approved advertising a public hearing for April 20,
1999 at 7:00 p.m. on the petition ofSt. Lucie County BCC for a change in zoning from AG-5
zoning district to the I zoning district.
A-l- PERSONNEL
Florida Retirement System Changes- The Board approved making the necessary position
name and code changes to comply with FRS requirements and authorized the transfer of not
more than $100,000 from contingency to cover associated retirement contribution costs.
REGULAR AGENDA
5. COUNTY ATTORNEY (1-402)
Indrio North Savannas Project- For consideration before the Board was staff
recommendation to grant conceptual approval to proceed with the proposed addition of the
Stewart parcel to the FCT Indrio North Savannas Project.
Com. Coward requested an update on the reclamation status.
The County Attorney stated they would report back to the Board the status of the code
enforcement issue.
Com. Barnes requested an accounting of our Park Impact Fees and future projections to include
what has been committed, and also, to investigate acquiring the Rawlins property for possible
use with park impact fees.
Com. Coward suggested applying for grants to help move the project along.
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Barnes, to approve staff recommendation;
and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
6. SHERIFF'S OFFICE (1-1720)
Undersheriff Williams addressed the Board regarding the Rock Road Chapel.
Undersheriff Williams advised the Board that this facility would have an all purpose function
at no cost to the taxpayers. This would provide the inmates with their spiritual needs as well as
provide additional space needs and requirements.
.
He also advised the Board that no additional staff would be needed and all services are being
donated by the community organizations etc.,.
Com. Barnes expressed his concerns with the legality of it's intended use.
Undersheriff Williams addressed Com. Barnes' concerns.
Com. Coward requested back up information on any further issues from the Sheriff s department
so that the County Attorney is able to make recommendations at the time an issue is presented to
the Board.
.______c_._
'--"
.....,
Com. Hutchinson advised the Board of some concerns she had and stated she would prefer to
hold off on making a decision until she felt comfortable all her questions were answered.
Com. Barnes suggested staff be directed to meet and answer any and all questions presented in
writing by the Board and have the issue brought back with a definite proposal.
Com. Barnes requested the County Attorney review the structure and architecture to make sure
the county will not be placed in a llable situation.
Undersheriff Williams stated the actual design of the structure has not reached that level, due to
the fact they do not have the Board's conceptual approval. What has been done is, they have
identified the funding sources, identified commitments, and a basic plan of operations, but,
before monies are spent in design, development and drawings, those putting up the money want
to make sure that the Board will agree with the process.
Com. Barnes at this time withdrew his suggestion and then suggested the issue be tabled for a
week until all questions have been answered.
Undersheriff Williams asked the Board to submit any and all questions to him this week and that
he and the County Attorney meet to jointly answer all legal questions and the buildings
functions.
It was the consensus of the Board to table this item for one week.
7. ADMINISTRATION (1-2596)
Seaport Advisory Committee- Consider staff recommendation to approve the following
objectives for this committee.
1. To review and make recommendations to the BCC on Port related project.
2. To pursue Federal and State Port project grants
3. To continually review Port operations, policies and safety
Com. Coward suggested the name be changed to the Ft. Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee and
the word "pursue" be changed to "identify and make recommendations regarding grants" on
objective # 2 and also add a fourth objective to read" to review and make recommendations
relative to the Indian River Lagoon".
Com. Barnes stated he would suggest members on the committee have some technical expertise.
It was also recommended that on objective one, the word "Port" be changed to "Harbor".
Com. Barnes st~ted he would prefer to see the whole committee reformed or started a new with
the members having the necessary expertise to make recommendations.
Com. Hutchinson suggested inviting those with technical expertise to attend any scheduled
meetings rather than expanding the list of members.
Com. Barnes expressed his concern with those experts wanting to be paid as consultants.
Com. Lewis suggested asking someone with the technical background on an individual basis to
be a member of the committee would be different than going to the institution.
Com. Hutchinson expressed her concerns with forming a committee for this county which does
not have a good history of having meetings.
,_.._,.~ ---"'-".-.
--;\'..<;.:.:..;'....~'""'.,
'-'
:~;:: ...~:-:,~.,:....:~!'~
.'wJ
Com. Coward stated that he felt most of those from Harbor Branch and the Smithsonian would
choose not to be on an advisory committee to make recommendations on a very controversial
Port project. He strongly disagrees and would like the Harbor Advisory Committee provide
input for upcoming permit issues.
The County Administrator stated he would like to invite the committee to a workshop which will
be scheduled in the immediate future.
~J
Com. Barnes requested Taylor Creek be also an issue for recommendations as well as the others.
It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Coward to change the name of the
Seaport Advisory Committee to the Ft. Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee; and, upon roll call,
motion carried unanimously.
BOARD COMMENTS
Com. Bruhn requested the resolution regarding Mr. Bangert's request be presented at the next
meeting.
There being no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at
10:30 a.m.
Chairman
Clerk of Circuit Court
Ü,,,.._. _~..".._<_....~....,o:""""J.,-,."",-,:,~":,,,-~~.~~"-.'·:è';:':-.'h1."'-.:"!"'·'~~~""._£":¡"~'~:;o.:-:-.''7~'~_\-'
.,
v
\r/
~
..,¡
AGENDA REOUEST
ITEM NO. L
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [X]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [ ]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
SUBJECT:
Resolution No. 99-97 - Proclaiming the week of April 18, 1999, through April 24, 1999, as "INFANT
IMMUNIZATION AWARENESS WEEK" in St. Lucie County, Florida.
BACKGROUND:
Infant immunization protects children fÌ"om deadly diseases and saves health care costs. Mrs. Helga Snure of the
Health Education Program in Port St. Lucie, Florida, has requested the Board proclaim April 18 - 24, 1999, as Infant
Immunization Awareness Week in St. Lucie County, Florida. The attached Resolution No. 99-97 has been drafted
for that purpose.
, FUNDS AVAIL.:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution No. 99-97 as drafted.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ ~ APPROVED [] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
NCE:
- r-----
ou as Anderson
County Administrator
County Attorney:
:J
Review and APprovals
Management & Budget
Purchasing :
OtheE:
Other:
Originating Dept.
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)___
Eff. 5/96
"
'-'
....,¡
RESOLUTION NO. 99-97
A RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK
OF APRIL 18, 1999, THROUGH APRIL 24, 1999,
AS "INFANT IMMUNIZATION AWARENESS
WEEK" IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made
the following determinations:
1. Infant immunization protects children from deadly diseases and saves health care costs.
St. Lucie County has been a part of the Nation's success in raising immunization rates to an all-time
high. The incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases is at an all-time low compared with epidemics
in the past. However, much community work is required to sustain this effort. There are still too
many children in this country who are not getting immunized on time.
2. Research shows that diseases such as measles, whooping cough, and rubella occurring in
St. Lucie County could have been prevented with the proper immunization. Children need a series
of vaccinations, starting at birth, to be fully protected from these deadly and debilitating diseases.
3. This Board believes that it is time for everyone in St. Lucie County to take responsibility
by spreading the word about the importance of proper immunization before age two~ and urges the
citizens of St. Lucie County to participate in reaching a goal of raising immunization rates in the
Kindergarten level from 92% to 95% and in the Seventh grade level from 55% to 70% this year.
4. This Board further believes that parents and care givers need to be educated about the
importance of early immunizations, encourage health care providers to improve access and
consistency of immunization services, and seek long-term policy changes that will ensure full
immunization status for all children by age two.
'-'.
...,.I
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St.
Lucie County, Florida:
1. This Board does hereby proclaim the week of April 18, 1999, through April 24, 1999, as
"INFANT Il\1MUNIZATION AWARENESS WEEK" in St. Lucie County, Florida.
2. This Board encourages businesses, government agencies, national organizations,
community-based organizations, and service groups to spread the immunization message throughout
their communities.
3. This Board further encourages public and private health care providers, parents, and
children's care givers in St. Lucie County to advance the health of children by ensuring early and on-
time immunization against preventable childhood diseases.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 1999.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
DEPUTY CLERK
CHAIRMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
~
....,;
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
PAULA A. LEWIS
COMMISSIONER
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
April 9, 1999
TO:
Patti Raffensberger
Assistant to the County Administrator
FROM:
0~
Commissioner Paula A. Lewis Vr
RE:
Proclamation
Our office received a request from Mrs. Helga Snure (Health Education Program) proclaiming the
week of April 14 - 24,1999 as INFANT IMMUNIZATION AWARENESS WEEK in St. Lucie
County. See the attached information for you review.
Due to the lateness of receiving the request . Snure does understand that the proclamation will
not be ready until the meeting April 20th.) Mrs. Kim Orr will be present to receive the
proclamation.
Thank you.
P AL:baf
Attachment
JOHN D. ßf',UHN, District No.1. DOUG COWAf',D, District No.2. PAULA A. LEWIS, District No.;) . FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, District No.4· CLIFF ßAf',NES, District No.5
County Admlnistrotor - Douglos M. Anderson
2300 Virginia Avenue . Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652 · (561) 462-1406 · FAX (561) 462-2131 · TDD (561) 462-1428
SUN COM 259-1406
04/06/1999 14:41
Sb13375ï57
SLCHD
PAGE 02
Ir
'-'
....,
\/
Nationallnf&rt ImnmnízatÎon Week
Infant bnm1Dlization protects children from deadly diseases and saves health C~ costs.
Ow' great county of St. Lucie can be proud to be part of the Nation's success in raising
immunization rates to an aU.time bigh. The incidence ofvaccme.preventable diseases is at an aU-
time low compared with epidemics in the past. However, much community work is required to
sustain this effort. There arc stin too many children in thi$ country who are not getting
immunized on time.
R.eseareh shows that diseases such as measles, whooping cough, and rubella occurring Ù1 St.
Lucie County could have been prevented with the proper immunization. Children need a series of
vaccinations, starting at birth~ to be fully protœted from these deadly and debilitating diseases.
It is tUne for everyone in our communities to take responsibility by spre.wing the wotd about the
importance of proper immunization before age 2. We offiçially call upon all member!! of St.
Lucie County to perticipate in reaching our goat of raising our immunization rates in the
Kindergarten level from 92% to 95% and in the Seventh grad. level trom 55% to 70% this year.
T ogetbet we need to educate parents and calegiverg about the importance of early immunizations,
encourage health care providers to improve access and consistency of iromwtization services, and
seek tong-term policy changes that wiJI ensure fuU immunization status for a11 children by age 2.
NOW, THEREFORE. WE. the St. Lucie County Board ofCommis$ÌOners., do hereby proclaim
the week of Apri118-24. 1999, as INFANT IMMUNIZATION AWARENESS WEEK IN St.
Lucie County and encourage businesses, BOV$rnanent agencies, national organizations,
community-based òfganizatious, and service groups to spread. the inununization meSBagC
throughout their communities. We also encourage public and private health care providers,
parents, and children's caregivers in this county to adwnce the hea1th of children by ensuring
early and on-time immunization apinst preventable childhood dtllC8SeS.
DATED: Aril 6, 1999
SIGNED:
~
--
..",.
AGENDA REQUEST
ITEM NO. 5-A
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [X]
CONSENT [ ]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY (DEPT) : Utilities Department
William R. Blazak
SlffiJECT: Public Hearing to determine whether the purchase of the Holiday
Pines Service Corporation Utility is in the public interest.
FUNDS AVAIL.: n/a - Bond issue
PREVIOUS ACTION: see attached
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
determine that the proposed purchase of the Holiday Pines Water and
Wastewater System is in the public interest.
/
]
APPROVED
OTHER:
]
DENIED
COMMISSION ACTION:
Coordination/Signatures
/Î1 "
'Lr
county Attorney:X f.:' Mgt. & Budget:
originating DePt'X~ other,
Finance Director: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)____
Purchasing
Other:
Eff. 5/96
'-"
'wi
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
UTiliTIES & RECYCLING
DEPARTMENT
WILLIAM ßLAZAK
DIP.EGOP.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM R. BLAZAK, DIRECTOR ~
APRIL 20, 1999
TO:
FROM:
SUBJ:
PURCHASE OF HOLIDAY PINES UTILITY SYSTEMS
BACKGROIJND:
As the Board is aware, the County is investigating the feasibility of purchasing the
Holiday Pines Water and Wastewater System. Under Section 125.3401, Florida Statues, no
county may purchase a water, sewer or wastewater reuse utility that provides service to the
public until the governing board of the county has helØ- a public hearing and made a
determination that the purchase is in the public interest. In determining whether the purchase is
in the public interest, the county shall consider, at a minium, the following.
(1) The most recent available income and expense statement for the utility;
(2) The most recent available balance sheet for the utility, listing assets and liabilities
and clearly showing the amount of contributions-in-aid-of construction and the
accumulated depreciation thereon;
(3) A statement of the existing rate base of the utility for regulatory purposes;
(4) The physical condition of the utility facilities being purchased, sold, or subject to
a wastewater facility privatization contract;
(5) The reasonableness of the purchase, sales or wastewater facility privatization
contract price and terms;
(6) The impacts of the purchase, sale, or wastewater facility privatization contract on
utility customers, both positive and negative;
(7)(a) Any additional investment required and the ability and willingness ofthe
purchaser, or the private firm under a wastewater facility privatization contract, to
make that investment, whether the purchaser is the county or the entity purchasing
the utility from the county;
JOHN D. ßRUHN, District No.1. DOUG COWARD, District No.2. PAULA A. LEWIS, District No.3· FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, District No.4· CLIFF ßARNES, District No, 5
County Administrator - Douglas M. Anderson
2300 Virginia Avenue . Fort Pierce, FL 34982 · Phone (561) 462-1150 · FAX (561) 462-1153
,-".
'-'"
(b) In the case of a wastewater facility privatization contract, the tenns and conditions
on which the private firm will provide capital investment and financing or a
combination thereof for contemplated capital replacements, additions, expansions,
and repairs. The county shall give significant weight to this criteria.
(8) The alternatives to the purchase, sale, or wastewater facility privatization contract,
and the potential impact on utility customers if the purchase, sale, or wastewater
facility privatization contract is not made; and
(9)(a) The ability of the purchaser or the private firm under a wastewater facility
privatization contract to provide and maintain high-quality and cost-effective
utility service, whether the purchaser is the county or the entity purchasing the
utility from the county.
(b) In the case of a wastewater facility privatization contract, the county shall give
significant weight to the technical expertise and experience of the private firm in
carrying out the obligations specified in the wastewater facility privatization
contract.
(10) All moneys paid by a private firm to a county pursuant to a wastewater facility
privatization contract shall be used for the purpose of reducing or offsetting
property taxes, wastewater service rates, or debt reduction or making
infrastructure improvements or capital asset expenditures or other public purpose;
provided, however, nothing herein shall preclude the county from using all or part
of the moneys for the purpose of the county's qualification for relief from the
repayment of federal grant awards associated with the wastewater system as may
be required by federal law or regulation.
Attached to the memorandum is a copy of a report prepared by the County's utility
consultant and a due diligence report prepared by the County's utility engineers. As indicated in
the report, staff and the consultants believe that the pr~posed purchase of the Holiday Pines
Utility System is in the public interest.
Staff and the consultants will be available during the public hearing to answer questions.
RECOMMENDA TTON:
Staff recommends that the Board determine that the proposed purchase of the Holiday
Pines Water and Wastewater System is in the public interests.
"-'
.......,¡
,.,..
HOLIDAY PINES SERVICE CORP.
PURCHASE BY ST. LUCIE COUNTY
REQUIREMENTS OF STATUE 125.3401
1) The most recent available income and expense statement for the utility;
Attached is the December 31, 1998 income and expense statement as submitted
to the PSC.
2) The most recent available balance sheet, listing assets and liabilities and showing
the amount of C lAC and accumulated depreciation thereon;
Attached is the December 31, 1998 balance sheet showing total assets of
$3,105,092 . It also shows an amount of $1 ,796,895 In CIAC and $694,890 of
accumulated depreciation thereon.
3) A statement of the existing rate base of the utility for regulatory purposes.
Attached is the December 31,1998 rate base showing $928,150 for water and
$577,578 for sewer.
4) The physical condition of the utility facilities being purchased.
Attached is the due diligence report of Lindah~, Browning, the counties consulting
engineers, on the Holiday Pines Service Corp. dated March 1999.
5) The reasonableness of the purchase.
The purchase of Holiday Pines Service Corp. Is being made by issuing municipal
bonds that will be secured by the revenues of the utility system and be totally self
supporting with no pledge of the counties credit. Only revenues based on the
customers existing rates, with no requirement for rate increases, is needed for the
purchase.
6) The impact of the purchase on the utility customers.
The customers will be positively effected since the system is being purchased and
the improvements to the system will be made under the existing rates. Also
regulation will be by the local government instead of from the state in Tallahassee.
7) Any additional investment required and the ability and willingness of the purchaser
to make that investment.
'-"
'-"
The county has identified required improvements to the system by the consulting
engineers I and all such improvements have been provided for through either the
bond issue or the continues operating reserves from the system.
8) The alternatives to the purchase and the potential impact on utility customers if
the purchase was not made.
If the county did not purchase the system it would remain in private hand subject
to rates which must provide a profit, local and federal taxes and other costs which
are passed on to the customers. Improvements to the system as identified will be
immediately provided by the county for the benefit of the customers.
9) The ability of the purchaser to provide and maintain high-quality and cost-effective
utility service.
The county has a professional operator which will be contracted to operate the
system at a cost-effective basis.This operator is presently providing the same service
to existing county facilities on a high-quality and professional manner. The county
also retains a professional utility staff of qualified personnel along with consultants
to oversee the utility operation.
10)AII moneys paid by a private firm to a county pursuant to a privatization contract
will be used as identified.
Since no money is being paid to the county by a privatization contractor this
question is not applicable.
'-'
""'-"
:> //}--¡¿I~- /.1.5:" 34 D /
flAY( .µ /
YEAR OF REPORT
December 31,1998
UTILITY NAME:
Holiday Pines Service Corporation
COMPARATIVE OPERATING INCOME
ACCT. PREVIOUS REF. CURRENT
NO. ACCOUNT NAME YEAR PAGE YEAR
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
UTILITY OPERATING INCOME
400 Operating Revenues________________ $ 696,936 F-3(b) $ 700,629
401 Operating Expenses_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 397,345 F-3(b) 456,331
403 Depreciation Expense_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 65,023 F-6/F-21 74,854
406 Amortization of Utility Plant Acquisition
Adjustment_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
407 Amortization Expense_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
408.1 Taxes Other Than Income_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 60,379 F-17 66.886
409.1 Income Taxes ------------------- F-17
410.10 Deferred Federal Income Taxes ----------
411.10 Provision for Deferred Income
Taxes - Credit___________________
412.10 Investment Tax Credits Deferred
to Future Periods_________________
412.11 Investment Tax Credits Restored
to Operating Income_______________
Utility Operating Expenses _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 522,747 598.071
Utility Operating Income_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 174,189 102.558
413 Income From Utility Plant Leased .
To Others_____________________
414 Gains (Losses) From Disposition
of Utility Property___ _____ _________
Total Utility Operating Income [Enter here and
on Page F-3(c)L_________________ 174,189 102,558
F-3(a)
'-"
-....I
<,"-7 - I'v r ).<1 "/
...J/,'7/¡)C '....';>7'-"
77f.-u =Ii I
YEAR OF REPORT
December 31.1998
Holiday Pines Service Corporation
,.",
UTILITY NAME:
COMPARATIVE OPERATING INCOME (Cont'd)
ACCT. PREVIOUS REF. CURRENT
NO. ACCOUNT NAME YEAR PAGE YEAR
(a) (b) (c\ (d) (e\
Total Utility Operating Income [From
Page F-3(a}L___________________ 174,189 102,558
OTHER INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS
415 Revenues From Merchandising, Jobbing and
Contract Deductions (Guarenteed Revenues)__ 26,247 25.571
416 Costs and Expenses of Merchandising,
Jobbing and Contract Work_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ --
419 Interest and Dividend Income____________ 2.660
420 Allowance for Funds Used During
Construction --------------------
421 Nonutility Income _ _________________ 427 201
426 Miscellaneous Nonutility Expenses_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Total Other Income and Deductions_ _ _ _ _ _ __ 26.674 28,432
TAXES APPLICABLE TO OTHER INCOME
408.20 Taxes Other Than Income_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-17
409.20 Income Taxes (Credits) _______________ F-17
410.20 Provision for Deferred Income Taxes_ _ _ _ _ _ __ ,
411 .20 Provision for Deferred Income
Taxes - Credit___________________
412.20 Investment Tax Credits - NeC _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
412.30 Investment Tax Credits Restored .
to Operating Income_______________
Total Taxes Applicable to Other Income_ _ _ _ __
INTEREST EXPENSE
427 Interest Expense_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 199,436 F-18 227,630
428 Amortization of Debt Discount & Expense_____ 12.072 F-12 17,549
429 Amortization of Premium on DebC _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-12
Total Interest Expense______ _________ 211,508 245,179
EXTRAORDINARY ITEMS
433 Extraordinary Income _______________
434 Extraordinary Deductions_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
409.30 Income Taxes, Extraordinary Items_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Total Extraordinary Items______________
NET INCOME ------------------- $ (10,645) $ (114,189)
F-3(c}
'--'
""'"
5 j;g. jz; ¿- - /~J': 3 -?ð /
-ThfÞ/'#z-
YEAR OF REPORT
December 31,1998
UTILITY NAME: Holiday Pines Service Corporation
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET -ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS
ACCT. REF. CURRENT PREVIOUS
NO. ACCOUNT NAME PAGE YEAR YEAR
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
UTILITY PLANT
101-105 Utility Plant____ ___ _______ ___________ F-5 $ 4,134,463 $ __~~~?5180
108-110 Less: Accumulated Depreciation
and Amortization ----------------- F-ô (1,583,862) _~~,~3~,331)
N~P~nL_________________________ 2,550,601 2,689.949
114-115 Utility Plant Acquisition --...-...
Adjustments (NetL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-5
Other Plant Adjustments (specifyL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ------------
-----
Total Net Utility Plant___________________ 2,550,601 2.689,949
---------
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS
121 Nonutility Property_ _ ____ __ __ ______ _ _ ___ F-7
122 Less: Accumulated Depreciation ----- --
and Amortization -----------------
---- _'. - __0' __n____._
Net Nonutility Property_ __________________ ."-----
123 Investmenty in Associated Companies_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-8
Utility Investments_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-ß ----- ------~
124
Other Investments_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-8 ________ _n___
125
127 Special Funds _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-8 '--.._---
-----. ---
Total Other Property and Investments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ~
--- ____non. -----
CURRENT AND ACCRUED ASSETS
131 Cash ---------------------------- 438,833 64.288
132 Special Deposits_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ F-7 -"--------
134 Working Funds _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
135 Temporary Cash Investments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
141-144 Accounts and Notes Receivable, Less
Accumulated Provision for
Uncollectable Accounts_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-9 61,235 67,857
145 Accounts Receivable from Associated
Companies_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ F-10
146 Notes Receivable from Associated
Companies_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-10
151 Materials and Supplies _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
162 Prepayments_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-11 24,181 9,280
171 Accrued Interest and Dividends Receivable_ _ _ _ _ _ __
174 Misc. Current and Accrued Assets_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Total Current and Accrued Assets_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 524,249 141.42~
F-1 (a)
'-'
UTILiTY NAME: Holiday Pines Service Corporation
......,
J//'J-!¿,i,¿;,: / v5. 3-,/0/
T;kjAI µ ~
YEAR OF REPORT
December 31,1998
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET - ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS
ACCT. REF. CURRENT PREVIOUS
NO. ACCOUNT NAME PAGE YEAR YEAR
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
DEFERRED DEBITS
181 Unamortized Debt Discount & Expense_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-12 30,242 16,811
182 Extraordinary Property Losses_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ F-12
186 Mise, Deferred Debits___________________ F-11
.--..-"-
190 Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes___________
-----.- -- ----.
Total Deferred Debits___________________ 30,242 16,811
--'-
TOTAL ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ $ 3,105,092 $ 2,84ª,1§5
.-.---- ------
NOTES TO THE BALANCE SHEET
The space below is provided for important notes regarding the balance sheet.
F-1(b)
'-'
......,
5'þ1Vc= /YS:3~/
. -d
77?J,t-! ~- Þ-
UTILITY NAME: Holiday Pines Service Corporation
YEAR OF REPORT
December 31,1998
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET - EQUITY CAPITAL AND LIABILITIES
ACCT. REF. CURRENT PREVIOUS
NO. ACCOUNT NAME PAGE YEAR YEAR
(a) Ib) Ic) Id) (e)
EQUITY CAPITAL
201 Common Stock Issued --------------- F-14 500 $ 500
204 Preferred Stock Issued F-14 ------..,
--------------- -~._-- ----
211 Other Paid-in CapitaL_______________ 399,500 399,500
212 Discount on Capital Stock_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ --.-..--
213 Capital Stock Expense _______________ .--.-
214-215 Retained Earnings (DeficitL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-15 (2,060,634) (1,946,445)
216 Reacquired Capital Stock______________ (25,000)
-
218 Proprietary Capital (Proprietorship
and Partnership OnlyL______________ -------
Total Equity Capital (DeficitL____________ (1,685,634) __~!,5~~~4_5)
LONG TERM DEBT
221 Bonds_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-16
-------,.._-. --- - .-.
223 Advances from Associated Companies_ _ _ _ _ _ _ F-16
---------- .---~ --.-----
224 Other Long Term Debt_______________ F-14 2,285,145 1,291.752
--------~-
Total Long Term Debt________________ 2,285,145 1,291,752
._-,---
CURRENT AND ACCRUED LIABILITIES .
231 Accounts Payabfe_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 11,956
232 Notes Payable_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ F-13
233 Accounts Payable to Associated Co. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ F-13
234 Notes Payable to Associated Co. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-13 1,139,054 1,557,489
Customer Deposits _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 29,318 ------
235 23,634
236 Accrued Taxes___________________ F-17 32,680 32,543
237 Accrued Interest F-18 202,614 31-6,832
-------------------
238 Accrued Dividends _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
239 Matured Long Term Debt______________
240 Matured InteresC _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
241 Miscellaneous Current and Accrued
Liabilities_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-19 1,888
Total Current and Accrued
Liabilities_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 1,403,666 1,944,342
F-2(a)
'-'
UTILITY NAME: Holiday Pines Service Corporation
ACCT.
NO.
(a)
......,
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET - EQUITY CAPITAL AND LIABILITIES
ACCOUNT NAME
(b)
DEFERRED CREDITS
REF.
PAGE
Ie)
251 Unamortized Premium on Debt _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ F-12
252 Advances for Construction_____________ F-19
253 Other Deferred Credits _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
255 Accumulated Deferred Investment
Tax Credits____________________
Total Deferred Credits________________
OPERATING RESERVES
261 Property Insurance Reserve ____________
262 Injuries and Damages Reserve___________
263 Pensions and Benefits Reserve_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
265 Miscellaneous Operating Reserves _ _ _ _ _ _ __
27'1
272
Total Operating Reserves_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
CONTRIBUTIONS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION
Contributions in Aid of Construction_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ F-20
Accumulated Amortization of Contributions in
Aid of Construction
----------------
Total Net C.I.A.C. __________________
ACCUMULATED DEFERRED INCOME TAXES
281 Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes-
Accelerated Depreciation_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
282 Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes-
Liberalized Depreciation _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
283 Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes -
Other _______________________
Total Accum. Deferred Income Taxes _ _ _ _ _ __
TOTAL EQUITY CAPITAL AND LlABILlTIES____
F-2(b)
~-21
CURRENT
YEAR
Id)
1,796,805
(694,890)
1,101,915
$
3,105,092 $
5' /rj-JJ¿: /)4 /_-5ýc.) /
TÆ,J}/'þI ;<
YEAR OF REPORT
December 31.1998
PREVIOUS
YEAR
(e)
$
,--
------
- -..-
.---
'-
.--------
1,779,749
(621,213)
1,158,536
2,848,185
UTILITY NAME: Holiday Pines ~ice Corporation
'-"
:J/7/t/~ / y.J I ;)'<fL 0 /
-;T.7i,¡,q :# 3
YEAR OF REPORT
December 31,1998
SCHEDULE OF YEAR END RATE BASE
ACCT. REF. WATER SEWER
NO. ACCOUNT NAME PAGE UTILITY UTILITY
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
101 Utility Plant In Service________________ F-5 $ 2,191,767 $ 1,942,696
Less:
Nonused and Useful Plant (1) ________ .__._-_.~
108,1 Accumulated Depreciation_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-6 796,692 787,170
110.1 Accumulated Amortization F-6 -------
-----------
271 Contributions in Aid of Construction_ _ _ _ __ F-20 812,498 984,307
252 Advances for Construction ----------- F-19
Subtotal ----------------------- 582,577 171,219
--------.
Additions:
272 Accumulated Amortization of Contributions
in Aid of Construction ------------ F-21 308,834 386,056
._._~_.,..-
Subtotal ----------------------- 891,411 557,275
--
Pius or Minus:
114 Acquisition Adjustments (2) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ F-5
115 Accumulated Amortization of Acquisition
Adjustments (2L ______________ F-5
Working Capital Allowance (3L _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - -------
36,739 20,303
Other (Specify): . -_._---~.__._--
RATE BASE -------------------- $ 928,150 $ 577,578
UTILITY OPERATING INCOME__________ $ 62,072 $ 40,486
ACHIEVED RATE OF RETURN__________ 6.69 % 7.01 %
NQIfS.; .
(1) Estimated if not known.
(2) Include only those Acquisition Adjustments that have been approved by the Commission.
(3) Calculated using the 1/8th of 0 & M method.
F-4
~
....,.¡
st. Lucie County, Florida
Holiday Pines
Service Corporation
Engineer's -Report
Prepared for St. Lucie County Utilities
March 1999
Prepared by
l!2£þ
LINDAHL, BROWNING,
FERRARI & HELLSTROM, INC.
'-"
.....,¡
-;;~-
,.::-"
HOLIDAY PINES SERVICE CORPORATION
ENGINEERING REPORT
March, 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION
A. Authority........................................................................................... 1
B. Purpose And Scope....................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1
C. Description of System ........................................................................... 2
.~
n. WATER SYSTEM
A. General............................................................................................. 2
B. Treatment Capacity and Demands............................................... .. .. ... .. .. .. . 3
C . Water System Recommendations .......................................................... ,.,.3
D. Supply....................................................... ..~:::..................................... 4'
E. Distribution........................................................................................ 4 .
ill. WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM
A. General...........................................,................................................. 5
B. Collection / Transmission... ..... ............ ... ......... .......... ..... ... ....... .......... .......5
C. Wastewater Lift Stations ........................................................................ 5
D. Lift Station Recoinmendations ................................................................. 6
IV. W ASTEW ATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
A. General . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. .. .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . .. .. .. . . . .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . 6
B. Trea1:nlent Facilities.................... '.........:..................................... ..........7
C. Wastewater Characteristics ............. .......... :.... ...... ........ ..........................9
D. Inflow and Infiltration Analysis. . .. . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
E. Wastewater Recommendations............... . .. . .. .'. . . . . ... . . . ... . .. . .,. . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . 9
F. Effluent Disposal Options .................................................................... 10
V. DOCUMENT REVIEW ............................................................................... 11
VI. ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS
A. General; ...... .... ..,.. ...... .................... ......... ................ ................ ........ 13
B. Summary and Recommendations.................... .. . ...... . .., .. . . .. . . . . . . . . ., . . . . .. ... .. 13
SLCD 03/99
LBFH #97-494B
Engineering Due Diligence Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
Figure 1 -
,r
Figure 2 -
Figure 3 -
Figure 4 -
Figure 5 -
SLCD 03/99
LBFH #97-494B
~
......,
,.,..-
..:---
HOLIDAY PINES SERVICE CORPORATION
ENGINEERING RE¡»ORT
March, 1999
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Description
AFrERPAGE
Water and Wastewater Service Areas and Facilities in
Unincorporated St. Lucie County.....................·...······························· 2
Holiday Pines Service Corporation - Areas Served. ......... ... .......... ............. 2
Site Layout - Holiday Pines Water Treatment Facility .................. ............:. 3
Site Layout - Holiday Pines Wastewater Treatment Facility........ . . . . . ... ... . . .. . 7
Site Layout - Holiday Pines Wastewater Treatment Facility.............. . ... ... . . . 7
.~
"
ii
Engineering Due Diligence Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
r
Table 1 -
Table 2 -
Table 3 -
Table 4 -
Table 5 -
SLCD 03/99
LBFH #97-494B
-
'-"
""".,
,.,..'
,- .~... ..
HOLIDAY PINES SERVICE CORPORATION
ENGINEERING REPORT
March, 1999
LIST OF TABLES
Table Description
PAGE
Summary of Water Treatment Facility Upgrade Recommendations..... . . . . .. ... . . 3
Summary of Wastewater Collection Facility Recommendations ..................10
Summary of Water Utility Easements and Right of Ways. . .. .. ~ .. .. ... . . . . .. .. ... 11
Summary of Wastewater Utility Easements and Right of W ays ~................. 12
Summary of Water & Wastewater Immediate Upgrade Needs.................... 14
',->.
'.
iii
Engineering Due Diligence Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
-
'-,,J
"'"
,..,...
,...,.,-
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Authority
In January of 1999, the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners authorized
Lindahl, BroWning, Ferrari & Hellstrom, Inc. to proceed with preparation of an
engineering due diligence report and financial due diligence investigating the possible
acquisition of Holiday Pines water and sewer utilities by St. Lucie County (SLC). This
engineering report is a summary of the more detailed due diligence report.
B. Purpose and Scope
The purpose of the due diligence is to investigate and evaluate the Holiday Pines water
and wastewater system assets and to assist St. Lucie County (SLC) in determining a basis
of negotiations for acquisition of the system assets.
r
The work includes the inventory and evaluation of the water and wastewater facilities
owned by Holiday Pines Service Corporation, (HPSC). The evaluation encompasses the
future adequacy of the facilities (treatment, disposal, etc.), maintenance programs, and
the physical condition of the facilities.
In the course of this technical investigation, LBFH performed observations of the water
and wastewater treatment plant, percolation ponds, and collection-system manholes and
lift stations. Inspections were done to obtain information regarding water and sanitary
sewer main sizes, construction materials and age, maintenance schedules, and any
operating/financial data made available. "
More specifically, the scope of work performed includes the following:
1. Evaluate the water and wastewater treatment plant and equipment to ascertain a·
condition as such.
2. Determine present and future adequacy of treatment processes, permitting issues and
capacity planning.
3. Determine the present and future adequacy of sewer system outfalls (disposal), deep
well injection, land spray, percolation ponds, etc.
4. Evaluate water and sewer lines and distribution/collection systems.
5. Determine the maintenance adequacy of plants, lines, lift stations, valves, wells and
disposal units·.
6. Determine the adequacy of sludge handling (plant) disposal methods, and any legal or
capacity requirement in effect.
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. Inc.
P:197-0494BIW\Engineering Report 00 I. doc
1
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
-
'-'
'-'
,."...
,':---
7. Investigate records of water and sewer permit violations over the life of the system,
and any agreements to change or alter the syst~m.
8. Review the number of recorded connections, capacity allocations and cancellation
clauses in agreements.
9. Review billing and collection system records for amount of water purchased, water
metered, water sold and frequency and methods of meter reading.
c. Description of System
The Holiday Pines Service Corporation (HPSC) provides the water and sewer utilities for
the· Holiday Pines subdivision. Figure 1 presents the general location of the Holiday
Pines Service Corporation. Areas generally served by the HPSC are presented in Figure
2. The HPSC service area is located north of the St. Lucie County Airport and, generally
includes the following areas:
r
1. Holiday Pines Subdivision
2. Indian Pines Village Apartments
3. Heatherway Apartments
4. Indrio Crossing Shopping Center
5. Harbor Federal Bank
6. Riverside National Bank
7. Lakewood Park Elementary
8. Golf Lake Villas (Holiday Pines~
9. Lakewood Park Fire Station (Santa Barbara Drive)
10. Lakewood Park Library (Santa Barbara Drive)
.'~
The majority of the service area is comprised of residential developments consisting of
single family homes, apartments, town homes and some commercial establishments.
II. WATER SYSTEM
A. General
The Holiday Pines water system currently serves a population of approximately 1,500.
The water treatment system consists of two surficial raw water wells, a reverse osmosis
treatment system, and ground storage tanks. According to design plans, the distribution
system generally consists of polyvinylchloride (PVC) distribution piping and
polyethylene (PE) customer service connections.
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. Inc.
P:\97-0494B\W\En~in..rin~ Report OOLdoc
2
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
-
'-"
HOLIDAY PIN S
HOLIDAY PINES
SERVICE CORPORA TJON
FLORIDA TURNP1KE
r
LEGEND
_ OTHER S£RV1Ct AREAS
~ HOUDAY PINES SElMCE Nt£A
OIWIGE AVE.
@
SLCU NORTH
HUTCHINSON ISLAND
~
~
.,
SCALE
1" = 15,000'
SLCU SOUTH
HUTCHINSON ISLAND
FORT PIERCE
UTIUTlES
AIJT} ORITY
,
..
...
JS
...
~ GJ
! --
:!i
~
ROAD
~
Water and
Facilities in
-
Undahl. Brawnln¡,
a Hellstrom, In:. .
--. ~.......
_ ,.. 1&tOI~
---
Wastewater Service Areas and
Unincorporated St. Lucie County
ST. LUCIE COUNTY UTILITIES
HOLIDAY PINES FIGURE 1
ENGINEERING REPORT
-
'-'
'-'
,..,..
........... ... ..............
.......................
.........
~
"~ ~
~
.;¡CALE
I
I
I
I
Donlon ~oad ~ ......... ...............,.........
~~ .. ..~ If,?##,y PINES
\ .:.... , ':{:':::::;···""·:,:;::::f:::;.:i~::·:·¡:J.r·' ,/.. HOUDAY PINES SUBD/vis
1 ,.;..,;::;' ·:R·;::;;:;:;;;::tf¡ff@ffJ~-BOUNDARY OF AREAS REC 'HC
¡ .." .;,;.'.' :';'.". :.:.:.:.:.;.:.;.:.;.:.;.;.:.;.:.:.;.;.;.: .' W;'AT'ER JL. SEJY.£R SERV.¡"'£
( ,..... CD .','-;' Z":"lir:';\WW':':': .H "" ...,
~ u.____ )
R FEDERAI..
::::::BA~" ,Y; I....mm..mmm~mll
....·······,·..·..·PAi:K """- . . .,..... /
LAKEWOOD?!:,.Jf.K '\.
FIRE STA """'" '\. "/
.I.~L~ II R~m __,'
·::'..tll'ilJYl i~€.lff:: t=¡;j.) 1:::I:~:::I[:¡¡[:[[:::::I[:[::::::i::¡:II[:[[:I[I:[[it:::::::)::::::[:![ ....
, -g" "t'-..
& ~-
~ ~/
~ -r- ~~
~ ~
I
~
\
( .
J ..,..,..
I
,
ì
ì 1
"'" I
"'-
"'\:.. "'-
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
.'
I
I
p;
, ;
.......
~
I
OJ
~
52
-
.................
................................................... ........................................,.
............... .'
............. ............ ......
........................... .........
Holiday Pines Service Corporation
Areas Served by The Holiday Pines
Water and Wastewater Services
- ir.-~ ST. LUCIE COUNTY UTILITIES
Undahl,BrawnInt. ~ HOLIDAY PINES FIGURE 2
... Hellstrom, Ire.. .
==~=t- "",OR\DV ENGINEERING REPORT
...--..:.-
\..I
"'"
..-,....
,'''''''
B. Treatment Capacity and Demands
The Holiday Pines water treatment facilities (WTF) constitutes the largest water system
in northeast St. Lucie County. The site occupies about 5.4 acres located east of King's
Highway in the southern portion of the IWliday Pines development. Figure 3 presents the
Holiday Pines' WTP facility layout. The treatment facility and wells are owned by
Holiday Pines Service Corporation and operated by Hutchinson Utilities. The plant is a
low-pressure reverse osmosis (RO.) plant also known as membrane softening.
Recent upgrades to the facility have increased its overall rated capacity from 238,000 gpd
to 288,000 gpd maximum daily flow (MDF). This total includes 160 gpm permeate
(treated water) + 40 gpm raw water blend equal to 200 gpm total or 288,000 gpd (gallon
per day).
,.
Raw water is supplied to the plant from the Surficial Aquifer wells. The water is softened
by a single membrane skid unit consisting of seven vessels each equipped with six 8-inch
elements for a total of 42 elements and a total capacity of approximately 0.230 mgd
(permeate). Acid feed pumps and antiscalant pumps are included' for cleaning and
backwashing of the membranes. The membrane is a three stage, single pass, spiral
wound thin film composite material with feed pressure of about 150 psi. Reject water is
disposed of at the wastewater treatment facility.
The main process building housing the reverse osmosis unit is sized and piped to
accommodate one additional RO. skid. Additional raw water wells, pretreatment, post
treatment and storage facilities would be required for plant capacity expansion.
Review of monthly operating reports and disctf3sions with staff responsible for the daily
operations indicates that the maximum daily flow is approximately 0.177 mgd.
C. Water System Recommendations
Site visits and observations have been made at ~e Holiday Pines water treatment facility.
Generally, facilities and equipment were found ,to be in good condition. The main
process building has adequate space to accommòdate a second RO. skid unit. The
treatment plant site has adequate room for addition~ wells and storage facilities.
TABLE 1- Summary of Water Treatment Facility Upgrade Recommendations
··.""/L¡.·'j;J¡:If}t.êiI~"t:Y;JIpgí;i?J.~~.RecºIÍ:llI1endaµoÌ1s·L·L .... .;;;.......~. .. ¡::c,:Ç.~pit~~9~t;i:'.
.",,, .. ..... T··:.:.;':
1 Repair of the 78,500 gallon ground storage tank $29,000
2. Repair of the cascade aerator $3,000
Total $32,000
The preceding immediate upgrades are recommended to bring the water system into
conformance with generally accepted minimum standards. More extensive upgrades and
modifications are recommended to improve the water system reliability. These
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. Inc.
P:197-0494BIWlEngineering Report OOt.doc
..,
.)
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
/'> NEW WELL NO.3
v (FUTURE)
,r
NEW WELL NO.2
()"
"
"
"
"
"
BLOWOFF I DRAIN
,
~
'-'
APPROXIMATE ROUTE OF 4- PVC
BRINE REJECT TO EFFLUENT
DISTRIBUTION BOX AT EXIST .
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ~ J'. .
FIELD LOCATE "vI I·-
/
/
/-
GROUND STORAGE TANK /
/
/
/
BRINE HOLDING TANK
& CASCADE AERATOR /'
/'
/'
/'
(
I 12- EQUALIZER LlNE-
I WELL NO.1
I (ABANDONED)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'ð Å8ANDONED
WELL
- --
Holiday
-
Undahl, Brownl.,.,
" Hellstrom, In::. .
-. ~......
.. ..... ..,.......na
---
PP WI MOUNTED
TRANSFORMERS
ORIGINAL R.O. SKID UNIT
UNIT ABANDONED &
FOUNDATION PAD ABANDONED
ORIGINAL METER .fLUSH
TO GRACE - NOT USED
HIGH SERVICE PUMP
M-3 FIRE PUMP
\
\
\
\
\
\
TREATMENT PROCESS BUILDING
HOUSES RO UNIT, CHEMICAL INJ,
GENERATOR SET, & AUTOMATIC
SWITCHING
FENCE &
PROPERTY LINE
Site layout
Pines Water Treatment Facility
ST. LUCIE COUNTY UTILITIES
HOLIDAY PINES FIGURE 3
ENGINEERING REPORT
-
'-'
'-'
,..,..-
,..,..
recommendations are to be included in a capital improvement and repair and replacement
program to be implemented over the next five years. Costs are included for rehabilitation
and repair needs for most treatment plant equipment items. The five year program along
with immediate repair needs are summarized as follows:
Suìnmary of Water Treatment Facility U p~rade Costs
Year
Annual Cost
1999
$32,000
2000
$19,300
2001
$17,100
2002
$3,700
2003
$6,500
2004
$11,200
D. Supply
r
The Holiday Pines raw water wells are located on the water treatment plant site shown in
Figure 3. The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) pennit includes a
maximum annual aquifer allocation not to exceed 153 million gallons (Mgal) and a
maximum daily allocation not to exceed 0.58 million gallons. The SFWMD permit was
issued for withdrawals from the surficial aquifer. The permit stated that the total rated
capacity of the production wells is 400 gallons per minute (gpm), with a daily capacity of
0.58 mgd, a monthly capacity of 17.9 Mgal and an annual capacity of 210 Mgal. The
annual rated capacity of the pumps exceeds the maximum annual allocation from the
surficial aquifer. ',;. , '
E. Distribution
Verification of the transmission/distribution syJfem included review of system maps and
record drawings and discussions of existing facilities with Hutchinson Utilities and
Holiday Pines Service Corporation staff. The Holiday Pines water distribution system is
comprised of nearly 50,000 lineal feet of water mains 2 to 8-inches in diameter, most of
which is PVC piping. Design plans specified concrete thrust blocks for bends, tees, and .
other appurtenances without mechanical restraining devices.
Services and water meters range from 5/8-inch to' ç-inches in size. The number of water
equivalent dwelling units (EDU's) is approximately 1,038.
Testing of system fire hydrants indicated that with hydrants in the full-open position the
system can deliver water at a rate of 670 to 750 gpm at or near 20 psi pressure.
A leaking water main was noted at Indrio Shopping Center near Lift Station #6.
Generally, the quantity of fire hydrants in the Holiday Pines subdivision is less than
recommended for modem communities. The water distribution system was designed as a
subdivision type system and, as such, did not ,require unnecessary oversizing of pipelines,
or redundant looping. However, the system is configured to support the expansion of the
system beyond its current configuration. It is also recommended that new fire hydrants
SLCU 03/99
LBFH, Inc.
P:197-0494BIW\Engineering Report 00 I.doc
4
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
-
'-'
.....,
'"'":--
,..,...
be added to the water distribution system and additional looping be provided when the
system expands beyond current permitted capacities. The distribution system can be
easily modified to include fire hydrants at specified interavals.
III. WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM
A. General
The Holiday Pines wastewater system currently serves approximately 740 customers or a
population of approximately 1,400. The collection system is comprised of gravity
sewers, manholes, and pumping stations for the collection and conveyance of raw
wastewater to the Holiday Pines wastewater treatment facility, (HPWWTF) located in the
northeast portion of the Holiday Pines development, see Figure 1.
B. Collectionffransmission
r
The wastewater collection and pumping system for the Holiday Pines Subdivision was
designed as a typical gravity sewer, manhole and pumping station network. Review of
design plans indicates that the system includes approximately 30,330 lineal feet of PVC
gravity sewer pipe and 12,400 feet ofPVC force main. gravity sewers were designed to-
be not less than 8-inches in diameter and placed on slopès of not less than 0.40%. Force
mains appear to be not less than 4 inches in diameter.
C. Wastewater Lift Stations
'.
Wastewater pumping stations for the Holiday Pines subdivision Phases II, IIA, III and
Sections 1 through 7 appear to be based on Flygt pumping station standards. Wetwells
were designed to be six to eight feet in diameter. Pump and valve vault access covers -
were designed to be aluminum.
Guide rails were generally specified to be stainles~ steel. Discharge piping was specified
to be flanged galvanized steel. Drains from the và1ve box to the wet well were typically
shown without a goose neck trap. Field observa~ons generally confirmed that the lift
stations as field installed are similar to design plans.
Common features observed at most lift stations during the inspections include the
following:
· Stainless steel control panel. Note, scorch marks and other signs of overloading were
not seen inside any of the panels.
· Stainless steel guide rails inside the pump pits.
· Electrical conduits sealed against H2S intrusion. Exceptions include lift station's 4
and 5.
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. Inc.
P:191-0494BIW\Engin...ring Report OOl.doc
5
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
'-"
...",;
,.,...
· Generator receptacle and audio/visual alarms on outside panel.
· Aluminum pump pit and valve vaults access covers. Note access hatches did not
appear to be traffic load bearing type covers.
· Ductile or cast iron type check and plug valves in valve vaults.
· Float type ~witches.
· Water service. Most stations have RPZ backflow preventers. Those stations that do
not include lift station's 3 and 4.
· Florida Power and Light electrical meters.
· Pre-cast pump pit and valve vaults.
· A secure fence surrounds Lake Park Elementary lift station.
· An auto dialer is provided the master lift station located adjacent to the HPWWTF.
D. Lift Station Recommendations
,~
Site visits and observations were made at each lift station site. Most stations require
replacement of control panels and control equipment. Overhauling of the submersible
pumping units is also recommended. Other miscellaneous problems that vary with each
station include broken hatch covers and root intrusion. Lift Station #6 and Indrio
Crossing shopping center appeared to have the most significant problems requiring
immediate replacement of the control panel and pump~g units. Costs for immediate.
replacement of Lift Station #6 control panel, pumps ând controls is estimated to be
$12,000.
Other station upgrades and modifications are included in a five year capital improvement
plan. The list of five year improvements is sttuctured to improve the collection system
reliability and perfonnance. Five year capital improvement recommendations include
replacement of all lift station control panels with new, stainless steel, NEMA 4 rated
enclosures and equipment. Five year repair and replacement items include overhaul of
pumps at each station. The capital improvement and repair and replacement program is to .
be implemented over the next five years. Costs for the five year program, along with Lift
Station #6 immediate repair needs, are summariz,ed as follows:
Summary of Wastewater Lift Station System UD!!1"ade Costs
Year
Annual Cost
Immediate
1999
$12,000
2000
$4,000
2001
$17,000
Five Year
2002
$26,000
2003
$15,000
2004
$12,000
IV. WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
A. General
The Holiday Pines Wastewater Treatment Facility is a 0.21-mgd McNeil cast-in-place
concrete type plant that operates as an extended aeration facility. Effluent disposal is via
SLCU 03199
LBFH. Inc.
P:197-0494BIWIEngineering Report OOl.doc
6
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
- -
\wi
'-'
percolation ponds. Sludge is sent to a sludge holding tank from which a portion is
returned (RAS) to the aeration basin and the remaipder wasted, (WAS).
The Holiday Pines WWTF layout is presented in Figures 4 and 5. Design plans show
that the plant was originally intended to be operated in a contact stabilization mode,
including procèss path of aeration, sedimentation and re-aeration. However, with the
rectangular clarifier out of service, the as-built facility is able to operate only in a plug
flow, extended aeration mode.
B. Treatment Facilities
The following is a summary of process facilities at the Holiday Pines wastewater
treatment facility:
1. Aeration Basin 1: One 141,000 gallon rectangular tank with a single floating type
I5-horsepower (hp) surface aerator. The basin receives raw. sewage from the
master lift station and return activated sludge.
,~
2. Aeration Basin 2: One 69,000 gallon rectangular tank with a single 15 hp floating
type surface aerator. A single submersible pump is located in the tank to pump
mixed liqueur to the clarifier through a flow splitter box. ..
3. Flow splitter box: One aluminum box that bypasses a percentage of flow from
Aeration Basin 2 to the new circular clarifier. The purpose of the box is to pass a
constant rate of flow to the clarifier at all times. 'The box receives flow from the
mixed liquor pump in Aeration Basin 2.',
4. Original Clarifier Unit: The original clarifier is a cast in place rectangular unit
with a volume of 39,400 gallons, surface area of 520 square feet, and a weir
length of 33 feet. Return activated sludge and sludge wasting is provided by a .
sludge/air eduction system. This clarifier has been out of service since year 1996.
5. New Clarifier Unit: The new clarifier unit, is a circular steel tank fabricated by
Davco. The clarifier has a volume capacity of 23,502 gallons, a surface area of
314 square feet and a weir length of59.7 feet as per 1 996-permit application. The
permitted surface loading rate (SLR) for this unit is 669 gallons per day per
square foot. Sludge is returned (RAS) to Aeration Basin #1 and to the Aerobic
Digester (WAS) via air eduction
6. The Chlorine Contact Tank: The chlorine contact tank is one of the original cast
in place concrete structures with a volume of 9,550 gallons. Disinfection is
provided by gas chlorination utilizing recycled effluent as the vehicle water.
Flow is measured by a V -notch weir and flow recorder/totalizer located in the
downstream end of the chlorine contact tank.
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. Inc.
P:\97 -04948\ W\Engineering Report 00 I.doc
7
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
-- -
-....I
LAKEWOOD PARK
SUB-DIVISION
HOUDAY PINES GOLF COURSE
AND SUB-DIVISION
Site Layout
Holiday Pines Wastewater Treatment Facility
_ ST. LUCIE COUNTY UTILITIES
Undahl, BnMnIn¡. ~ H 0 LI 0 A Y PIN E S FIG U R E 4.
1& Hellstrom, Ire. .
~.- ENGINEERING REPORT
- - --
....."
/ '-"
/
/
-<--- PERCOLATION
/ ~OND (GROUP 1)
/
/
/
/
/
/
,.~ .
6" INFLUENT
CHLORINE
CONTACT
BASIN
"-
"-
"-
"-
"-
C?y~
CHLORINE /
FEED
r
¡"
ABOVE GROUND
: : TRANSFER PI~~NC;
II
))
//
METER PANEL & .
MAIN DISCONNECT SWITCH ii
/ ......
/ ...::::>..
a... U/
.'. ,"
. . . .
...::.... ...:':."
.' /
80 e :," owing from the files of Culpepper & T~p' i%lnc.
F acilify Layout
Wastewater Treatment
ST. LUCIE COUNTY UTILITIES
HOLIDAY PINES
ENGINEERING REPORT
Treatment
Holiday Pines
IL'Þ
Undahl, Brownl.",
& HellstrOm, In:. .
-. ~.......
.... .... -.IIOI.~
---
SCALE
1" = 20'
SECURITY
FENCE ~ 0
---
/~ ~-'
GOLF COURSE
Fa c i I i ty
FIGURE 5
'-"'
.....,
,.,..
..,..-
7. Chlorine Gas Feed System: Chlorine is provided by a gas feed system utilizing a
gas chlorinator system by Regal. Chlorine gas is stored in 150 pound cylinders.
8. Aerobic Digesters: Waste sludge is stored and aerated in the aerobic digestion
tank located adjacent to Aeratio.{l Basin.2. The digestion tank is divided into
several-connected compartments with a total volume of 18,800 gallons. Coarse
bubble aeration is provided by two 12 hp blowers located in the generatorlblower
shed.
9. Percolation Ponds (Rapid Infiltration Basins): Effluent disposal is via two groups
of percolation ponds. Group one consists of three separate ponds with a total area
of 95,900 square feet. Group two consists of four ponds with a total area of
70,600 square feet. Operators indicated that normally group two ponds are used
for effluent disposal.
10. Main Power Feed: Power is supplied to the facility by Florida Power and Light.
Power feed enters from the northwest side (Kings Highway) of the site by
overhead power cables. Power step down is provided by two pole mounted
transformers located near the generatorlblower shed.
,~
11. GeneratorlBlower Shed: The emergency power generator and blower equipment
is housed in a protective plywood shed located oIl·the southwest side of Aeration-
Basin 2. ".
12. Generator Equipment: Onsite power generation facilities consist of one Onan
propane fueled 84 kilowatt (kW) 3 phase, 60 Hz generator. Propane is stored in
two 120 gallon, UndemTÌter Laboratori~3 (UL) rated above ground tanks adjacent
to Aeration Basin 2 and the GeneratorlBlower shed.
13. Blower Equipment: Blower equipment includes two twelve-horsepower rotary
positive displacement blowers. Both blowers were observed to be operable. The.
blowers are belt driven.
14. Monitoring Wells: The site and vicinity includes a total of eleven monitoring
wells. Only four of the monitoring wells àre operational. All of the other wells
appear to be filled with sand or grout. Based on a rectangular site layout one
operable well is available along each side.
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. Inc.
P:\97-0494B\W\Engineering Report OOl.doc
8
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
'-'"
.....,
,.,...
,..,..
C. Wastewater Characteristics
Typical year 1998 influent and effluent flow characteristics are summarized as follows:
Average Annual Influent Characteristics
Flow (gpd) 111,000
TSS (mg/L) 137
BOD (mg/L) 190
A verage Annual Effluent Characteristics
TSS (mg/L) 10.5
BOD (mg/L) 11.0
Residual Chlorine (mg/L) 3.0
D. Inflow and Infiltration Analysis
,r
Estimates of inflow and infiltration have been made by comparing reported wastewater
treatment facility flow to water treatment facility flow on a per-inch diameter of sewer
pipe per mile basis. Average IJI flows for Holiday Pines are 479 gpd/inch-mile. Typical
allowable inflow and infiltration rates nationwide, since the 1980' s, are reported to range
from 100 to 250 gpd/inch-mile, Collection System R?habilitation and O&M, Water·
Environment Federation, Conjèrence Proceedings, July /997.
A second method for estimating the magnitude of III is comparison of gallons per day of
plant per EDU to local and typical national values. Typical average unit flow for Holiday
Pines is 138 gpdÆDU. Typical unit flowvalue~'reported elsewhere in the nation in areas
with known excessive III problems range from 366 to 536 gpdÆDU, based on average
daily flows, Collection System Rehabilitation and O&M, Water Environment Federation,
Conference Proceedings, July 1997. The United States Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) suggests 120 gallons per capita per day as an approximate upper limit. .
The Holiday Pines unit flow values are similar t~ USEP A recommended maximum limits
and less than national values where III is known to be a problem. Based on the preceding
analyses it appears likely that Holiday Pines does have some inflow and infiltration flow
into its collection system but that the III flow probleµ¡ is likely not severe.
E. Wastewater Treatment Facilities Recommendations
Site visits to the Holiday Pines Wastewater Treatment Facility were made for the purpose
of observing the working condition of the existing equipment. Based on field
observations the following immediate facility upgrades are recommended:
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. inc.
P:197-0494BIW\Engineering Report 00 Ldoc
9
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
- ~ ............-
'-'
~
,."...
,..,..
TABLE 2 - Summary of Immediate Upgrade Recommendations and Costs
. Cost
1. $17,400
2. $21,000
'" $47,000
.J.
4. $8,000
5. $10,900
6. $29,000
7. $10,100
8. $13,000
Total $156,400
The preceding immediate upgrades are recommended to bring wastewater treatment
facilities into conformance with generally accepted minimum standards. More extensive
upgrades and modifications are recommended to improve the plant reliability and
performance. These recommendations are to be included in a five year capital
improvement and repair and replacement program to be implemented over the next five
years. Costs for the five year program along with- immediate repair needs' 'are
summarized as follows: .~
r
Year
Annual Cost
Summary of Wastewater Treatment Facility UD2:rade Costs
Immediate F'ivp. YPn7
1999 2000 2001'. 2002
$156,400 $36,400 $38,700 $48,800
2003
$43,900
F. Effluent Disposal Options
2004
$52,000
The Holiday Pines WWTF permit is up for renewal in March year 2000. Conversations
with FDEP permitting staff indicate that changes in the permit requirements are not
anticipated by FDEP at this time. Alternative fohns of effluent disposal such as deep
well injection and land application are not demandeq by FDEP and are not recommended
in this report.
The percolation ponds appear to be of adequate size for effluent disposal. However, a
mounding analysis is recommended to verify the disposal capacity of the pond system.
Upgrade of the plant to effluent disposal by deep well injection is not recommended at
this time. Deep well injection will cost over two and one-half million dollars to install
and would not be cost efficient for a plant oftþis size,
Land spray irrigation of treated effluent is not recommended for immediate upgrades.
Land application of effluent requires treatment to FDEP standards for high level
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. Inc.
P:\97-0494B\W\Ensineering Report 00 I. doc:
10
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
- ~
--
'-'"
..,..-
,......
..."
disinfection. This requires addition of filtration units and a system for automatic
rejection of effluent that violates standards for solids, turbidity or chlorine residual. The
present treatment plant site is occupied by treatment plant facilities therefor pumping
offsite would be necessary. Additional piping and pumping facilities would also be
needed.
v. DOCUMENT REVIEW
The documents available for review by the engineer consisted of the following:
· Record documents available from the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation (FDEP), i.e. water and wastewater pennits, monthly operating reports,
correspondance memoranda and notes between FDEP and owners/operators of the
Holiday Pines system, drawings and plans submitted for regulatory permitting
· Permits issued by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)
· St. Lucie County property and tax records
The Holiday Pines subdivision was designed and permitted with niost water utilities
located in the roadway rights-or-way. Discussions with staff of the St. Lucie County
Property Acquisition Division indicated that roadway rights-of-way have been dedicated
to St. Lucie County. The following is a summary of properties with utility crossings and
the. status of utility easements that were requested for r~view during the Due Diligence,
reVIew process:
,.
, r'"
, .
TABLE 3 - Summary of Water Utility Easements and Rights of Way
"
¥roperty '.
'"<:":'
. Typ¢ofI!tWo/
, ......'...........<,f,.,,,i......,..·'...·..·
Water Mains & WTF
Water Main
6-Inch Water Main
8-Inch Water Main
;..,.-
Holiday Pines Subdivision
Indian Pines Village
Heatherway Apartments
InOOo Crossing Shopping Center
(FPFWCD, SLC)
Indrio Convenience Store (Lot No.'s
Berlin, Barnett, FPFWCD)
Harbor Federal Bank
Riverside National Bank
Lakewood Park Elementary
Golf Lake Villas (Holiday Pines)
Paradise Pines Mobile G.S. (Lot No.'s
348,347)
Lakewood Park Library
Lakewood Park Fire Station
Holiday Pines G.C. (Club House)
Lot No.'s 478
Lot No.'s 556,557
FPFWCD Canal No.4
FPFWCD Canal No.3
Canal In Front to Water Treatment Plant
South of Holiday Pines Subdivision
8-Inch Water Main
8-Inch Water Main
8- Inch Watèr Main
8-Inch Water Main
2 & I-Inch Water Main
2-Inch Water Main
Water Main
Water main
4-Inch Brine Reject
4-Inch Brine Reject
4-Inch Water Main
8-Inch Water Mains
8- Inch Water Main
8- Inch Water Mains &
4-Inch Brine Reject
J!Fi~rM
Public
Private
Private
Private &
Public
Private &
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public &
Private
Public
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
'Easement-
, ::;"fli)¡,"" ',"
"'<._,.-
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
SLCU 03/99
LBFH, Inc.
P:\91-0494B\ WlEngineering Report 00 I ,doc
11
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
~ --
'-"
.....,
.'~ .
,'~ .
(1) Easement or permit providedfor review.
Documentation confrrming that easements have been properly obtained for the facilities
listed in Table 3 has not been established. Owners of the Holiday Pines system have
assured that that legal documentation is available and it is strongly recommended that
such documentation is verified prior to cÌosing if the system is acquired.
The following is a summary of properties with utility crossings and the status of utility
easements that were requested for review during the Due Diligence review process:
TABLE 4 - Summary of Wastewater Utility Easements and Rights of Way
Sewers, Force Mains &
WWTF
Indian Pines Village 8-Inch San. Sewer, Lift Private No
Station & Force Main
Heatherway Apartments (4-Inch Main 8-Inch San. Sewer, Lift Private . No
located in Drain. Easement) Station & Force Main
,- Indrio Crossing Shopping Center 8-Inch San. Sewer, Lift Private & No
(FPFWCD, SLC) Station & Force Main Public
Harbor Federal Bank 8-Inch San. Sewer Private No
Lakewood Park Elementary 8-Inch San. Sewer &'4 Private No
Inch Force Main
Golf Lake Villas (Holiday Pines) 6-Inch San. Sewer Private No
Lakewood Park Library 8-Inch San. Sewer Public No
Lakewood Park Fire Station 8-Inch San. Sewer Public No
Holiday Pines G.C. (Club House) 4-Inch BI¡.ne Reject Private No
Lot No.'s 478 4-Inch Brine Reject Private No
Lot No.'s 556, 557 4- Inch Water Main Private No
FPFWCD Canal No.4 4-Inch Force Mains Private
FPFWCD Canal No.3 4-Inch Water Main Private No
Canal In Front to Water Treatment Plant 4-Inch Brine Reject Private No
South of Holiday Pines Subdivision
(1) Easement or permit providedfor review
Review of St. Lucie County plat maps and tax records indicated that the lift stations are
located on property's under a variety of ownership including:
· Holiday Pines Service Corporation, Tampa, Florida: Holiday Pines WWTF
· Holiday Pines, Inc., Tampa, Florida: Lift stations
· Fairway Golf Club of Purchase New York: Lift Station #1 at Suson & Indian Bend
It is recommended that easement information be reviewed for all lift stations as
applicable.
Permits are required for utilities crossing canal rights-of-way owned by the Fort Pierce
Farms Water Management District and subdivision drainage easements. Easements are
SLCU 03/99
LBFH, Inc.
P:\97.0494BIW\EngineffÌng Report 00 I.doc
12
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
~ --
- -
'-"
.....,
..~..
........
also required for utilities crossing private properties. To date, easement documentation
has not been provided.
VI. ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIO~S
A. General
Evaluation of the Holiday Pines water and wastewater system has been conducted to
determine the value of the system assets and to assist SLC in the detennination of a basis
for negotiations for acquisition of the utility. The following is a summary of immediate
improvements and improvements to take place over the next five years. .
B. Summary and Recommendations
,r
Detailed inspections of the Holiday Pines water and sewer utilities indicates that the
system is in varied condition. The Holiday Pines system is located in north central St.
Lucie County and is strategically located to serve as an excellent base for expansion of
water and sewer services in that part of the county. Adjacent communities such as
Lakewood Park potentially could add several thousand new water and sewer customers.
The water treatment plant has undergone recent upgrades. and is in fair to good condition..
The limiting capacity component of the WTF is the reverse osmosis skid unit. Water
,facility components requiring immediate upgrade are the cascade aerator on Brine Tank
l, and repair of the 78,500 gallon above ground clear well. Costs for immediate upgrade
of the water treatment facilities is $32,000. Adequate room is provided in the main
process building for an additional R.O. skid umt. Sufficient space is available on site to
accommodate new supply, storage and treatment equipment for a minor expansion.
The wastewater plant is in fair to poor condition. Recent upgrades have included the
addition of a new circular clarifier and a mixed liquor transfer pumping system. The lift .
station system requires extensive rehabilitation and upgrade of panels and pumping
equipment. Opinioned costs for immediate upgrades includes $12,000 for the collection
system and $156,400 for the treatment facility. Sufficient space exists on-sit to
accommodate a minor facility expansion. '
Total costs for immediate upgrades is opinioned to be $200,400, which includes water
and wastewater system upgrades. A summary of immediate upgrades is as follows:
SLCU 03/99
LEFf! Inc.
P:\97-0494BIW\Engineering Report OOLdoc
13
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
-- --
'-'^
......,
TABLE 5 - Summary of Water and Wastewater Immediate Upgrade Needs
Subtotal
$17,400
$21,000
$47,000
$8,000
$10,900
$29,000
$10,100
$13,000
$156,400
2. Hand Rail Rep.lacement
3. Security Fence Replacement
4. Rectangular Clarifier Rehabilitation
5. Influent Pipe Replacement
6. Chlorination Facility Replacement
7. Percolation Pond Rehabilitation
8. Facility Electrical Conduit & Wiring Rehabilitation
9. Permit Renewal
Subtotal
$29,000
$3,000
$32,000
10. Markoff Tank Rehabilitation
11. Cascade Aerators Rehabilitation
Total
$200,400
r
.:.;,
'.
SLCU 03/99
LBFH. Inc.
P:\97-0494B\W\Engineering Report 00 1. doc
14
Engineering Report
Holiday Pines Water And Wastewater Systems
"".,
~
-
..
~
AGENDA REQUEST
'-"
ITEM NO.
5ß
.
DATE: 04/20/99
CONSENT
REGULAR
PUBLIC HEARING [ X ]
Leg. [] Quasi -Jud. [X]
<' . \ PRESENTED BY:
........,..
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY:
SUBJECT:
BACKGROUND:
FUNDS AVAILABIÆ:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
'RECOMMENDATION:
COMMISSION ACTION:
.¡
]
APPROVED
OTHER:
County Attorney:
0V
Community Development
Co i ty D elopment Director
Request for Rezoning of property~loca ed on the north
side of Delaware Avenue, approximately¡ 500 feet east of
Hartman Road from the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family -
3 du/acre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional)
Zoning District - Draft Resolution 99-010
Petition of Father Michael Sajda for a Change in Zoning
from the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family 3 - 1 du/acre)
Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District.
The stated purpose of the rezoning is to allow ballfields
for John Carroll High School. (File No.: RZ-99-005)
N/A
The Planning and Zoning Commission, by a vote of 8 toO
with 1 member absent (Mr. Merritt), recommended approval
of the rezoning at its March 18, 1999, meeting. On April
6, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners continued the
public hearing on this item to the April 20, 1999, Board
of County Commissioners meeting.
Approve Draft Resolution 99-010 changing the zoning from
the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) Zoning
District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District for
property located on the north side of Delaware Avenue,
approximately 500 feet east of Hartman Road.
DENIED
D ug as M. Anderson
County Administrator
Review and Approvals
Management & Budget:
Other:
Purchasing:
Other:
originating Department:
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)
~
-...,,¡
COUNTY .cOMMISSION REVIEW: April 20, 1999
Resolution 99-010
MEMORANDUM
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
To:
Board of County Commissioners
Community Development Director
April 14, 1999
Petition of Father Michael Sajda, for a Change in Zoning from the RS-3
(Residential, Single-Family - 3 dulacre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning
District. (File No.: RZ-99-005)
From:
Date:
Subject:
The proposed rezoning of property located on the north side of Delaware Avenue, approximately 500
feet east of Hartman Road from the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 dulacre) Zoning District
to the I (Institutional) Zoning District. The stated purpose of the rezoning is to allow for soccer and
softball fields for John Carroll High School.
At the March 18, 1999, public hearing on this matter, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 8 to 0 with one member absent, recommended approval of this petition
as set forth in Draft Resolution 99-010. At the April 6, 1999, public hearing on this petition this
Board heard testimony from an adjacent property owner, Mr. Terry Cooper about his concerns with
the rezoning of the subject property to Institutional. His main concern was the potential decrease
in the value of his property. The Board continued the public hearing to the April 20, 1999, Board
of County Commissioners meeting and directed the applicant and Mr. Cooper to work out a solution
to their problems.
This proposed rezoning meets the standards of review as set forth in Section- 11.06.03 of the St.
Lucie County Land Development Code, and is not in conflict with the goals, objectives, and policies
ofthe St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
Staff recommends the approval of this petition for a change in zoning from the RS-3- (Residential-
Single-Family - 3 dulacre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) as set forth in Draft Resolution 99-
010.
SUBMITTED:
hf
cc: Father Michael Sajda
Terry Cooper
File
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
~
.....,,¡
RESOLUTION 99-010
FILE NO.: RZ-99~05
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM
THE RS-3 (RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY - 3 DU/ACRE) ZONING
DISTRICT TO THE I (INSTITUTIONAL) ZONING DISTRICT OF
CERTAIN PROPERTY IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made
the following determinations:
1. Father Michael Sajda presented a petition for a change in zoning from the RS-3 (Residential,
Single-Family - 3 du/acre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District for the
property described below.
2. On March 18, 1999, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public
hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 10 days prior to the hearing and
notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property, and
recommended that the Board of County Commissioners approve the hereafter described
request for a change in zoning from the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) Zoning
District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District for the property described below.
3. On April 6, 1999, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at
least 10 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet
of the subject property. That public hearing was continued to the April 20, 1999, Board of
County Commissioners meeting.
4. On April 20, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners continued the public hearing.
5. The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the
St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and has satisfied the requirements of Section 11.06.03
of the St. Lucie County Land Development CQde.
6. The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the existing ànd proposed u~e of property
in the surrounding area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St.
Lucie County, Florida:
A. The proposed change in the Zoning District Classification for that property described
as follows:
COOPER'S SUBDMSIONyLOTS 4 AND 5. (Tax ID#'s: 2408-706-0004-000/3 and 2408-706-
0005-000/0).
File No.: RZ-99-005
April 20. 1999
Resolution 99-0 I 0
Page I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
'-'
~
CONTAINING 3.67 ACRES.
(Location:
North side of Delaware Avenue, approximately 500 feet east of Hartman
Road.)
owned by The Arch Diocese of Palm Beach, is hereby changed from the RS-3
(Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning
District.
B. The St. Lucie County Community Development Director is hereby authorized and
directed to cause the change to be made on the Official Zoning Map of St. Lucie
County, Florida, and to make notation of reference to the date of adoption of this
resolution.
After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows:
Chairman Paula A. Lewis
xxx
XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
Vice-Chairman John D. Bruhn
Commissioner Frances Hutchinson
Commissioner Doug Coward
Commissioner Cliff Barnes
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED This 20th Day of April 1999.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
Chairman
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
Deputy Clerk
County Attorney
hf
H:\ WP\RESOLUTI.N\FINISHED.99\Sajda.RZ\SajdaRES.wpd
File No.: RZ-99-005
April 20, 1999
Resolution 99-010
Page 2
~ ~
a:s
"'Q
---.
a:s
en ~
Q) 0
a:s 0
..c I
0 m
.- m "
~ ~
N C-
o
'- a: \ C-
O) '\
..c "
~
a:s
lL
~z
.,
E
~ "
t::
" .,
[r~
.2 t::
" 0
~ ::
C> E
>. ...
~ 0
ï: è
;:>-
E u
E:ë
o '"
U '"
...
b )
o
"
t:>
~
~
~'
·
,
o
·
."
·
"
·
~
"-
"-
·
'"
d
:?
w
'" ,,-,
.., ...,
0o...
a: a:
~
::> ~
0
Ü ::>
0
00'" 3M' 3'JN'f1t Ü
a: ~
~ ~
... ~ ~
~, z
ã: ~
~, u Z
L, ~
W ~: ~
'" :;;: ~ '"
..., ...,
i: ~ o\'t>o NOJ.lYn -
OYOM ODNS a:
a: g;
~ <n,
0 tZ·' ''t'N1')
C 0
~
-J
> ~
~
W
.- ! .-
.., ""
a: a:
A.LNno~
s þ£
S S£
3380H~33>10
Y'
Father Michael Sajda
.- t:oning
I
r
I]]]~ "
- r-
CG C( ~
"\ . -oJ êf.
c u
s -.J
tJ ~
"'0 ~ þ-3 I....-~ antic Ave
lB. 0 fì' ..c
0 -oJ tÇ
3: <.0
Q) I") rr
~ .
(f) (f.
7 ~
I
City of
I Ft. Pierce
"'0 %/
0 I S ~~
0
0:: -
z ij;~ I
,,'\ ss Delaware Ave
~ s ,....'"'\
Q) sz c ' \
,-.......-.
r", > 0
. \ \.. - E
I 0 St -oJ
ì ~, ~-3 \.. r-, RS-3
...' JOn, 0 ''''_J I z S2
I -
"'0 L..--....:. Menendez Ave
0 zgD ~ "'0 I
0 I
3: ,3 0 , I~
,
-----...... Q) ,. 0 I
(f) 0::
I 0 I
z 0:: -oJ
rI Z :J Ii I
1---- 0 !
0.... wood .D
Ln lI& S 0:: f onlonedo
~ Ave
I . I ( I I
Orange
J ~S-4
Ave
/~
/;-1
o
RZ 99-004
Community Development f
Geographic Information Systems
Map revised January 25. 1999
_ rnoø-.... boon """1"od Io<gonofOIp&onnr.g ond ..._ _ "'"Y.
WhIle .-y eftort hM bMn mIde to pIO¥Ide IN moct Q.II'Nint and KiCIIØIe N
ntonnadon poabIe.. II fIO( InIerded br UN .. . I8g8Iy bhdIng doamefC.
--
y
Father Michael Sajda
Land Use
I
- r-
eaM
"\ . eo~ ~ +J :ñ
c ()
S --'
10 -
'U _~ antic Ave
IS! " 0 1:5
0 , +J
:¡: to I~
( ) I"")
~ .
(f) 1(11
T RU ~
Pk
~ City of
Ft. Pierce
'U , %~
0 J
0
a:::: ~~ -
t
I. f
~ SJ Delaware Ave P¡Ç:J
fC S ,-~"\
( ) JZ C ' \
,.........-.
,.'-', .~ 0
1 , "- E
0 Sf +J
; ; "- r-,
.",' , 0 RU ,
I ... . t J2
, RU I '_J
I :J() v--.
· -
I ----
i 'U tfll) ~endez Ave
i 0 I
· 0
I 'U I
· :¡: ,3 0 ,
I I~
, ( )
------- 16 0
U) a:::: I
, 0 I
t a:::: +J
t7 t :J , I
---- 0 I
o..,wood :9
Ln lIS S F'ontonedo
U:I a:::: Ave
I " I ( I I
Orange
J lRH
Ave
//11
o
ITJ~ "
RZ 99-004
Community Development f
Geographic Information Systems
Map revised January 25. 1999
"'" mop '- boon __ 'aq e...oIpIamk>g end _ _ criy,
White ~ eftort hu been nwie to pItMde IN moll curtnI and -=anile N
nfonnation pou.bIe, It Is no( ~ b OM .. . Ieg8Iy bi1dW1g ctocurnert.
~
~
PUBLIC HEARING
FATHER MICHAEL SAJDA
FILE NO. RZ-99-004
Chairman McCurdy explained the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing procedures.
Mr. Hank Flores presented staff comments.
Mr. Flores stated that he was presenting the petition of Father Michael Sajda for a Change in Zoning
from the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 dulacre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning
District for 3.67 acres ofland located on the North side of Delaware Avenue, approximately 500 feet
east of Hartman Road.
Mr. Flores stated that the purpose of the rezoning is to allow the property to be used for ballfields
for John Carroll High School.
Mr. Flores stated that the surrounding zoning to the subject property is RS-3 (Residential, Single-
Family - 3 dulacre) to the north, south, east, and west. CG (Commercial, General) to the northeast.
I (Institutional) to the east.
Mr. Flores stated that staff has reviewed this petition and determined that it confonns with the
standards of review as set forth in the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is not in
conflict with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff is, therefore, recommending that you
fOlWard this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval.
Chairman McCurdy asked if there were any questions for Mr. Flores.
Chainnan McCurdy asked if the applicant was present and would like to address the Board.
At this time, Chainnan McCurdy opened the public hearing.
Chainnan McCurdy asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in favor of or in opposition -
to this petition.
Mr. Teny Cooper, 3912 Delaware Avenue, Fort Pierce, addressed the Board. Mr. Cooper stated that
he owns Lot 3 and that he will be surrounded on several sides by ballfields. Mr. Cooper stated that
in lieu of the fact that no one is here tonight from John Carroll High School, he would request that
this hearing be continued until such time that he can hear what they propose.
Mr. Kelly stated that this petition would have been heard by the County Commission on March 16th,
however that meeting has been canceled. This petition has been rescheduled for the April 6th Board
of County Commission meeting.
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
February 25, 1999
Page 3
'-'
~
Mr. Kelly stated that if the Board would like to continue this hearing to the March 18th Planning and
Zoning meeting it could still be heard by the County Commission in exactly the same· time ttame. -
The applicant would not be penalized in any way, staff does not know why the applicant is nothere
and this may provide an opportunity for a fairer hearing without penalty to the applicant since they
are already being pushed back.
Chairman McCurdy asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak in favor of or in
opposition to this petition.
Ms. Judy Dennison, 195 Hartman Road, Fort Pierce, addressed the Board. Ms. Dennison asked staff
if another zoning district would allow John Carroll High School to have the ballfields.
Ms. Dennison stated that if the property is rezoned to Institutional and the property is ever sold,
anything could be placed on the property that falls within the permitted uses of Institutional. If John
Carroll decided not to place ballfields on this property, they could place something on the property
that may be of benefit to some but certainly detrimental to the residents. She would prefer that the
applicant be held to the placement of the ballfields.
Mr. Kelly stated that there is no other zoning district. The RF (Religious Facilities) zoning district
only allows for the church itself. The school, the ballfields, and the other uses that John Carroll
would like requires an I (Institutional) zoning district. He stated that Ms. Dennison is correct in that
once the property is rezoned, anything on the list of permitted uses is a pennitted use on that parcel.
Chairman McCurdy asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak in favor of or in
opposition to this petition.
Hearing no further arguments in favor of or in opposition to the petition, Chairman McCurdy
closed the public portion of the hearing.
Chainnan McCurdy asked what would be the pleasure of the Board.
Mr. Merritt made a motion to continue Father Michael Sajda until March 18th at 7:00 p.m. or as soon
thereafter as possible.
Mr. Moore seconded the motion, and upon roll call the motion was approvèd 7-0.
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
February 25, 1999
Page 4
~
'-!
PUBLIC HEARING
FATHER MICHAEL SAJDA:-
FILE NO. RZ-99-004
Chairman Wesloski explained the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing procedures.
Mr. Hank Flores presented staff comments.
Mr. Flores stated that he was presenting the petition of Father Michael Sajda for a Change in Zoning
from the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning
District for 3.67 acres ofland located on the North side of Delaware Avenue, approximately 500 feet
east of Hartman Road.
Mr. Flores stated that the applicant is proposing ballfields for soccer and baseball for the John
Carroll High School.
Mr. Flores stated that the surrounding zoning to the subject property is RS-3 (Residential, Single-
Family - 3 du/acre) to the north, south, east, and west. CG (Commercial, General) to the northeast.
I (Institutional) to the east.
Mr. Flores stated that staff has reviewed this petition and detennined that it conforms with the
standards of review as set forth in the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is not in
conflict with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff is, therefore, recommending that you
forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any questions for Mr. Flores.
Chairman Wesloski asked if the applicant was present and would like to address the Board.
Mr. Mike Driscoll, 1920 Wren Avenue, Fort Pierce, addressed the Board. Mr. Driscoll stated that
he represents Father Michael Sajda and John Carroll High School. He stated that he is a member
of the School Advisory Board and is involved in the long range planning process for the sèhool.
Mr. Driscoll stated that Lots 4 and 5 were purchased a few months ago, they are cÜrrently zoned
residential and cannot be used for the school's intended purpose. He stated that as shown on the
overhead, the Diocese of Palm Beach owns the parcel zoned Institutional and all the way back to
South 33M Street. He stated that the Institutional parcel is currently used as a football field and track.
Mr. Driscoll stated that Lots 4 and 5 are intended to be used for softball and practice fields for
soccer. He stated they recognize within the Institutional zoning any building structure placed on this
property, in the future, would require a conditional use approval before this Board and also the
County Commission. Mr. Driscoll stated that he would be happy to answer any questions.
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
March 18, 1999
Page 2
........
'..t
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any questions for Mr. Driscoll. -
Mr. McCurdy asked Mr. Driscoll if the school will be expanded in the future.
Mr. Driscoll stated that John Carroll High School currently has approximately 500 students with a
planned lO% increase at a slow progression for a total of 550 students. There is no interest in trying
to expand John Carroll into a large major school. The property and the facilities at the present time,
with a few more classrooms, will facilitate their needs in the future.
Mr. McCurdy asked Mr. Driscoll if the Diocese plans to stay with this location for the foreseeable
future.
Mr. Driscoll stated that there have been no discussions or plans for any other schools at the
secondary level. He stated that John Carroll is the high school for the Diocese, serving a four county
area.
Ms. Dreyer asked Mr. Driscoll if the fields will be lighted.
Mr. Driscoll stated that this property is a very old citrus grove with a few oak trees. He stated they
plan to clear the majority of the property, level it, grass it, and possibly install some fencing to
separate it from the neighboring properties. He stated that because of the size and the layout of the
lots the only thing that could be placed on these lots would be a practice soccer field and a softball
field. He stated that it would not be economically feasible to install lighting for a very short softball
season. A football field had also been discussed on these lots, physically and economically it just
would not work.
Mr. Driscoll stated that another limiting factor on the use of this property are the FP&L high
powered tension lines that run along the east side of Lots 4 and 5 and between the currently owned
and zoned Institutional property. The lines run to the north and back to the east, down to the comer
of33ni Street and Delaware to the transmission substation. He stated that they need to stay clear of
the concrete poles, the lines and the FP&L easements.
Mr. Driscoll stated that when the school considered placiIig a football field on these lots he asked
about lighting. He was told they would not be able to install lighting because FP&L already had
poles on the north and east boundaries of the lots. Additional poles would not be aÏlowed as they
could possibly go down during a storm, affecting the FP&L high powered tension lines.
Mr. Driscoll stated that they do not have any plans nor would it be feasible to have lighting.
Chainnan Wesloski asked if there were any further questions for Mr. Driscoll.
At this time, Chairman Wesloski opened the public hearing.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in favor of this petition.
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
March 18, 1999
Page 3
'--'.
'-.I
Chairmatl Wesloski asked if there was- áñyone that w~uld like to speak in oppositiõñ to this petition.
-
Mr. Terry Cooper, 3912 Delaware Avenue, Fort Pierce, addressed_the Board. Mr. Cooper stated that
he owns Lots 1,2, and 3. He stated that Lots 1 and 2 are vacant and his home is located on Lot 3
which is adjacent to Lot 4.
Mr. Cooper stated that he does not have anything in particular against the proposed use of Lot 5, Lot
4 leaves a little bit to be desired. He stated that Lot 4 runs the full length of his yard and his house
would just be 30-40 feet away from the athletic fields.
Mr. Cooper referred the Board to item #8 in the staff report which reads "whether the proposed
amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and is in hannony with the purpose and
intent of this Code". He stated that he does not know about the purpose and intent ófthe Code, but
as far as public interest, he is probably the most affected· public in the area, because he will be
surrounded on three borders of his property by this.
Mr. Cooper stated that he is not concerned about Lot 5. He is hesitant about Lot 4 being zoned
Institutional due to the number of uses that could take place. It has been stated that Lot 4 will be
used as a practice soccer field. This will create a lot of activity at the side of his house.
Chainnan Wesloski asked if there was anyone else who would like to speak on this petition.
Chairman Wesloski asked Mr. Driscoll ifhe would like to address the concerns of Mr. Cooper.
Mr. Driscoll stated that they purchased Lots 4 and 5 knowing if they ever wanted to develop Lot 5,
they would need the Delaware Avenue frontage from Lot 4. If they only owned Lot 5 they would
not have the required access of 60 feet.
Mr. McCurdy asked Mr. Driscoll if the lµgh powered tension lines run north and south along the
eastern border of Lot 4.
Mr. Driscoll stated that they run north and south along the eastern border of Lot 5.
- -
Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Driscoll if they plan to have traffic flow onto Lots 4 and 5.
Mr. Driscoll stated that they have not made any plans beyond the clearing and the placement of
grass. He stated that there is a potential for some minor traffic if a game or practice were to be held.
He stated that there is sufficient parking to the east side of the Institutional parcel with 50 spaces
being added at the present time.
Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Driscoll without lights would he anticipate much activity after sundown.
Mr. Driscoll stated no.
Planning & Zoning Conunissionl
Local Planning Agency
March 18, 1999
Page 4
~
'-'
Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Driscoll i(practices woulà occur in-ffieTate afternoon.
- "
Mr. Driscoll stated that practices would occur after school.
Mr. Driscoll stated that he spoke with Father Michael regarding the possibility of having Physical
Education classes on these lots. Father Michael immediately said no. Mr. Driscoll stated that from
the center of Lot 5 to the closest building is approximately 1,200 feet, which is almost a 1/4 mile.
Mr. Driscoll stated that having access to practice fields are a problem in the after school hours. The
current soccer and softball fields are shared with St. Anastasia School because this is when all the
kids are available to practice. He stated that many of the seasons overlap now and this is the primary
reason the school needs additional fields.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were" any further questions for Mr. Driscoll.
Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Cooper if at the present time there is any noise intrusion from the school.
Mr. Cooper stated that when they use the P.A. system or when the band practices. It is not a
particular annoyance. He understands there are children present and they have activities, but to bring
them even closer would be more of an intrusion.
Mr. Cooper stated that he was involved in the planning of the subdivision. The County insisted that
Lot 5 not be land-locked. It is by County rules that Lot 5 has a peculiar shape which would give
adequate vehicular access to Lot 5 without having to use Lot 4. He stated Lot 5 was planned to be
15 feet wide from Delaware and then open up to 30 feet to handle the vehicular traffic needs of the
future.
Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Cooper ifhe and his wife are employed.
Mr. Cooper stated that he is a retired police officer. His wife is employed by the citrus industry in
Fort Pierce.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there was anyone else who would like to speak on this petition.
Ms. Judy Dennison, 195 Hartman Road, Fort Pierce, addressed the Board. MS. Dennison stated that
they are relatively close to the proposed changes and are concerned about the flow of traffic and
nOlse.
Ms. Dennison stated that many times they can hear the kids practicing. It is not especially annoying,
but if it were closer, perhaps it could be. She stated that she understands that if the school were to
change the intended use of the property, to include a structure, the residents would have the
opportunity to raise questions.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there was anyone else who would like to speak on this petition.
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
March 18, 1999
Page 5
-
~.
"-'
Mr. Cooper askedÇhairman Wesloski ifhe could voice one more concern.
-
Chairman Wesloski stated that this would have to be the last time.
Mr. Cooper stated that every so often the school has an activity and the parking is not contained on
their property. He has noticed neighbors up and down Delaware Avenue place ribbons on their
property to block people from parking in their driveways. He stated that he is concerned the school
would use Lot 4 for parking.
Chairman Wesloski asked Mr. Driscoll ifhe would like to address the concerns of Ms. Dennison and
Mr. Cooper.
Mr. Driscoll stated that the school experiences á problem every year in October during the Fall
Festival. The Festival Committee places ribbons in yards and driveways to help the residents protect
their yards and driveways from the public. Mr. Driscoll stated that the school would certainly like
to cooperate with the residents to continue the placement of the ribbons. He stated that the school
also provides security during the event to try to control the traffic as much as possible.
Hearing no further arguments in favor of or in opposition to the petition, Chairman Wesloski
closed the public portion of the hearing.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any questions for staff
Mr. McCurdy asked Mr. Flores if a buffer or vegetation is required between the residential and
proposed Institutional area.
Mr. Flores stated that a buffer zone would only be required if a circulation area were installed.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any further questions for staff.
Mr. Matthes asked Mr. Flores if site plan approval would be required ifballfields were put on these
lots.
Mr. Flores stated no.
Chairman Wesloski asked what would be the pleasure of the Board.
Chairman Wesloski stated that she would like to hear a motion.
Chairman Wesloski stated that she was passing the gavel to Mr. McCurdy.
Chairman McCurdy asked if there was a motion.
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
March 18, 1999
Page 6
-
.......,
'.....,I
Aft~r considering tlietestimony presented during the public hearing, including staff comments, and
the standards of review as-s~t forth in· Section 11.06.03, St. Lucie County Land Development Code,
Ms. Wesloski moved -that the Planning and Zoning Conunission recommend that the St. Lucie
County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of Father Michael Sajda
for a Change in Zoning from the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) Zoning District to
the I (Institutional) Zoning District.
Mr. Lounds seconded the motion, and upon roll call the motion was approved 8-0.
Chairman McCurdy passed the gavel back to Ms. Wesloski.
Chainnan Wesloski stated that the petition would be fOlwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners with "a recommendation of approval.
-
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
March 18, 1999
Page 7
'-'
'...."I
AGENDA - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
TUESDAY, APRIL 6, 1999
7:00 P.M
Petition of Father Michael Sajda (Robert fv. Lynch, Agent), for a Change in Zoningfrom
the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning
District for the following described property:
(Location: North side of Delaware A venue, approximately 500 feet East of Hartman
Road)
THE PROPERTY'S LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
If it becomes necessary, these public hearings may be continued from time to time. Please
note that all proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded.
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect
to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings, and
that, for such purposes, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,
which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the
request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any
party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying
during a hearing upon request. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will
also be considered.
Prior to this public hearing, notice of the same was sent to all adjacent property owners on
March 25, 1999. Legal notice was published in the Port St. Lucie News and The Tribune,
newspapers of general circulation in St. Lucie County, on March 25,1999.
FILE NO. RZ-99-004
-
'-'
"'"
-
, ST. llJCIE COUNTY BOARD Of
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
.. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA
APRIL 6. 1 ?99 .'
3, THE JET SERVICE .CENTER
(Hollyce '. Hoover, Agent), has'
applied for a Major Adjustment to
the existing Conditional Use at the
SI. Lucie COunty International Air-
port. The proposed Major Adjust.
ment Is to expand the dolly opero-
tlons to allow let pointing services,
a 1.800 square foot office, ,9nd a
12,000 square foot I1ongar, for ~
following desa1bed prOperty: . . ". '
Beginning at the South~cor-
nor of Section 29; Township ~4
South, Range 40 East, run ,South
87"49'54~ East 30.00 feet to a
point lying on the sOuth line of saId .
section; cui. North.~6',W E,ast
525.11 'feetpcJi-alleF:tO\íhè ~
line of said section; run South
87"51 '34~ East 231:09 ,feet. to the
PC)/ntof BeginnIng; from.sald POint
of8eglrinlng run SoIIth 87"51'34~
East 517.19' feet; run North
4S015'26" East 559;19' feet; run
South 50"08'40'.5" - East . T60.49'
feel; run 'South 00026'26" Wost
589.00 feet; lVI' South 89"52'26"
West 1 044.20 . feet; run North
00026'26~ East 319.83 ·fee. to he
Point of Beginning. (Tax I.D:No:
1429-342-0001-000/$). '
(Location: 3131' Jet Center Ter-
race, SI. Lucie County Intematlcinal
Airport). . '. .
4. PETER L SANDEfUR. for a
VarIance fr.om Seetlo.n
6.02.02(8)(2)(ø), . of the. SI. Lucie
County .Land Development Code to
-allow . for the coitstrudlon of a
slngle-famlly home within '. 50 .teet
of the mean high weiter line of the
St. Lucie RIver for the following
desatbed pi'o ierty:
SectIon 24, T~hlp 37 South,
, Range 40. East, Beau Rlvage
Helghb, Lot 12 and that part. of
canal ad¡ to S.D lot bnded by'm
of N & sly 11 of Lat 12 (OR 6.95-
1324')" (T(!x I.D. No.
4424-804-0012-000/9). '. : ,,',
, (Location: .623 Howord..c:r..k
Lane) , . . ".:,,'-:',
PUBUC HEARINGS wiil be held
In the. CountyC9mmrssloci:'Chc!~
hen, 3rd Roor.of.the Roger. ~
AdmInistration. Annex . Building, .
2300 VIrginia A'ftlIIJO, fort PI...œ,:
florldå 'on APri"~il~99, biiglri- '
"ingOt 7:00 P.M..·o¡:as soon ~
after as. IÓ$SIbIë.. '. ' ," "
, " PURSUANT,· TO' ·Sectf~
286.0105, florida ',Slatutes;; If a
PenOn c!eddes to appeal any decI~
sIon macleby a ~,:a e!lC)',-<!"
commission. withresped to' .ciÍ)Y
matter córisJdered at" a . meetliIg'ør
hearing. he wiH..need ci recOrd of
. the . proceedIngs; ~~~, for,~.
purpose, he may ......., to' -~
that a verbåtfm rec:ord of ~ P':O:'
c:e«llngs Is niade, . which reëord
Includes the '. testimony and evi-
dence upon whIch the', appeal Is ki
be bosed. '
BOARD Of COUNTY
coMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
/sl PAULA A. LEWIS,
. CHAIRMAN
Pub.: Mar. 25, 1999
·.·.r
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
.' NOTICE Is ttereb{.;glven In
aCCordo'nce 'WI!\! SedIotiiJ- :po.03'
òf'thê St~ Luâê)tounty léind QeveI,
'en! 'codéJi:lnd In'~ .
:;:,I~ ¡inivtslònS "of tIMi "st'. I.ude '
COunty COmpr'ihrilw Plan; that
the followIng applicants· have
requested that·the SI. Lucie County,
Board of ,Coünty 'Commissioners '
consider their requesi as follows..;' .
'1. fATHER MICHAEL SAlDA; ,
for a Change In ZonIng from the
RS-3 (Residential, Slngle-FainIIy --G;
du/ aae) Zoning DIsfr!ct to the'J
lInstlMlonaQ ZonIng DI~for the
following desa1bed prOpIrIfI;:
, SECTION 8. TOWN~IP 35
SOUTH, RANGE oCO EAST:''C~
PER'S SUBDIVISION'.lOT:04'(O.B8
AQ .(OR 11 BM56) 'ANI?;!l~T '5
(2~79 AQ.(OR.IIB9-956){fAX),o.
NOS. 2408-706-QOO4-aoo/3"(!nc!
2408-706-0005-000/0).;','
. .. (Locaflon: North side of.,' DeIa~
ware Avenue, approxl~ely 500
feet East of Hartman Rood). ;; . ,
2. THE fOl¡T PIERCE 'AlRÇE~~
TER(Erllestó Velasco, Alleot).l!o,s .
applled./oi- a' MOJoi' Adlusfment.. '.; '"if.'~.'~
.the :.xlstlng CondItional Use.4t"", .
SI; Lude County Intemajional Alf~
port. "{he proposed' Ma orAdJ9sf~
men! Is to Constrvèt a 4.eoo S!IUOri!'
foot hangar .(Hangar E-I2) ·for 1I1ë;
following desa/bed prppIIfy: ..;"
BeginnIng .at the ,south.. cac:-,
nor of SectIon ,29; T!)WIIShlp 304
South, Range 40: Eàstrvn'",SQuth
89"31'34" East 30.00 feet' 'to a
point Iyfng on' "'- south 11M òf såkf
section; thene, run: NorJh
00"26'26" East 625.i l·fêët ~1;
lei to the west 1I.M',Øf iqld,;~
te¡ a poInt; fhènce . Wp." ,',..~,
B7"51 '34" East 36~Ø9: feel; :tòß
pointnald. PØ!~! f'lng,~~~~~i
Beglnnlng;,~mä'.ä~5~·
:::~~a3"~ iOå'jXJIrii;>~
run North 4~15'26' Ea$t51.5~~'
feet.to c:lpolnt;~~:,..,
'44°42'34" Wist 1314.92 '"' (0'0
POint saldPotnt being' ttíe. p;c.'~
a CU:V.con<:a'fe 'to iii. West. bciY;
Ing . a delta ârig1e'~òf3,~~
and a radlus~ '1294~~,~
thence run In' a 'iòutherty.~
alOÍlg t/1e are:~sald :~.6?~~~
feet to a point; saldpòlnt belt\; 'tIie.
P.T. of Sold CIIMI;~ rvnSou!\!,
45°17'26" West: 100 . feetto.~ 1:1.
point; thence rvnSOüth·~_6.'
'West 540.00 ieetto a.poInt; sakf
point being the Point of Beglnn!ng·.:
All lying In SedfO\l 29, T~Ip,.
34 South, Ral1ge 40 East. St.L~e,
COunty, florIdo. . (Tax' I.D.. ,No.
1429-323-0002-000/6).
(Location: 29"82 Curtis KIng Bou-
levard. SI. Lucie- County.. Intema;
tlonal Airport; Hangar 12) .
JILL ~j
'-'
No. 1229
ST. LUCIE CÒUN1Y BOARD OF COUNIY COMMISSIONERS
PUBUC HfARING AGÐI)A
N'RIl6, 1999
TO WHOM If MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE Is hereby given In accordance with Section
11.00.03 of the St. lucie County Land Development COde and
In acCorctance with the provisions of the St. lucie County
Comprehensive Plan. thallhe fOllowing applicants have
reque'sIed that the St. lucie County Board of County
Commissioners consider their request as foØows:
1." FAtHER MICHAEl. S,AJDA, for a Change In ZOning from
· the RS-3 (ResIdential, Slngle-famlly . 3 dWacre) ZonIng
DIsIrIcIto the I pnstllullonaQ ZOning DIsIrIcI for the
, following described property: .
SECTION 8. TOWNSHIP 35 SOUIH. RANGE oW EAST, .
COOPER'S SUBOMSlON LOT 4 lO.88 AC) (OR 1189-956)':
AND LOT 5 (2.79 AC) (OR 1189-956) (Tax I.D. Nos.
·2408·7~-00013 AND 2408·7~.
(lacaIIon: North side of DeIawae AverøJ8.
appIO)CImaIeIy 500 feet East of HaI1man
Road)
2. tHE FORT PIERCE AIR CENTER (Erneslo Velasco, Agent)
has applied for a Major Adjustment to the existing
Conditional Use at the st lucie County international .
Airport. The proposed tlajor Adjustment Is to consIIucI
a 4,800 square foot hangar (Hangar E·12) for the
following described property:
8EGINNING þJ tHE SOU1HWEST CORNER OF SECI\ON 29.
TOWNSHIP 34 SOU1H, RANGE oW EAST.RUN SOUIH 89"
~ 31'34" EAST 30.00 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON tHE SOUIH
UNE OF SAID SECTION; 1HENCE RUN NORIH 00" 26'26"
EAST 625.11 FEET PARAUB. TO tHE WEST LINE OF SAD
SECTION TO A POINT: 1HENCE RuN SOUIH 87" 51'34" EAST
· 36.09 FEET TO A POINT: SAID POINT BEING 11iE POINT OF
· BEGINNING: FROM SAID POINT OF BeGINNING RUN SOUIH
· 87" 51'34" EAST 668.83 FEET TO A POINT: tHENCe RUN
NORIH 45"15'26" EAST 515.68 FEET TO A POINI'; 1HENCE
· RUN NOR1H 44" 42'34" WEST 1314.92 FEET TO A POINI',
SAID POINT BBNG 11iE P.C. OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO
tHE WEST. ""WIG A DB.TA ANGLE OF 3Ö" 04'00" AND A
'RADIUS OF 1294.52 FEET: 1HENCE RUN IN A sounERLY
· DIREC110N ALONG 1HE ARC OF SAID CURVE 678.55 FEET
· TO A POINT: SAID POINT BEING 11iE P.T. OF SAID CURVE;
· tHENCE RUN SOUIH 45" 17'26" WEST 100 FEET TO A
POINT: 1HEtoICE RUN SOUIH 00" 22'26" WEST 540.00 FEET
-TO A POINT: SAID POINT BBNG THE POINT OF~. .
, AU. LYING IN SECtION 29. TOWNSHIP 34 SOU1H, RANGE oW
EAST. ST. LUCIE COUNtY. flORIDA. (fax 1.0. No.
1429-323.0002.()()()/6).
(lacaIIon: . 2982 Cur1ts KIng IIoœwId. st. lucie
Ccx.r1ty Intematlonal.-llport: Hangar 12)
. I
I
I
-
"""
3. THE JET SERVICE CENTER (HoIlyce Hoover, Agent) has
:. applied for a Major Ad usfmentto the existing
· Conditional Use at the st. lucie County International
Airport. The proposed Major Ad ustmentlS to expand the
dally operations to allow jet· pointing services. a 1,800
square foot offtce, and a 12,000 square !oot hangar for
the following described properly:
BEGINNING þJ THE SOU1HWEST CORNER OF SECI10N 29,
TOWNSHIP 34 SOUIH, RANGE 40 EAST. RUN SOUIH 87"
49' 54" EAST 30.00 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON THE SOUIH
,.UNE OF SAID SECTION. RUN NORIH 00" 26' 26" EAST
. 525.11 FEET PARAUB. TO tHE WEST UNE OF SAD
SECTION. RUN SOUIH 87· 51' 34" EAST 231.09
FEET, TO 1HE POINT OF BEGINNING, FROM SAID POINT OF
BEGINNING RUN SOUIH 87" 51'34· EAST 517.19 FEET. RUN
NORIH 45"15' 26· EAST 559.19 FEET, RUN SOUIH 50"08'
oW.5" EAST 160.49 FEET. RUN SOUIH 00" 26' 26" WEST
· 589.00 FEET. RUN SOUIH 89" 52' 26· WEST 1044.20 FEET,
RUN NORIH 00" 26'26" EAST 319.83 FEET TO 1HE POINT OF
· BEGINNING. (Tax I.D. No. 1429-342~1.()()()/8).
'(LocatIon: 3131 Jet Center Tenace, st. lucie CoII'1Iy
. international AkporI .
4.. PETER L SANDEFUR, for a Variance from Sectton
.' 6.02.02(8)(2)(0), of the 51. lucie County land
:, Development Code fo allow for the construction of a
single-family home within 50 feel of the mean high water
line of the St. Lucie River for the following described
property:
SECTION 24, TO'NNSHIP 37 SOUIH, RANGE 40 EAST.1IfAU
RlVAGE HEIGHtS, LOT 12 AND tHAT PART OF CANAL ADJ
TO SDLOT &tiDED BY EXT OF N a: SLYU OF LOT 12 (OR
695-1324). (Tax I.D. No. 4424-ð04.oo12.CJOC119).
'(I.OCaIIOn: 623 Howald Creek Lane)
PUBLIC HEARINGs wUl be held In lhe County CommIssIon
Chambeis. 3rd floor of the Roger Poitras Admlnlslrallon Annex
BuIIdIiig, 2300 VIrginia Avenue, Fort PIerce, Florida on AprIl 6,
1999.. beglMlng at 7:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible.
PliRSUANl'TO Seciton 286.0105,' Florida statutes. If a person
decides to appeal any decision made by a boord, agency, or
commission with respect to any rnØter ~eø at a
meeting or hearing, he wi. need a record of the proceedings, .
and thai, for such purpose, he may need to ensure thai a .
vetbaIIm record of the proceedings Is made, which record
Includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal Is
to be based. .
BOARD OF COUNtY COMMISSIONERS
St WClE COUN1Y, FLORIDA
/SI PAUlA A. LEWIS. CHAIRMAN
fubUsh: March 25, 1999
.....-;-1
I /\.; )Lq~
-
'-"
\wi
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW: 03/18/99
File Number RZ-99-004
MEMORANDUM
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TO:
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning Manager ~
March 11, 1999
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Application of Father Michael Sajda for a Change in Zoning from the RS-3
(Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre)Zoning District to the I (Institutional)
Zoning District. This item is continued ftom the February 18, 1999, meeting.
LOCATION:
North side of Delaware Avenue, approximately 500 feet east
of Hartman Road.
EXISTING ZONING: RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre)
PROPOSED ZONING: I (Institutional)
FUTURE LAND USE: RU (Residential Urban)
PARCEL SIZE: 3.67 acres
PRO~OSED USE: Ballfields for an Existing School
SURROUNDING ZONING: To the north, south, east, and west the zoning is RS-3
(Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre). To ti!e_northeast is
CG (Commercial, General) Zoning~ To the east is I
(Institutional) Zoning.
SURROUNDING LAND USES: General existing use of surrounding property is residential
and institutional.
COM (Commercial) Future Land Use to the northeast. RU
(Residential Urban) Future Land Use to the north, south, east,
and west.
FIRE/EMS PROTECTION:
Station #1 (2400 Rhode Island Avenue) is located
approximately 2.5 miles to the southeast.
~
"wi
March 18, 1999
Page 2
Petition: Father Michael Sadja
File No: RZ-99-004
UTILITY SERVICE:
The site is in the is in the Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority
(FPUA) water and wastewater service area.
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
RIGHT-OF-WAY
ADEQUACY:
The existing right-of-way width for Delaware Avenue is 60
feet.
SCHEDULED
IMPROVEMENTS:
None at this time.
TYPE OF CONCURRENCY
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
Concurrency Deferral Affidavit
STANDARDS OF :REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03,
ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
In reviewing this application for proposed rezoning, the Planning and Zoning Commission
shall consider and make the following detenninations:
1. Whether the proposed rezoning is in conflict with any applicable portions of the
St. Lucie County Land Development Code;
The proposed change in zoning is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan. The request is compatible with the RU (Residential
Urban) Future Land Use classification, which allows I (Institutional) Zoning.
- -
2. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St.
Lucie County Comprehensive Plan;
The proposed zoning district is consistent with the St. Lucie County Land
Development Code and specifically has met the standards of Section 11.06.03.
3. Whether and the extent to which the proposed zoning is inconsistent with the
existing and proposed land uses;
The proposed zoning is consistent with the existing land uses. These land uses
include an existing school and single-family homes.
,
~
......",
March 18,- 1-999
Page 3
Petition: Father Michael S_agja
File No: RZ-99-004
4. Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment;
Conditions have not changed so as to require an amendment.
5. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
demands on public facilities, and whether or to the extent to which the proposed
amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not
limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks,
drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit, and emergency medical facilities;
The intended use for this rezoning is not expected to create significant additional
demands on any public facilities in this area. Any development will need to
demonstrate that there are adequate public facilities in the area to support such
development.
6. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment;
The proposed rezoning is not anticipated to create adverse impacts on the natural
environment. Any development will need to comply with local, state, and federal
environmental regulations.
7. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in an
orderly and logical development pattern specifically identüying any negative
affects of such patterns;
An orderly and logical development pattern will occur with this change in zoning.
The surrounding properties are generally used for residential, commercial, and
religious purposes, which are compatible with the proposed use. --
8. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest
and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Code;
The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with the public intèrest and is in
harmony with the purpose and intent of the St. Lucie çounty Land Development
Code.
\w'
,...."
March 18, 1999
Page 4
Petition: Father Michael Sadja
Fiië No: Rz-99--004
COMMRNTS
The petitioner, Father Michael Sajda, has requested this change in zoning nom the RS-3
(Residential, Single-Family - 3 dulacre) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District on
acres of property located on the north side of Delaware Avenue, approximately 500 feet east of
Delaware Road in order to establish ballfields on the subject property for an existing school.
This item was first considered on February 18, 1999. Opposition for the petition was heard
by the Board and no representative of the applicant was present. The item was continued until
March 18, 1999.
Staffhas reviewed this petition and determined that it conforms with the standards of review
as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is not in
conflict with the goals, objectives, and policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff
is recommending that you forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a
recommendation of approval.
Please contact this office if you have any questions on this matter.
Attachments
hf
cc: Father Michael Sadja
File
· :::::ë'
a Q
~ Q
..."C
rIJ CJ
£00
="C
Q .~
~=
œ
aõ
¡.. ¡..
cS ¡
~u
CJ =
.... "C
"C Q
ø.~
œ ......,
¡.. œ
bl)"t:I
Q .....
~ œ
Øoo
'Q3
1:; œ
~"C
a .~
ø.~
oS ¡..
~ ~
t-s
~ œ
~~
.... =
==
=' ,
aO\
aO\
8~
~ ¡..
QcS
......
= rIJ
~ ....
a-
t: ~
œ:'=
~.;
~~
'-:
"'"
~O~~~O~~~~~~~N~N~~~~O~~~~~~~~-~~
.~~~~~~;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;~~~~~~~~~~~
N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(/)
z
¡.L¡
~
~ ~
o ~
¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡~¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡~~¡.L¡¡.L¡¡.L¡~~a¡.L¡~~~ ~¡.L¡~~Z
0\ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~
~ ~~~~~¡.L¡~~~~~~~~~>~~~~g~~~~ ~~~~~
~ ~~~~~ø~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~8
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ð~
~''''ooooo~ooooooooo~oooo~oooo~ooooo~
~u~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ø~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ø~
¡.L¡ ¡.L¡ ¡.L¡¡.L¡ ¡.L¡O ~ ~~
> > »~~>~ »> g
~ ~~~ ~~ ~~(/)~~og: ~~ ~~ g:~~~ 5
z~z~z~~~z ~~~g:~~6~~Z~ ~~ ~zzz3~<
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~_~~~-~~~-~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~Z~~
~;§~-~;§¡.L¡;§~X~¡.L¡;§~X¡.L¡¡.L¡ ~~~ ~~ XX~~X?;§~ ;§~~x~
~ (/) 0 OMO 000 <O~ MO oooooz ~oo
"t:I 0 N ø(/)o Ø~~O~_N¡.L¡(/)~ øØooØo ~ØN
"t:I~õg~~ob~~0~gg8~~~b~~OO~~0~~8õgo~
<__NM_~_M_~M~M~M~~-M~~~MM~~-~N~~M
-
~ ¡.L¡ ~ ø ~
~ ~~ (/) ~ ~ ~
~~ ~< ~ ~ ü o~ ~ ~
~ ~~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ : §>~ -~~(/)
z ~~~~U~ j æ> ~ ~ ~~S] (/) ~üß~
< ~~>ü~~ ~ü~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~j
~ ~o~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ o~~ø
~~~ô~ø~~ :~æ~~~~><~~ ~~< ~ E~~~~
~~~~~~~ð~~ªB~~à~~ð§~~~~~ ~~3~æ~~
B~@~z~Üo~ê~~~~~~j~æ~~g]~~~~~~~~~8t
~.....o~O¡.L¡ ~~ ~¡.L¡~~~~~~~~,2¡oO ~ ~ ~o>""'? ~.;3
~~~~~~§~~I;~~~~~~~~~li~~~~~ll~!~~
Z<øüüoo~~oooooooo~~~~~~ZZ~~~~~(/)(/)(/)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Q~~
00000000000000000000 0000000000
oooooooooooo~-oooo-o 0000000000
OOOOOObOOOOOOOOOOOOO_OOOOOOOOOO
N~~~~~~MM~~NMÑNNNMM~=M~~~N~MNM~
oooooooooooooooooooo~oooooooooo
-gggggggggggggggggggg<gggggggggg
........ I I . I I , , I I I I I I . . I I I I I "';:::s I I I I I I I I · I
~~Ñ~~~~Ñ~~~~~~~~~ÑÑ~;~~~~Ñ~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q~~~~~~~~~~~
œooooooooooooooooooooQoooooooooo~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<~~~~~~~~~~o
-
~
'-'
AGENDA REQUEST
......,,¡
ITEM NO.
<)"c.
DATE: 04/20/99
CONSENT
REGULAR
PUBLIC HEARING [ X ]
Leg. [] Quasi-Jud. [X]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRE ENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY:
SUBlTECT :
BACKGROUND:
FUNDS AVAILABLE:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION:
COMMISSION ACTION:
vi APPROVED
] OTHER:
County Attorney:
J;6
Community Development
elopment Director
Request for Rezoning of Property located n the southwest
corner of the intersection of Okeechob e Road and West
Midway Road from the AG-s (Agricultural - 1 du/s acres)
Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District
- Draft Resolution 99-015
Petition of St. Lucie County Board of County
Commissioners for a Change in Zoning from the AG- 5
(Agricultural - 1 du/s acres) Zoning District to the I
(Institutional) Zoning District. The stated purpose of
the rezoning is to allow for the re-location of the St.
Lucie County Fairgrounds to the subject property.
(File No.: RZ-99-006)
N/A
The Planning and Zoning Commission, by a vote of 8 to 0
with 1 member absent (Mr. Merritt), recommended approval
of the rezoning at its March 18, 1999, meeting.
Approve Draft Resolution 99-015 changing the zoning from
the AG-s (Agricultural - 1 du/s acres) Zoning District to
the I (Institutional) Zoning District for property
located on the southwest corner of the intersection of
Okechobee Road and West Midway Road.
DENIED
---
M. Anderson
Administrator
Review and ~prova1s
Management & Budget:
Other:
Purchasing:
Other:
Originating Department:
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)
-
.. --
-
'-"
.......,
CGUNTY COMMISSION REVIEW: April 20, 1999
Reselution 99-015
MEMORANDUM
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
To:
Board of County Commissioners
Community Development Director
April 14, 1999
Petition of St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners, for a Change in
Zoning from the AG-5 (Agricultural - 1 du/5 acres) Zoning District to the I
(Institutional) Zoning District. (File No.: RZ-99-006)
From:
Date:
Subject:
The proposed rezoning of property located on the southwest comer of the intersection of Okeechobee
Road and West Midway Road from the AG-5 (Agricultural- 1 du/5 acres) Zoning District to the I
(Institutional) Zoning District. The stated purpose of the rezoning is to allow for the relocation of
the St. Lucie County Fairgrounds.
At the March 18, 1999, public hearing on this matter, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 8 to 0 with one member absent, recommended approval of this petition
as set forth in Draft Resolution 99-015.
This proposed rezoning meets the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the St.
Lucie County Land Development Code, and is not in conflict with the goals, objectives, and policies
of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
Staff recommends the approval of this petition for a ch~ge in zoning ITom the AG-5 (Agricultural-
1 du/5 acres) Zoning District fo the I (Institutional) as set forth in Draft Resolution 99-015.
SUBMITTED:
hf
cc: File
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
...
'-'
'....I
RESOLUTION 99-015
FILE NO.: RZ-99-006
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM
THE AG-5 (AGRICULTURAL - 1 DU/5 ACRES) ZONING DISTRICT TO
THE I (INSTITUTIONAL) ZONING DISTRICT OF CERTAIN PROPERTY
IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made
the following determinations:
1. The ~t. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners presented a petition for a
change in zoning ftom the AG-5 (Agricultural- 1 du/5 acres) Zoning District to the
I (Institutional) Zoning District for the property described below.
2. On March 18, 1999, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a
public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 10 days prior to the
hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject
property, and recommended that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
hereafter described request for a change in zoning ftom the AG-5 (Agricultural - 1
du/5 acres) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District for the property
described below.-
3. On April 20, 1999, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing
notice at least 10 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail all owners of
property within 500 feet of the subject property.
4. The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies
of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and has satisfied the requirements of
Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code.
5. The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the existing and proposed use of
property in the surrounding area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St.
Lucie County, Florida:
A. The proposed change in the Zoning District Classification for that property described
as follows:
SECTION 1, TOWNSmp 36 SOUTH, RANGE 38 EAST, THAT PART OF THE EAST Yz LYING
SOUTH OF WHITE CITY ROAD AND SOUTH OF STATE ROAD 70 - LESS ROAD
RIGHT-OF-WAY AS IN OR 43-397 AND LESS CANAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND LESS
OKEECHOBEE ROAD WIDENING AS IN OR 308-2043 (172.73 AC). (Tax I.D. No.
3201-133-0005-000/0); and;
File No.: RZ-99-006
April 20, 1999
Resolution 99-015
Page I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
--
'-'
"'-"
SECTION 12, TOWNSIllP 36 SOUTH, RANGE 38 EAST, THE NORm Y2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4
_ LESS ROAD AND CANAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY (77.99 AC) (Tax I.D. No. 3212-111-0002-000/5).
Southwest corner of the intersection of Okeechobee Road and West Midway Road
(White City Road»
CONTAINING 250.73 ACRES.
(Location:
owned by St. Lucie County, is hereby changed from the AG-5 (Agricultural- 1 du/5
acres) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District.
B. The St. Lucie County Community Development Director is hereby authorized and
directed to cause the change to be made on the Official Zoning Map of St. Lucie
County, Florida, and to make notation of reference to the date of adoption of this
resolution.
After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows:
Chairman Paula A. Lewis
xxx
XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
Vice-Chairman John D. Bruhn
Commissioner Frances Hutchinson
Commissioner Doug Coward
Commissioner Cliff Barnes
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED This 20th Day of April 1999.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
U
:,"r,
~f.
Chairman
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
Deputy Clerk
County Attorney
hf
H:\ WP\RESOLUTI.N\FINISHED.99\FairRZ\Fair. wpd
File No.: RZ-99-006
April 20. 1999
Resolution 99-015
Page 2
'-'
-.....;
(j)
~
Q)
c
o
-(j)
'+- (j)
o E
~E
o 0
mO
~
+-'
C
::J
o
o
~z
~
..
E
.. '"
c ..
'" ..
E ,.,
c.'"
;! c
'" 0
> .-
'" ..
C II
E
,.,,,,
:=:-2
c c
" -
E (J
E:ë
o 0.
U II
'"
..
o
'"
"
,,;
co
CO
~
L()
o
o
I
0)
0)
t-
·
~
.¡:
Co.
...
~
·
0.
~
0.
0.
·
'"
o
Ï
~
~
o
~
d
N
a:
\ t.
'\
I!
w
... w
....
, . 1 ...
....
II:
ç
Z
::::>
0 ç
() z
::::>
0
()
a:
w i
> -1
if I'
o. u
w t! Z
= w ~
~ .. I ..
r .... «
II: 0\'011 0331<5 ~
Z II:
«
15 .,-)
~
...
....
i
!
w
~
~
w
...
,..,
II:
II:
/
AlNno::>
3380H::>33>10
,
~
S K 1
S 0;£ 1
Zoning
~ard of County Commi~ioners
1___1
RZ 99-005
Community Development ~
Geographic Information Systems
Map revised February 3.1999
TNI rnIIp tw"" ~ IotglnnlpIInTQ rG ........ ~ 0tIt·
WhIt --r eIIort tw beM ..... to pn:rrrictI .. molt CUI'IIt MIl KICUW N
HoImIØon poeIIIbIe,." noI~ 1Dr1M.. ~bRInIl docu1w!-.
Land Use
B'ë>ard of County Commi~ioners
, .
RZ 99-005
Community Development f
Geographic Information Systems
Map revised February 3. 1999
TNa ft'IIp....... ~ 1IIr~pWw*1g and .-...nee ~ odt·
WNII .-y 1IoIt... __ mIdt ~ prowIdiI .. moIIIo.mrt Ind ....... N
Horn-*-' ~.. nulflwdId tor........, bhdIfIQ ctDcunW1l
\..f'
'...,.I
PUBLIC HEARING
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FILE NO. RZ-99-005
Mr. Hank Flores presented staff comments.
Mr. Flores stated that he was presenting the petition of The St. Lucie County Board of County
Commissioners for a Change in Zoning from the AG-5 (Agricultural- 1 du/5 acres) Zoning District
to the I (Institutional) Zoning District for 250.72 acres of land located on the Southwest comer of
the intersection ofOkeechobee Road and West Midway Road.
Mr. Flores stated that the purpose of the rezoning is to relocate the St. Lucie County Fairgrounds to
the subject property. The Fairgrounds are currently located on Indrio Road.
Mr. Flores stated that the surrounding zoning to the subject property is AG-5 (Agricultural - 1 du/5
acres) to the north, south, east, and west.
Mr. Flores stated that staff has reviewed this petition and determined that it confonns with the
standards of review as set forth in the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is not in
conflict with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staffis, therefore, recommending that you
forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any questions for Mr. Flores.
At this time, Chainnan Wesloski opened the public hearing.
Chainnan Wesloski asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in favor of or in opposition
to this petition.
Mr. William Phares, 3658 Eleven Mile Road, Fort Pierce, addressed the Board. Mr. Phares stated
that he is the President of the St. Lucie County Fair and with him tonight are the Vice-President and
Trustees to show their support to the Board of County Commission requesting this rezoning.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any questions for Mr. Phares.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak in favor of or in
opposition to this petition.
Hearing no further arguments in favor of or in opposition to the petition, Chairman Wesloski
closed the public portion of the hearing.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any questions.
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
March 18, 1999
Page 8
'-'
......,,;
-
Ms. Dreyer asked Mr. Flores when the fair is relocated how will water and wastewater be handled.
Mr. Flores stated through a package plant.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any further questions.
Mr. McCurdy stated that the package plant would be for the wastewater and then use treated well
water.
Mr. Matthes asked Mr. Flores if this property is located within the urban service boundary.
Mr. Flores stated no.
Chairman Wesloski asked if there were any further questions.
Chairman Wesloski asked what would be the pleasure of the Board.
After considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including staff comments, and
the standards.ofreview as set forth in Section 11.06.03, St. Lucie County Land Development Code,
Ms. Dreyer moved that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of The St. Lucie County Board
of County Commissioners for a Change in Zoning from the AG-5 (Agricultural - 1 du/5 acres)
Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District.
Mr. Grande seconded the motion, and upon roll call the motion was approved 8-0.
Chairman Wesloski stated that the petition would be forwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners with a recommendation of approval.
Planning & Zoning Commission!
Local Planning Agency
March 18, 1999
Page 9
'-'
....,
-
AGENDA - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 1999
7:00 P.M
Petition of Board of County Commissioners, for a Change in Zoning from the AG-5
(Agricultural-1 du/5 acres) Zoning District to the I (Institutional) Zoning Districtfor the following
described property:
(Location: Southwest corner of the intersection of Okeechobee Road and West
Midway Road (White City Road))
THE PROPERTY'S LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
If it becomes necessary, these public hearings may be continued from time to time. Please
note that all proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded.
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect
to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings, and .
that, for such purposes, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,
which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the
request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any
party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying
during a hearing upon request. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will
also be considered.
Prior to this public hearing, notice of the same was sent to all adjacent property owners on
March 19, 1999. Legal notice was published in the Port St. Lucie News and The Tribune,
newspapers of general circulation in St. Lucie County, on March 19, 1999.
FILE NO. RZ-99-005
'-'
ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA
APRIL 20.1999
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given In
accordance with Sedion 11.00.03
of the 51. Lucie County Land Devel-
opment Code and In accordance
with the pravislans of the 51. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan, thai
the following applicant has
requested that the 51. Lucie County
Boord of County Commissioners
consider their request as follows:
Boord of County Commis-
sioners for St. Lucie County, for a
Change in Zoning from the AG-5
(Agricultural - 1 du/5 aaes) Zon-
Ing District to the I (InstlMional)
Zoning District for the follawing i
desaibed property:
Sedion 1, Township 36 South,
Range 3B East, that part of the East
112 lying South of White City
Rood and South af State Rood 70 -
less rood right-of-way as In OR
43-397 and less canal rlghts-of-
way and less Okeechobee Road
widening as in OR 308-2043
(172.73 ac) (Tax I.D. No. 3201-
133-0005-000/0); and
Sedion 12, Township 36 South,
Range 38 East, the North 1/2 of
the Northeast 1/4 - less rood and
canal rights-of-way [77.99 ac)
(Tax I.D. No. 3212-111-0002-
000/5).
(Location: Southwest corner of
the intersedion of Okeechobee
Rood and West Midway Rood
('White City Rood))
A PUBLIC HEARING will be
held in the County Cammlsslon
Chambers, 3rd floor of the Roger
Poitras Administration Annex Build-
Ing, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort
Pierce, Florida on April 20, 1999. I
beginning aI 7:00 P.M. or as soan I
thereafter as possible. . I
PURSUANT TO Section I
286.0105, Florida StaMes, If a
person decides ta appeal any deci-
sion made by a board, agency. or
commission with respect to any
molter considered at a meeting or
hearing, he will need a record of
the proceedings, and thal,.for such
purpose, he may. need to ensure
that a verbatim record of the pro,-
ceedings Is made, which record
Indudes the testlmoný and evi-
dence upon which the appeal Is to
be based. .
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, flORIDA
151 PAULA A. LEWIS,
CHAIRMAN
Pub.: March 19, 1999
''''''
í/L¿ lrLüJ.5
--
'-"
No. 3389:
ST. LUCIE COUN1Y BOARD
OF COUN1Y COMMISSIONERS
PUBUC HEARING AGENDA
APRIL 20. 1999
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given In
accordonce wnh Section
11 .00.03 ot the St. lucie
County Land Development
Code and in accordance
with the provisions of the Sf.
Lucie County Comprehensive
Plan, that the following
applicant has requesfed that
the Sf. Lucie County, Board of
County Commissioners
consider their request as
follows:
Board of County
Commissioners for st. Lucie
County. for a Change.ln
Zoning from the AG-5
(Agrlculfural - 1 dU/5 acres)
Zoning Dlstricf fo the I
(Instlfutlonal) Zoning Dlstrlcf for
the following described
property:
section 1. Township 36 South.
Range 38 East. that part of
the East 'h lying South of .
WhIle CIty Road and South of
, Stale Road 70 - less road
rIght-d-way as In OR 43-397
and less canal rights-of-way
and less Okeechobee Road
widening as In OR 308-2043
(172.73 ee) (Tax I.D. No.
3201-133-D005~; and
section 12. Township 36
South. Range 38 East. the
NoIth 'h of the Northeast 1/4
- less road and canal
rIgh1s-d-way (77.99 ee)
(Tax I.D. No.
3212-111-0002.ooD1S).
(LocaItan: SouIhweIt comer
01 the InterseCIIon of
Qkeechobee Road and West
Midway Road (WhIle CIty
Road))
A PUBUC HEARING will be·
held in the County " :,
Commission Chambers. 3rcL
floor of the Roger Poitras' ..
Administration Annex
Building. 2300 Virginia
Avenue. Fort PIerce. FloIIda '
on April 20. 1999. ~Innlng
at 7:00 P.M. or as sObn. ..
thereafter .as possible.
PURSUANT TO Section
286.0105. Florida Statutes.~:a.),
person decides to appeal .
any decision made by a,· ,
board. agency. or
commission wI1h respect to.
any matter considered at a
meeting or hearing. hØ'wlII
need a record of the
proceedings. and that. for
such purpose. he may need
to ensure that a verbatim .
record of. the proceedings Is
made, which record Includes
the festlmony and evidence
upon which fhe appeal Is to
be based.
BOARD OF
COUNlY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNlY, FLORIDA .
/51 PAULA A. LEWIS
CHAIRMAN
Publish: March 19, 1999
\..,.¡
.,.-/ I
¡ lcl\ b L(/1U!...-
'-"
.....,.¡
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW: 03/18/99
File Number RZ-99-005
MEMORANDUM
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVE~OPMENT
FROM:
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning Manager ~-l--
March 10, 1999
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Application of The St Lucie County Board of County Commissioners, for
a Change in Zoning ftom the AG-5 (Agricultural - 1 du/5 acres) Zoning
District to the I (Institutional) Zoning District.
LOCATION:
Southwest comer of the intersection ofOkeechobee Road and
West Midway Road.
EXISTING ZONING: AG-5 (Agricultural- 1 du/5 acres)
PROPOSED ZONING: I (Institutional)
FUTURE LAND USE: AG-5 (Agricultural- 5)
PARCEL SIZE: 250.72 acres
PROPOSED USE: St. Lucie County Fairgrounds
SURROUNDING ZONING: To the north, south, east, and west the zoning is AG-5
(Agricultural- 1 du/5 acres)
SURROUNDING LAND USES: General existing use of surrounding property is agricultural
and some residential.
AG-5 (Agricultural - 5) to the north, south, east, and west.
FIRE/EMS PROTECTION:
Station #11 (Shinn Road) is located approximately 2.5 miles
to the north.
UTILITY SERVICE:
The site does not currently have access to water and
wastewater service area.
'-'
-....;
-
March 18, 1999
Page 2
Petition: St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Pile No: RZ-99-005
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
RIGHT-OF-WAY
ADEQUACY:
The right-of-way width for Okeechobee Road is 140 feet.
The right-of-way width for West Midway Road is 60 feet
SCHEDULED
IMPROVEMENTS:
None at this time.
TYPE OF CONCURRENCY
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
Concurrency Deferral Affidavit
STANDARDS OF REVIEW ASSET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03,
ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
In reviewing this application for proposed rezoning, the Planning and Zoning Commission
shall consider and make the following determinations:
1. Whether the proposed rezoning is in conflict with any applicable portions ofthe
St. Lucie County Land Development Code;
The proposed zoning district is consistent with the St. Lucie County Land
Development Code and specifically has met the standards of Section 11.06.03.
2. Whether the pr~posed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St.
Lucie County Comprehensive Plan;
The proposed change in zoning is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan. The request is compatible with the AG-5 (Agricultural
_ 5) Future Land Use classification, which allows I (Institutional) Zoning.
3. Whether and the extent to which the proposed zoning is inconsistent with the
existing and proposed land uses;
The proposed zoning is consistent with the existing agricultural land uses.
4. . Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment;
Conditions have not changed so as to require an amendment.
· '-'
~
to,
~::.
March 18, 1999
Page 3
Petition: St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
File No: RZ-99-005
5. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
demands on public facilities, and whether or to the extent to which the proposed
amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not
limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks,
drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit, and emergency medical facilities;
The intended use for this rezoning is not expected to create significant additional
demands on any public facilities in this area. Any development will need to
demonstrate that there are adequate public facilities in the area to support such
development.
6. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment;
The proposed rezoning is not anticipated to create adverse impacts on the natural
environment. Any development will need to comply with local, state, and federal
environmental regulations.
7. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in an
orderly and logical development pattern specifically identifying any negative
affects of such patterns;
An orderly and logical development pattern will occur with this change in zoning.
8. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest
and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Code;
The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with the public interest and is in
harmony with the purpose and intent of the St. Lucie County Land Development
Code.
COMMENTS
The petitioner, St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners, has requested this
change in zoning from the AG-5 (Agricultural- 1 du/5 acres) Zoning District to the I (Institutional)
Zoning District on 250.72 acres of property located at the southwest comer of the intersection of
Okeechobee Road and West Midway Road in order to re-establish the St. Lucie County FairgrouÌÍds
on the subject property. The Fairgrounds are currently located on Indrio Road.
-
~
..."
March 18, 1999
Page 4
Petition: St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
File No: RZ-99-005 .
Staffhas reviewed this petition and determined that it conforms with the standards of review
as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is not in
conflict with the goals, objectives, and policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff
is recommending that you forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a
recommendation of approval.
Please contact this office if you have any questions on this matter.
Attachments
hf
cc: File
<I)
e
Q,
....
<I)
>.
00.
= <I)
o ~
~ =
co= 0
e ';j
¡., <I)
cS ïª
.5 §
.~ u
'Ê.þ
co= =
¡., =
~o
Q, u-
c.?,-
I 0
...."0
= ¡.,
Q, co=
§.~
o Q,
'i~
~ ¡.,
~cS
þl/ì
... <=
=<=
= I
e~
§~
u ¡.,
'õcS
.... ....
= <I)
Q, ;:S
e OJ)
i:: =
c:::'::
g. .;
~~
"II(
..
...
...
~
_\oN__NV')OOV')O'IOO",,"O'I
00 NOO t"-OO t"-"""OO,,,," t"-\OV')O
"0'IV')0'It"-0'I0'I0'I0'I0'I0'I0'I0'I!"1
'::-N- ",,"!"1 """ N """ """ """ """ """ """ N ",,"!"1
!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1
E-<"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡"":¡
CZJ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0'1
0'1
"-
.c
Q,
~
I
M
~
¡¡.¡ ¡¡.¡ ¡¡.¡ffi¡¡'¡¡¡'¡¡¡'¡¡¡'¡:I:u¡¡'¡ëS
u u u uuuu u~
~~~o~§~~~~<~¡¡.¡
¡¡.¡-¡¡.¡~¡¡.¡:I:¡¡.¡¡¡.¡¡¡.¡¡¡.¡¡¡.¡¡¡.¡§
P::UP::ap::up::p::p::p::¡:Qp::
I>~¡§~~~~~~~~~~j
I:f:: a < a < a ~ a a a a ¡¡.¡ a E-<
u~o~CZJ~a~~~~>~p"
o
::;
¡:Q
¡¡.¡ § § ~
§ ~t3§~~§~ ~
~ ~:g~:I:~~~0'I ~
~~~u~~8aO~E-<~~
z !"1 ," CZJ z 0 .... u = N CZJ 0 a
¡¡.¡N\,.;-¡¡.¡N'¿¡<~-::c-u
"'....~e:=E9....¡¡.¡~¡¡.¡~~E-<~:>
~CZJa>:I:CZJzoø.oa"""a....
~_¡:Q0"""t"-0000'l¡:Q0¡:Q0
-o~agC!;~:g8g~a~a~
<Nø.NNN--V')-ø.V')ø.!"1
~
....:¡ ~....:¡~ z
::E ><¡¡.¡~ a
u .~ua-¡"'< ~
~ ¡::a~¡:~ct( u¡¡.¡
CZJ aUCZJct( g::E ~~o
¡¡.¡>-uC)~ ø.u~ Z
¡:::¡"'<CZJ~~::Ect( ::3~CZJ8<
~~~o~d~dCZJ~ct( ~
ø. a ," a....:¡ ~ :I: ¡¡.¡ :I: ¡¡.¡> a a a
au\,.; ~ø.::Eø. ~ ....
og:~ci~~~<~~C)¡::Q
uCZJu~¡¡.¡~~""'~C)&:;8u
CI)~~3u~«¡:Q<CZJ"":¡CZJE-<
~....:¡ ¡¡.¡uu~ffi~¡:QE-<....:¡a
zz~~~~::EO:I:O~~o¡¡:
_OOO"""OOOOO,,,,"-\ONOO
oooooooooooo~
000000000000t"-
9 cr 9 9 9 '9 9 9 9 c:r 9 9 _IV
N!"1V')V')O'IO-!"1-ooo"O
ggg88C!;ggggggg
99C:¡>9C¡>9999999~
-u..~~C'f""¡l""""4oq-~.....-4.....-1I""""4NOO~
____!"1"""""""""!"1!"1"""-!"1!"10
O~~'7~~~'7'7'7~~~~
~"""":....-4.....-1'1""""'4....-1'1""""'4NMM\O\Or--..U
~:=:¡:=:¡:=:¡:=:¡:=:¡:=:¡ÑÑÑgggš
E-<!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1!"1CZJ
-
-
,...,¡'
"
-----
~
......
v
....."
1
.\)~
AGENDA REOUEST
ITEM NO.
,
o
DATE: April 20,1999
REGULAR ( X
PUBLIC HEARING
12: Board of County Commissioners
CONSENT (
SUBMITTED BY (DEPT.): AirDort
PRESENTED BY:
Paul A. PhilliDs
SUBJECT: Authorize Selection Process for Consultant to Complete Amendment
to Airport DRI; Removal of 1,500 Runway Extension from Business Plan; and
Direction on Purchase of Land west of Kings Highway.
BACKGROUND: On April 8, 1999, the BCC held a workshop on the airport.
Information was provided on the background of the purchase and financing of
property at the airport, the uncompleted DRI, the status of the selection of a
consultant to amend the DRI, future projects in the approved Airport Business
Plan, and the potential purchase of property west of Kings Highway. At the end
of the session, the BCC directed staff to provide additional information and
schedule the matter for the April 20, 1999 Board agenda.
The attached report provides additional information requested by the Board
about projects and discusses the payback issues related to purchase of property
at the airport. Additionally, it discusses the issue of runway lengthening on
the existing 9R/27L runway and the purchase of property west of Kings Highway.
FUNDS AVAIL.: 140-4220-599300-400
PREVIOUS ACTION: See April 8,1999 workshop report.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners direct
staff to proceed with the selection process for a consultant to amend the
Airport DRI in accordance with the Airport Business Plan; eliminate the
lengthening of Runway R/9/27L; and provide direction regarding purchase of
property west of Kings Highway.
~
APPROVED () DENIED
OTHER Bring back on May 4
COMMISSION ACTION:
Review and ADDrovals
County Attorney:
Originating D.Pt'~
Management & Budget
Purchasing:
Other:
..
~
~
'-"
"
.,"
St. Lucie County International Airport
MEMORANDUM
TO:
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
Paul A. Phillips, Airport Director
DATE:
April 16, 1999
SUBJECT:
Additional Information on Selection of Airport DRI Consultant, Airport
Busness Plan and Land Purchase west of Kings Highway
As a result of the airport workshop held on April 8, 1999, the Board asked that additional
information be provided and that the issues discussed at the workshop be placed on the April 20,
1999 Board agenda. This report provides additional information and makes recommendations
regarding the airport DRI. Further, it requests direction regarding future land purchases west of
Kings Highway.
One of the primary issues before the Board at the workshop was what projects should be included
in the amendment to the DRI, if it was to be completed. It was pointed out that the Board approved
Business Plan for the Airport was being used to provide direction for the completion of a ten year
DRI. Questions were raised about the necessity of extending the existing runway and building a new
runway to the north of the existing runway, as well as whether either was necessary for the future
of the airport. There were questions regarding the "payback" of FDOT funds by the County and
reimbursement from the FAA. Additionally, there were questions about the need to purchase land
west of Kings Highway. Each ofthese issues is addressed in more detail below.
The Airport Business Plan was approved by the Board in March, 1997. This plan was established
to accomplish four goals: (1) to scale back the 40 year DR! to a manageable ten year time frame; (2)
to eliminate projects that were unacceptable to the community, primarily related to turning the
airport into a major jetport facility; (3) to develop a plan that would make the airport a self-
sustaining operation (no dependency on the County's General Fund); and (4) to continue the
reimbursements from the FAA and "payback" of funds to FDOT. The overall intent of the Airport
Business Plan was to ensure that the airport would become a quality general aviation facility over
the next ten years and that it would not be a financial burden on the County.
The need for the extension of the existing 9R/27L runway and the building of the new northerly
runway are in the Airport Business Plan to accomplish the above-stated goals. However, in doing
'-'
'wJ
Page 2
Information on 81. Lucie County Airport Issues
April 16, 1999
further analysis since the workshop, a recent FAA Bulletin indicates that it is not necessary to
lengthen runways beyond 6,500 feet in order to accommodate regional jet aircraft. This bulletin is
attached to this report. The bulletin does not address possible noise reduction and safety issues,
which are considerations in lengthening a runway. However, it is reasonable to assume that the FAA
would be satisfied that the airport is continuing to operate in a safe manner that protects the Federal
Government's investment and the public safety if the existing runway is not lengthened.
In the case of the new north parallel runway, this project is based on FAA criteria for safe operation
of an airport that reaches a specific utilization criteria. This runway will provide proper separation
of flights landing and taking off and will reduce the overall noise contours beyond the boundary of
the airport. From a safety and operational standpoint, it is a necessary future project. Additionally,
this runway was proposed to utilize the land on the northerly portion of the airport for airport related
uses, thereby qualifying all the land for Federal reimbursement of its cost and making it and other
projects at the airport eligible for cost sharing with the FAA and FDOT.
With regard to current service numbers at the airport, there are currently 144,347 operations
annually. This includes all actual take offs and landings, as well as training touch and go operations.
That figure is currently at 53% of capacity. Based on FAA design criteria; planning for additional
capacity is required when the airport reaches 60% of capacity, or 162,000 operations, and actual
construction of facilities at 80% of capacity. It is likely that the design threshold will be reached in
the next 3-5 years and the construction threshold within the ten year term of the plan. It is important
to note that the new runway is not triggered by a change in fleet mix, but by the number of new
operations at the airport, and that, because of its length, will only accommodate general aviation
aircraft. Elimination of this runway from future planning for the airport could likely jeopardize
future Federal reimbursements and cost-sharing for airport projects.
Last week, additional information was provided to you regarding the "payback" and reimbursement
schedule for airport land purchased with FAA and FDOT funding. This information is provided
again as part of this report. The "bottom line" on this issue is that if the County continues to receive
FAA reimbursements and continues to work with FDOT on the repayment schedule for the funds,
it should be possible to repay the funds over the next five-seven years without any significant burden
on the County. The December 8, 1997 letter from Curtis King to William J Ashbaker, FDOT
Aviation Manager, details the manner in which the repayment can be made. Although this
arrangement has not been formalized, it remains the best arrangement and its future formalization
is based on a continuing good working relationship between the FAA, FDOT and the County, and
on the continued operation of the airport that mutually meets the goals of all parties.
The issue of the purchase of additional land for the airport west of Kings Highway was raised at the
workshop. The Board had given staff authorization in 1998 to proceed to negotiate for the property
west of Kings Highway. An arrangement was worked out that would not require any County
'-'
'wi
Page 3
Information on St. Lucie County Airport Issues
April 16, 1999
funding for this project through payment for the land from FDOT with a leaseback agreement with
the property owner. Owning this land would allow the County to control land use in this clear zone
west of the airport runways. However, its purchase is completely a decision for the Board, based
on your determination of need for the airport to own the property. In the short term, it is not critical
to own the property. In the long term, it may be valuable for the County to control the use of such
property .
Finally, with regard to the hiring of a consultant to do an amendment to the existing uncompleted
DR!, the County can select a consultant to negotiate a contract for the completion of the project. We
have four proposals from consultants we have under contract. However, we cannot ascertain the
price of a contract until we are in the negotiation process. As was discussed in the workshop, the
consultant that did the original DR!, quoted the County a price of $168,000 to amend the existing
DR!. An additional $60,000-$80,000 was projected for initial resource permitting to go along with
the DRI so that the projects can be developed expeditiously once they were designed and ready for
construction. These numbers mayor may not be of value today depending on the consultant to be
selected (if the DRI proceeds), and what potential increases in costs may have occurred since the
quote was received in 1997. The cost of the amended DR! would be a 50%-50% match between
FDOT and the County. The County's Joint Participation Agreement budget with FDOT for the DR!
has approximately $140,000 in it and there is $90,000 for the resource permitting. This includes
both FDOT and County funds committed to these projects. If the price of the amended DR! exceeds
this budget, the County will need to request a modification of the JP A with FDOT, fund the
difference in cost itself, or abandon the DR!.
In conclusion, the Airport Business Plan that was adopted in 1997, provided a course of action to
develop a quality general aviation airport that would be self-sustaining, primarily through the
development of light industrial and airport-related uses that would generate substantial income for
the airport. Completion of the DR! would make it possible to maintain reasonable airport-related
development at the airport over the next ten years and ensure that the partnership between FAA,
FDOT and the County would continue, with our two partners paying for a majority of the projects.
It would help to bring new industrial development to the area surrounding the airport, with the
airport itself being the needed catalyst for such private development to occur successfully.
Additionally, the plan assures, with some certainty, that the County would be able to repay FDOT
for land purchases through Federal reimbursements and other funding available over the next five
to seven years. This repayment issue remains a critical component in future decision-making on the
airport.
Please let me know if you have any questions or I can provide any additional information.
Attachment
ATLANTA-ADO. GA
(404) 305-7150
FAX (404) 305-7132
9.ASO-A TL -ADO@faa.gov
Georgia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Ne'Nsletter No. 73
'-" "'"
FAA Southern Region
RECEIVED
APR 5 1999
Airportopics
_ AJR?ORT
SlllJCitCQ.<m. fU)SU0/\
JACKSON-ADO, MS
(601) 965-4628
FAX (601) 965-4632
9.ASO-JAN-ADO@faa.gov
Alabama
Mississippi
MEMPHIS-ADO, TN
(901) 544-3495
FAX (901) 544-4243
9.ASO-MEM-ÄOO@faa.gov
Kentucky
Tennessee
ORLANDO-ADO, Fl
(407) 812-6331
FAX (407) 812-6978
9.ASO-ORL-ADO@faa.gov
Florida
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
April 1999
1998 Annual Airports Awards
..
Airport Manager of the Year
Air Carrier-Robert M~ Ball, Southwest Florida International Airport, Fort Myers, Florida
General Aviation-Wanda F. Fulmer, Mark Anton Airport, Dayton, Tennessee
Airport Safety
Naples Municipal Airport, Naples, Florida
9JìDf~S1l'~ 1\ ,It
.'. ,". . ...... "." .... ."."
.... .... ...... . $:.. '!..:... ....:-.-'::-
.,,~.. ^" ^vt~.. .,~. X'~'-' ,,-
» Extension of AlP
» New Civil Rights Officer
» Reinventing government
» Unannounced security testing
» Runway incursions
» FAA navigational aids
» Y2K
» New documents
-- ...
~ '-"
Airpärtopics
. Change 12 to AC 150/5370-10A, Standards for
Specifying Construction of Airports, dated
2/22/99.
. Change 3 to AC 150/5340-14B,· Economy
Approach Lighting Aids, dated 1/26/99.
Airport Master Records (FAA Fonn 5010-1) are
now available through the Internet without the
airport sketch at www.gcr1.com.
Noise Compatibility Programs
We completed an evaluation of the implementation
of noise mitigation measures included in a Part 150
Noise Compatibility Program. Six airports were
reviewed in the state of Florida. At these six
airports, 70% of the recommendations were
implemented and 19% of the recommendations were
in the process of being implemented. We believe that
this is a representative sample of the positive results
achieved throughout the Part 150 process.
Runway Approach Minimums
FAA Aviation Systems
Standards will no longer deny
night minimums when there is
an unlighted 20: 1 approach
surface penetration. The
purpose of this change in
policy is to allow operators time to remove or light
the object. This new policy will continue for a least
another year.
Nonnally, FAA will not develop and publish an
approach category for a new instrument approach
procedure greater than the approach category of the
existing design aircraft listed on the approved ALP.
If an approach category greater than that of the
existing design aircraft is desired, the airport owner
should express this desire in their request for the
instrument approach procedure and must submit an
analysis showing that operations by these aircraft
may be conducted with an acceptable level of safety.
When constructing, reconstructing, or overlaying
runways to serve 37 to 50 passenger regional jets
April 1999
you generally only need a length of 6500 feet and a
width of 100 feet. Ally runway length in excess of
6500 feet and wider than 100 feet will need special
justification for federal funding.
Airport Operators Financial
Reports
If an airport operator does not submit its financial
reports in a timely manner, we are now required to
immediately suspend processing applications for
discretionary funds for that airport. Requests for
extensions will not be considered after the 120-day
grace period for submitting the reports.
Unannounced FAA Security
Testing
Vulnerabilities in acçess to aircraft, airport
operations areas, and failure to challenge and to
display ID have been vividly demonstrated in recent
tests at several airports. Airport and air carrier
personnel, systems, and policies contribute to this
vulnerability. FAA Security Division is requesting
that airports evaluate the above areas and if it is
determined those problems exist, develop and
implement a plan to eliminate the problems. FAA
has begun unannounced site visits at selected
airports to test the vulnerability of the above areas
and if determined that there are problems, the FAA
will assist the airport consortium in developing A
COMPREHENSIVE ACTION ~LAN. Additional
FAA Security testing will be conducted within 45
days after the corrective action plans are
implemented to verify that the corrective actions
have eliminated the problems.
If you have any questions, please contact Wylie
Kilpatrick at (404) 305-6931.
Installation of FAA Navigational
Aids
Listed below are the people that plan, schedule, and
install FAA navigational aids on your airport. They
also negotiate reimbursable agreements to relocate
navaids and generally can answer your inquiries
concerning the status and scheduling of navaids.
6
-
... -..-.
-
~
.....,
MEMORANDUM TO THE RECORD
DATE:
March 30, 1999
FROM:
Harvey Lincoln
SUBJECT: Airport Debt Reimbursement Schedule
Attachment 1 is a listing of the Joint Participation Agreement (JPA's) between St. Lucie County and the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) in relation to the purchase of property for the St. Lucie County Airport.
At the bottom of the page is a ten year payback schedule to be implemented in the event that the Federal
schedule for reimbursement for the land does not occur as planned. Federal reimbursements have not and are
not anticipated to be received as planned, so the reimbursement schedule is in effect.
The first JPA, WPI No. 4829222 in the amount of$459,166.67 has been paid off Attachment 2 reflects the
payments to date on JP A WPI No. 4829223. It reflects that, of the amount due through FY 2000 ($841,222),
$728,570 has been paid. This leaves a balance of$112,652 to be paid during FY 2000.
It is currently anticipated that a substantial fund balance will be available in Fund 140, the Port and Airport Fund,
at the end of the current fiscal year (FY 99). This will be available to pay the $112,652 due in FY 2000, and still
leave a substantial balance.
Financial shortfalls may begin to occur in FY 2001, when $1,173,424 comes due, and FY 2002, when an
additional $2,834,750 comes due. If currently projected fund balances are left intact, they should cover the FY
2001 payment, and leave a small balance to be applied to the FY 2002 payment.
If and as payments from the Federal Aviation Administration occur and are applied to the indebtedness, it may
alter County ad valorem tax: supported payment requirements.
A proposal made to the FDOT in a December 8, 1997 letter (attached) would either defer the repayments until
Federal reimbursement was received, or convert the agreements to grants with a condition that the state would
be reimbursed as federal funds were received in accord with the original land financing plan. This would result in
no additional cash outlay for the state, and would relieve the County from a potential property tax burden, but no
formal response has been forthcoming.
The question of the proper allocation of federal reimbursements under the original 90-5-5 federal-state-local
sharing in light of the repayments in progress under the 50-50 state-local matching arrangement does not appear
to have been addressed, and may prove to be contentious at some future date.
-
- -
- --
;
./
ST :~Lûc'i~ÜNTŸ-PÒRT' ANO"ÄÏRPÖRT' ÂÜ-,.(QRrry -It ~t:.M 1
JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS FOR LAND ACQUISITiON
INV. FOOT AMT. STATE STATE PAY AMOUNT
SUM. PArD WARRANT WARRANT BACK DUE TO
~ TO AUTH...L. DATE ~~ MO/_YR J..-º-Q.L
JPA UPl. No, 4829222 _LillL..t:!.-º-L~00-3814
t $1,368,553.50 tO/05/87 05955t9 tO/97 s 456,18^.50
2F e,946~ 1/19/88 1351\193 t/98 2 .L9JL2-.i~·
51 ,377 ,500 .00 '$ <159,166.67
JPA WPI No. 4829223 Job l!.Q..._ 94000-38?..A.
1 5 52,823.33 4/25/89 2242251 4/99 $ 1 7 ,.607 .78
2 293,191.50 7/21/89 0083200 7/99 97;730.50
3 227,648.00 3/28/90 2146077 3/00 75,882.67 í
4 1,950,000.00 4/25/90 2384299 4/00 650,000.00
5 34,650.00 10/19/90 08706"39 10/00 11 ,550 .00
6 1,748,850.60 2/06/91 17-44367 2/01 582,950.20
7 1,736,770.00 3/05/91 1973956 3/01 578,923.33
8 256,066.57 5/20/92 2640218 5/02 85,355.52
1,903,933.43 5/20/92 2640219 5/02 631\,61\.1\.1\8
9 1 , 111 ,925 .59 6/25/93 3058814 6/03 370,641.86
10F 359 , 140.98 4/07/95 2544970 1t/05 _ 119,713.66
$9,675,000.00 53,225,000.00
JPA WP! No. "-829225 Job No. 9"-000-3841
1 s 386,966".40 1/30/95 1850327 1/0:; s 128,988.80
2F 75,533.60 t./07/95 2544970 4/05 __ _ 2~..,J-ZL,-6_º-
$ 462,500.00 s 151\,166.66
3PA_ UP ~g..:_ 4829238 Job No. ~OO -385~
1F 56,344,250.00 5/19/92 2625387 5/02 s 2 , 1 1 4 , 750 .00
JPA WPJ~ 4829267 Job NQ-<- 9ÁOOO-~.J.
1 5 686,090.38 8/05/94 0226510 8/04 s 228,696.79
2 449,317.05 10/21/94 0960504 10/04 1<19,772.35
3 742,690.90 10/21/94 0960504 10/04 247,563.63
4 781,037.61 2/01/95 1876766' 2/05 ?60,345.87
5 303,150.48 2/01/95 1876765 2/05 101,050.16
6 723,556.98 4/04/95 2506383 4/05 241,185.66
7F 3,449~&Q 4/04/95 2506384 4/05 J.1.l1..9_,-98_~ ,-~1.
57,t35,800.00 52.378.600.00
~PA ~ No. 4829283 Job J:!..Q..\- 9tiQQQ-3ff.9~1
IF 52,000,000.00 6/27/95 33~9436
6/05
ÓóÓ,66Ó.67
$26,995,050.00
- - -
GRANO TOTALS
- - -
$8,998.350.00
ST. LUCIE COUNTY PORT AND AIRPqRT AUTHORITY
TEN (10) YEAR PAY BACK DUE BY FISCAL YEAR
ONLY IF FEDERAL REiM8URSEMENT @ 90% HAS NOT OCCURRED FIRST
10/97-9/98 10/98-9/9'L 10/99-9/00 10/00-9/01
s 459,166 .67 ~ 115,338.28 ~ 725~882-67 ~1 ,173,423.53
10/01-9/02 10/02-9/03 10/03-9/0J. 10/04-9/05
$2,834,750.00 s 370,641.86 s 228,696.79 :53.090,450.20
-
-.r -.-.
--
"-'
'..J
!hT'/ÌZ-l{Wt= f--J['
?-
The county was scheduled to begin paying FOOT back for JPA WPI No. 4829223 beginning Aprìl1999. In
actuality, we began paying FOOT for this JPA WPI March 1998. The following schedule is an accurate report
of what is due and what has already been paid:
Amount
Due
Amount
Paid
March 1998
July 1998
$335,849
$392,721
April 1999
July 1999
March 2000
April 2000
$17,608
$97,731
$75,883
$650,000
$841,222
$728,570
Amount Due
April 2000
$112,652
Fla Oept of Transportation
Airport Payback
WPI4829223
Begin Bal Per Schedule from State Auditor General 12116/97
Date Parcel Number Fed AlP Amount Paid Check Number
Begin Bal
March 6, 1998
March 6, 1998
March 6, 1998
July 2, 1998
6
RH1
6
5
18 $159,353.60
18 $17,141.73
18 $159,353.60
19 $392,721 .00
224207
224207
229488
Balance Due
$3,225,000.00
$3,065,646.40
$3,048,504.67
$2,889,151.07
$2,496,430.07
,
........... ~L...-..
------..
"1t-1Tltz- frW1 ~ 3"
ST. LUCIE COUNTY PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY
~
PORT Of FORT PIERCE - 51 LUGE COUNTY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Port Director
CURTlS KING
Airport Dir~or
December 8, 1997
.
I
I
I
- _.
M . ~-¡'-"':::GF'
ANAGdv:¡::;·a J. E'
Mr. William J. Ashbaker P. E .
Manager, Aviation Office
Florida Department of Transportation
605 Suwannee Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450
L~V I I 1997
~ SI LUCIE COUNTYFlO:=;,..
Dear Mr. Ashbaker:
Re: St. Lucie County Port And Airport Authority
Land Acquisition Joint Participation Agreements With FOOT
Since 1982 the Florida Department of Transportation has worked
very cooperatively with the st. Lucie County Port and Airport
Authority in a mutual effort to ensure that sufficient land is
available to meet the long term growth needs of our airport.
In 1986 a decision was made by the Authority and supported by the
FOOT to purchase all of the land that the Airport Master Plan
recommended acquiring. This decision was made so that the
capability of expanding the airport to its ultimate build out
would remain intact even though it may take forty to fifty years
for full buildout to occur. It was reasoned that if the
Authority owned the land then the airport could be expanded
incrementally according to future demand as it came about.
The Master Plan, with several amendments, recommended the
acquisition of approximately 2,800 acres of land. The original
airport consisted of about 1,400 acres. The total of 4,200 acres
would be enough land to provide the recomme~ded clear zones and
approach protection zones as defined by FAR Part 77. There would
be adequate room for a commercial size terminal area and
approximately 1,000 acres for airport development land. The
airport development land was intended to be leased to aviation
related industry to support the expense of operating a large
airport.
The first land acquisition project for the airport was completed
during the 1987-88 fiscal year. Since that time about 2,300
acres has been acquired. When the land acquisition program began
it was anticipated that the Federal Aviation Administration would
reimburse both the Authority and FOOT within a much shorter time
frame than what has actually occurred. We have received FAA
JOHN O. ~HN. Di><rict No.1' KEN SI\'T11.3. O;.t,;c: No. £. PNJI-^ A L£WtS, Di><ric: No. ) . ~ O. CI-~, $R, Oátrià No. , . QJFf IL^RNES, O;.a;c, No. S
'BOO Virgin... AvcnlX . Fort P~. FL 34982-5652· Pho~ (561) 462·1732· FAX (561) 462-1718 . Suncom 259.1732
.. -
~.,-
/<
/
'-"
'wi
,/:
/
William J. Ashbaker
December 8, 1997
Page Two
reimbursements for land that was purchased under WPI #4829241
which was an up front grant. We have used these reimbursements
as matching funds under the FOOT 75%-25% land acquisition
program. Our last reimbursement under this project has occurred
and we are now beginning to receive reimbursements for land
purchased under the 75%-25% program.
Our paybacks to FOOT are scheduled to begin during this fiscal
year (1997-98). As everyone in the aviation world is aware, the
Federal Government has drastically cut the AIP Program. AIr> has
been cut by about $1.4 billion dollars over the last four years
from what it would have been under previous spending levels.
Consequently, our land reimbursements have been much lower than
what was expected. The cuts in AIr> have-dramatically slowed
airport development throughout the whole country.
We have every reason to believe that the FAA will eventually
reimburse us for our land acquisitions. However, ,it will take
much longer than originally was anticipated. We believe that it
would be in both the Authority's best interest and FOOT's if our
obligations could be postponed until FAA reimbursement does
occur.
The purpose of this letter is not an attempt on our part to get
out of paying FOOT what we owe. We want to pay back FOOT. In
fact we have recently received an FAA land reimbursement in the
amount of $635,000 which will be applied toward what we owe. We
believe that FOOT would realize a much greater benefit from FAA
reimbursements than if we were to pay a 25% share to clear up our
debt. Attached is a breakdown of the Authority's land
acquisition transactions. as they have occurred. At the bottom is
a schedule of the 25% paybacks.
In rounded figures we have entered into 75%-25% JPA's totaling
$36,000,000 requiring a payback. Of this amount FOOT's share is
$27,000,000 and the Authority's share is $9,000,000. If we were
to pay $9,000,000 to FOOT to make a 50% ~atching fund project,
then FOOT would receive $9,000,000. But if we can postpone the
payback until we are reimbursed by FAA then there would be the
potential for FDOT to receive back their entire investment except
for 5% of the total cost of the land. There would be the
potential of being paid back $25,200,000 ($27,000,000 less
$1,800,000) -
-
...
-
,'"
'-
""
William J. Ashbaker
December 8, 1997
/ Page Three
Our latest pre~application with the FAA includes a~ost
$9 000 000 (before our recent reimbursement) in eligible
reimbu~sements that will be paid to FOOT as the reimbursements
are made. Attached is an Exhibit A Property Map for the airport
which shows the eligible property. It is colored dark green on
the west side of Runway 9R. It is clear zone and approach
protection zone property that has a high priority for
reimbursement.
We are in the process of a development of regional ~pact study
and an environmental assessment report for constructing the first
phase of Runway 9L-27R. The environment assessment has been
completed but has been put on hold for review by the FAA because
of a present downturn in traffic. However we are continuing with
the development of regional impact study. With some flight
schools that are coming on line at the airport we expect the
traffic to increase again and that the new runway will be needed
perhaps shortly after the year 2000. Much more land will become
eligible for reimbursement when this project is approved by FAA.
Also, as more infrastructure is completed and more. .land is leased
to aviation enterprises more land will become eligible.
We believe that it will be mutually beneficial to FOOT as well as
to the Authority to be able to postpone these debts.
What we are proposing is, that since we operate a General
Aviation Airport, for FOOT to replace our JPA's requiring a
payback in ten years with JPA's that require a payback as FAA
reimbursements occur with no time limit. . We understand that the
new land acquisition program could be interpreted so as to allow
this to be done.
As an alternative, we would propose that the current JPA's
structured as 75%-25% loans be converted to grants. We would
suggest that they be converted to 75%-25% grants, within the
limi ts of the currently authorized 80%-20% grant program. No
funds would be required to take this action. As a condition of
this action, the Authority would agree to transmit all federal
AIP funds made available relating to this land acquisition
program to FOOT until the FDOT receives its full share under the
Federal 90%-5%-5% federal grant program. Since there is already
approximately $9,000,000 eligible for reimbursement, FOOT would
get a least as much as it would by converting the loans to 50%-
50% grants, and would stand to recoup some $16,000,000 in
addition as the reimbursement program was completed.
-
-
/
/
'-'
'...I
/
/
William J. Ashbaker
December 8, 1997
Page Four
We would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter with
you in anticipation of arriving at a resolution that is in the
best interest of FOOT, the Authority, and the Aviation Community.
Sincerely yours,
/i t:; / ./
i':/ J;. l·wL-
,~{¿."t~. .I f~,
l.
Curtis King
Airport Director
CK/hs
cc: Port and Airport Authority
County Administrator
Assistant County Administrator
County Attorney
Management and Budget Manager
Interim Port Director
Russ Tagliareni, FOOT Aviation Central Office
Harry Downing, FOOT District 4
-
- .....
..... --
'- """
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
John D. Bruhn
District 1
Ken Sattler
District 2
Paula A. Lewis Gary D. Charles,Sr. Cliff Barnes
District 3 District 4 District 5
AGENDA
May 12, 1998
1. MINUTES
Approve the minutes of the meeting held April 28, 1998.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
3. CONSENT AGENDA
4. AIRPORT
Resolution 98-08- Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution accepting a Joint
Participation Agreement in the Amount of $2,980,000 for purchase of parcels 48, 49 and 50.
Authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement.
5. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Property purchases- Consider staff request for authorization to initiate the acquisition process
to obtain appraisals, a commitment for title insurance, a survey and an environmental audit for
properties offered for sale by Betty Green, Robert Edsall, Jr. and Larry McIver.
NOTICE: All proceedings before this Board are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to
appeal any action taken by the Board at these meetings will need a record of the proceedings and for such
purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Upon the request of any
party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the
proceedings will be granted an opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing
upon request.
-
- ~
~ -
'-
""
CONSENT AGENDA
Mav 12. 1998
1. WARRANTS LIST
Approve Warrants List No. 30,31 and 32.
2. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Mid-South Services, Inc.- Consider staff recommendation to approve the Subordination,
Nondisturbance and Attornment Agreement with Mid-South Services, Inc. and authorize the
Chairman to sign. Also approve the for m of the Subordination, Nondisturbance and Attornment
Agreement between Mid-South and Air Charter of Florida, Inc. and the Release of Subordination,
Nondisturbance and Attornment Agreement for Aircraft Painting Center. and authorize the
Chairman to sign the release.
"
-
-
-
,... -
'-'
.....".¡
AGENDA REQUEST
ITEM NO.
¡
DATE: 5-12-98
REGULAR [ x )
PUBLIC HEARING
CONSENT
TO: PORT & AIRPORT AUTHORITY
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY:
Airoort
curtis Kino
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 98-08, accepting Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) WPI #4829286
and authorizing the Chairman to execute the Agreement for Land Acquisition in the amount of
$2,980,000. This is a JPA with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the purpose of
acquiring Instrument Approach Zone Protection land for the airport. The FDOT share is $2,235,000.
No local matching share is required. No payback to FDOT is required unless the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) reimburses the Authority for the land at 90% of the cost within ten years.
BACKGROUND: The owners of the land (parcels 48, 49 and 50) want to lease it back and in concept
have agreed to accept the FDOT's 75% share as the full cash payment. In lieu of receiving cash from
the Authority a prepaid upfront lease on the property would constitute the Authority's 25% share of
the purchase price.
FUNDS AVAILABLE IN ACCT. #: No matching funds required.
PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Authority approve the Joint Participation Agreement and
authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement, and the attached Resolution No. 98-08 as drafted.
3-2
CONCURRENCE:
&-::
County Administrator
ION:
[
['
APPROVED DENIED
OTHER:
Management & Budget:
Purchasing:
County Attorney:
Originating Dept.
Other:
Other:
Finance: {Check for Copy only. if applicable}_____
Eft. 1/97
-
-
-
'-'
-...I
MEMORANDUM
To:
Port and Airport Authority
From:
Curtis King, Airport Director
Date:
May 4, 1998
Re:
Resolution No. 98-08 - Accepting the Joint
Participation Agreement (JPA) WPI #4829286
and authorizing the Chairman to execute the
Agreement for Land Acquisition in the amount
of $2,980,000. This is a JPA with the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the
purpose of acquiring Instrument Approach Zone
Protection Land for the airport. The FDOT
share is $2,235,000. No local matching share
is required. No payback to FDOT is required
unless the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) reimburses the Authority for the land
at 90% of the cost within ten years.
Background:
Attached to this memorandum is a copy of a proposed JPA between
the FDOT and the Port and Airport Authority in the amount of
$2,980,000 (WPI #4829286) for the purpose of acquiring Instrument
Approach Z~ne Protection Land.
Also attached is a copy of a draft Resolution No. 98-08 which
accepts the above described JPA and authorizes the Chair.man to
execute the Agreement and authorizes the County Attorney to
execute the Agreement by approving it as to form and correctness.
The FOOT 75% share of the JPA is $2,235,000. The Authority's
share would normally be 25% of the total amount of the JPA. For
this JPA it would normally be $745,000. However, the owners of
the land (parcels 48, 49, and 50) want to lease it back and in
concept have agreed to accept the FDOT's 75% share as the full
cash payment. In lieu of receiving cash from the Authority a
prepaid upfront lease on the property would constitute the
Authority's 25% share of the purchase price.
--...,
""
Under this arrangement there would be no matching funds required
of the Authority to make the purchase. A letter approving this
financial arrangement from the FDOT is included in the agenda
package. Also, under the new Land Acquisition Program enacted by
the Florida Legislature no payback of the FDOT funds will be
required unless the FAA re~urses the purchase of the land at
90% of the cost within ten years. The no payback requirement
will hold true even if the airport becomes a Commercial Service
Airport. It is the status of the airport at the time the JPA is
executed that binds the Agreement.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Authority approve the JPA and authorize
the Chairman to execute the Agreement, and the attached
Resolution No. 97-08 as drafted.
Respectfully submitted,
(}~' h
Curtis King
Airport Director
CK/hs
'-'
.-...,1
ST. LUCIE COUNTY PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 98-08
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
BY THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY PORT AND AIRPORT
AUTHORITY AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE
ST. LUCIE COUNTY PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY TO
EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT
BY APPROVING IT AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS
WHEREAS, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority has
made the following determination:
1. This Authority has sought approval for a proj ect to
provide for the undertaking of Land Acquisition (Work Program Item
No. 4829286).
2. This Authority should authorize and approve execution of
the Joint Participation Agreement with the State of Florida
Department of Transportation to provide for the undertaking of
Land Acquisition. (Work Program Item No. 4829286).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the St. Lucie County Port and
Airport Authority:
A. This Authority hereby authorizes and approves execution of
the Joint Participation Agreement with the State of Florida
Department of Transportation to provide for the undertaking of Land
Acquisition.
B. The Chairman and the Clerk of this Authority are hereby
authorized to execute the Joint Participation Agreement approved
\w,
'-'
by this resolution, and further, the County Attorney is hereby
authorized to execute the agreement by approving it as to form and
correctness.
After motion and second the vote on this resolution was as
follows:
Chairman Ken Sattler AYE
Vice Chairman John D. Bruhn NAY
Commissioner Paula A. Lewis AYE
Commissioner Gary D. Charles, Jr. AYE
Commissioner Cliff Barnes NAY
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 12th day of May, 1998.
ATTEST:
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY
BY:~~
da~
CHAIRMAN
AGENDA REQUEST
ITE':il'lO. :S
'-'
DATE: May 12,1998
REGULAR [ XX ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [ ]
TO: PORT AND AIRPORT AlITHORITY
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
SUBJECT: Request for Consideration to Purchase Airport Property Offered for Sale by Property Owners
BACKGROUND:
See attached memorandum
FUNDS AVAILABLE:
S9223-4211-561000-400
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Authority authorize staff to initiate the acquisition process to
obtain appraisals, a commitment for title insurance, a survey and an environmental audit.
3-2
COMMISSION ACTION:
[j APPROVED [] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
CONCU
CE:
County Attorney:
Or
Review and Approvals
Originating Dept.
"'"'ge.e"' , 'udge', ~
Airport D1r: ~~--7;; ,/
Purchasing:
Prop. Acq. M9r.~
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)
8ft. 5/96
,-.
'..,,/
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO:
Port and Airport Authority
FROM:
Daniel S. Mclntyre, County Attorney
C.A. NO.:
98-760
DATE:
May 5,1998
SUBJECT:
Request for Consideration to Purchase Airport Property Offered
for Sale by Property Owners
BACKGROUND:
Attached to this memorandum are letters hom Betty Haynes Green, Robert S.
Edsall, Jr. and Larry Mclver who are owners of Parcels 48,49 and 50 (approximately 120
acres) on the westerly side of the St. Lucie County Airport just west of Kings Highway. A
copy of a map locating the properly is attached. These properties are in the Instrument
Approach Protection Zone for the Precision Instrument Landing System for the East-West
runway at the airport.
The owners of these properties have expressed an interest in selling the properties to
the Port and Airport Authority and leasing them back as part of the purchase agreements.
The parcels are colored orange on the attached drawing.
The Por\: and AirPort Authority can purchase these properties with 75% FDOT land
acquisition funds and a 25% local match. The approximate cost of the properties is $2.2
million (appraisals to establish the actual purchase price would be done as part of the purchase
process). The Authority would not need to raise the 25% local match in this case as the
properly owners have agreed to accept lease credits as the 25% match through the term of the
leaseback of the properly to them. No payback to the FDOT would be required if the FAA
does not reimburse the Authority and FDOT within ten (10) years.
In the Lease, the Authority would negotiate a profit sharing arrangement with the
tenants on net income from the use of the property for citrus production through the term
of the lease. The actual lease amount and profit sharing methodology would be established
-
....... ~
- -
'-'
....,¡
through independent appraisal and negotiation as part of the purchase process. The FDOT
has indicated approval of this purchase process as indicated in their attached letter.
The Airport Master Plan recommends purchase of these parcels in that they serve the
same purpose on the west side of the airport as the Ridgehaven area serves on the east side.
They would be used as Instrument Approach Protection Zone land which would in the future
be eligible for reimbursement by the FAA at 90% of the cost in that the approach slope over
the properties is approximately 130 feet in height, going to 100 feet when the runway is
lengthened to 8,000 feet. public ownership of the property would provide a buffer for any
possible future incompatible land uses and ensure safety within the Instrument Approach
Protection Zone.
RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSIO N:
Staff recommends that the Authority authorize staff to initiate the acquisition process
to obtain appraisals, a commitment for title insurance, a survey and an environmental audit.
Respectfully submitted,
í) mjp 11
¡~JI1IIft\, ,
Danié S. McIn..ltyfe )
County Attorneý /
DSM/caf
Attachments
-
...... ....
~ -
~ '-'
EDSALL GROVE SERVICE:. IdC.
EDSALL GROVES, INC.
, 3915 1 S1' STREET sW
vERoaE:ACH. FLORIDA 32968
.,ð t -SG2 .37Z4 F,t,JC S6t ·~ð~·,:n I ð8!·4St· ;S4~~
Q.JI. ~~Au.. .;tt..
...tCC ....alOÐóT
.... 0'" Vie well( O<C:JC. \..
~
~d>.:T"'wv,"""";:A.s.u"'~
DËCEMBER 30, 1~97
FROM.:
~R. CURTIS KING, AIRPORT D!R~~TOR OF ST. LuctE COU~ÎY
F^X RO. 551~462-1718
rtRS.SETTY HA 1(I.{ES GREENE MW
ROBERT S. BOSALL, JR.
-~. .- ..- .---.
TO:
DEAR t1~. KING:
VE. THE OWNERS Of' 60 ACRES OF" CITRm; GROVE A.LONG THß WEST S¡UE:
OF THE FEEDER LANE m«:TUE NORTH S;IùE OF' LARRY ~cIVER'S 80 Jl,CRE:S AND
'WEST OF' 51. L.UC.IE COUNTY A1 RPQRT. ...~¡;: A\lÀ~E" TRAT TH1~ A.IRP'Of<i
AtITHORITY lfAY "BE INTERESTED IN OWNING OUR PROPERTY.
rr HAS B~ SUOOSSTEt) THAT 75~ OF 'THE AP?RJtlSED VALUI~ MIGHT BE:
?AID IN" CASH AND 1'ßJ:: ~RE11^!NING ~5~ ¡/î THE: Farm OF' A ?R£'?AiID t.EAS£.
'WE ARE OPEN TO SUCH "A DEAL DEP£ND1NG UPC}{· "TH~ i;ALtJE OF THE;
APPRAISAL Â~ù THE T~~S OF THE ?REPA10L£ÂSE.
VERY RESP£CTFULL1 YOURS.
Æ
z._<
---
... - - ---
~ "WÌ
LARRY ItlcIVER GROVES
öOO(~¡(\('i(tXx
1Œ2 Idy Jwild Dr.
x~~
Winter HaVEfl, FL 33881
~
(941) 938-ffi32
January 3, 1998
Mr. curtis King
Airport Director
st. Lucie County International Airport
2300 Virginia Ave.
Ft. Pierce, FL 34980
Dear Mr. King:
I understand that I own 80 acres located within the airport
acquisition program area. If this is true, I would be interested
in selling this property to the airport. I also understand that ln
the past the airport authority has purchased property and leased it
back to the seller. I would also be interested in this type of
transaction if it was available.
If you are interested in discussing this, please glve me a
call at one of the following numbers:
Local:
Winter Haven:
(561) 595-2352
(941) 968-0032
ef:/i?~
'Larry L. McIver
LLM/kab
-
--
-
'-'
,...."
ST. LUCIE COUNTY PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY
PORT OF FORT PIERCE - 5T. LUCIE COUN1Y INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Port Director
CURTlS KING
Airport Director
January 5, 1998
Mr. Harry Downing
Aviation Supervisor
Florida Department of Transportation
3400 W. Commercial Blvd.
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl. 33309-3421
Re: WPI #4829286 Land Acquisition
Parcels 48, 49, & 50
st. Lucie County International Airport
Dear Mr. Downing:
Attached is a letter from Mrs. Betty Haynes Green and Robert s.
Edsall, Jr., who are the owners of parcels 48 and 49 (total of
approximately 60 acres) which are included in our airport land
acquisition program. Also attached is a letter from Mr. Larry L.
McIver who owns parcel 50 (approximately 80 acres) This parcel
is also included in our land acquisition program.
The owners of these parcels are interested in selling them to the
st. Lucie County Port and Authority and leasing them back as part
of their purchase agreements. The parcels are colored orange on
the property map that is also attached.
In conversation with the owners, I explained to them that the
Authority is not in a position to raise the 25% local matching
funds that would be required for obtaining the 75% FOOT land
acquisition funds that would be needed for the purchase of their
property. The money that the Authority presently has available
for purchasing land is reserved for the remaining parcels in the
land acquisition program that are located east of King's Highway.
In further conversation the owners agreed in concept to accept
the FOOT 75% share of the appraised value of the property as
their payment for it's purchase. In lieu of being paid the local
25% share they are willing to count the local share as their
upfront pre-payment for a leaseback of the property. The
conditions, terms, and length of the lease period to be agreed
upon would be based on an appraised yearly rental value for the
property. If the property should be needed for an airport
purpose, then the Authority would need to retain the right to buy
out the leases, or prorated portions of the leases, for no more
than the original 25% of the purchase price with the yearly
rental value deducted from that amount.
JOHN D. BRUHN. Distric% No.1· KEN SATTI.ER, District No.2· PAULA A. LEWIS. District No.3· GARY D. CHARLES, SR. District No. ~ . CUFF BARNES. Distric% No.5
2300 Virginia Avenue· Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652 · Phone (561) 462-1732 · FAX (561) 462-1718 . Suncom 259-1732
TDD (561) 462-1 428
-
-
'-'
'wi
Under this arrangement the Authority would not have to raise any
of the matching funds for the purchase. Instead of receiving
rental payments each month the payments would all be pre-paid
until such time as the lease expires. The purchase and leaseback
agreements would all be subject to FDOT approval. The Authority
would hold the title to the land and would, along with FDOT and
the FAA, have complete control of the uses of the property and
could thereby prevent any incompatible land uses from occurring.
The land would eventually provide income for the operation and
maintenance of the airport.
We are by this letter requesting FOOT conceptual approval of this
purchase arrangement. If FOOT concurs with initiating the
purchase process under this concept please so indicate by signing
in the space provided below and return the original for our
files. We.will also need to enter into a JPA for WPI #4829286
which is our last Work Program Item for land acquisition. The
Authority's 25% share would be the pre-paid lease.
Please call me if you have any questions. Thank you for your
assistance.
Sincerely yours, OF TRANSPORTATION
~~
Airport Director
Approved by
Date t / ;;:¿\/ q ~
t l
CK/hs
V"')
M
ª ¡¡ ~
3~ " - ~l
_10 t:",:
~ ~:: 1i; -;¡ t'\ g..;1.. g
~ 0 .. ~ ..~:ï ~~::
B> D' ....:1 1_
_0 !'!t¡;;; ~;
õ .. a"" ...::; ~I~~; ~!
3v ~. ~af <0
0 Ji! i!¡¡
:;-:~ .... [...:....·ø ~~
Z u ~i :! 'H! ~~ ß ¿. ~g
~ ~ ... Ñ '\; ~
ill ~ ~v
ø II v' ª, U !II
ill 21 öl
;::1 21 . ~
" ß~
..J ~I ~I a..::
É! æ....&::
~ ~ fl~
!?! ,I g ~
~I ~J v E~ ~ ,~
61 "I g ~~
.' il
:>
<
.
~ t:
I ~
~
~~
I
u
~
: ~
::: <.!
.. ~
~,~:
~ ,,¡:
~ ft
I ~
"
Ì"
'"
N
,
.,
~ -¡
$ ~¡
~ .
=
w
(j) I
1 2
<-
---
... :i ~ ~
r.',
l:oJ
ŒQ
r.~
>g
~~
\nD~It-'Thlr-C::\~TPDnOT\O¡<1h,-') Th" hi"" nc; no- 1n- Ak 1007 n""iri t.r,r'.
r--
m
"'-
N
o
"'-
m
o
Ü
f'1
I
Q
"'-
::1:
r--
:;-
w
'0
::J
..J
I
I-
(j)
/'
, ,
"
Ld
ul
'm:'
I.d
1/)
!~ff-r
¡-r;:;D
I
L~
II
IMMOI< OLEE P[I
LEGEND
NORTH
o 1,800
I ,__ I
~ I ~w I
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
3,600
I
I
I
I
I
~INSULA DR
riVER PRADO
WA TERS ' DP
¡--
~D
=-.
:>
r::
0::
w
'-./
::(
Z
Z
0)
¿~) ~
q.~
.-
Lt1
~o
AVE
,-( W
; 1.0
~~~~
1-
R [J .5
UL TIMA IE AIRPORT PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PHASE II DEVELOPMENT
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
(1998-2010)
EXISTING ROAD
EXISTING RAIL ROAD
P!="\/I<:r::-n U ^ 0 W
......
'-'
...,
Development of Regional Impact (DRI)
Chronology
Background A Binding Letter of Interpretation for Development of Regional Impact Status was issued
by the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to St. Lucie County on January 22,
1987 regarding St. Lucie County International Airport. This letter concluded that the
extension of Runway 9/27 by 1,500 feet to a length of6,500 feet was not a DR!. The letter
also concluded that the runway extension "shall be considered cumulatively with any future
additional development."
Nov. 1990
Dec. 1990
Feb. 1991
Aug. 1991
Nov. 1991
May 1992
Oct. 1992
Dec. 1992
Apr. 1993
The St. Lucie County Port & Airport Authority (P&AA), after considering the
implementation of the 1984 Airport Master Plan, concluded that additional development is
of regional impact. Thus, a DR! should be prepared. In addition, the P&AA concluded that
to determine the financial feasibility of relocating the airport, an Alternative Site Analysis
should be completed.
The P&AA approved a Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) with Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT). This JPA for 50% funding of the project was for $150,000 of
FDOT funding and $150,000 of BOCC funding for a total project cost of $300,000. The
JP A and Resolution 90-35 (see Attachment One) approved the development of a DR! based
on the ultimate build out of the Airport as indicated in the 1984 Airport Master Plan. (see
Attachment Two)
As a result of Greiner's work with the approved 1984 Master Plan and a perceived conflict
of interest for Greiner, the P&AA disapproved Supplemental Agreement No. 19 for
$185,130 to the Greiner engineering contract dated January 18, 1988 for the preparation of
a DR! and for the preparation of an Alternative Site Analysis.
P&AA authorized the Airport to advertise for proposals ITom firms to produce a DRI/ADA
and the Alternative Site Analysis.
P&AA approved the ranking of firms for staff to negotiate with for the preparation of the
DR! and the Alternative Site Analysis.
P&AA approved Phase I to Aviation Planning Inc. for $126,610 to conduct an Alternative
Site Analysis.
P&AA voted to terminate the Aviation Planning contract because of the consultant's failure
to keep the planning team together. P&AA authorized staff to negotiate with the number
two firm, Williams, Hatfield, & Stoner.
P&AA approves the updated Airport Master Plan. (see Attachment Three)
FDOT stated that they would not support any relocation of the Airport from its current
location. (see Attachment Four)
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) stated that they would not participate in any
Alternative Site Analysis as the existing site has not been maximized. The FAA stated they
would participate in an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed parallel runway.
(see Attachment Five)
P&AA rejected the $160,000 proposal ITom WH&S to conduct the Alternate Site Analysis
and directed staff to conduct the study in house.
May 1994
Jul. 1994
Sep. 1994
Jul. 1996
Sep. 1996
Oct. 1996
Feb. 1997
Mar. 1997
ApI. 1997
May 1997
Sep. 1997
ApI. 1998
Aug. 1998
Oct. 1998
Dec. 1998
'-'
~
FDOT states that state or federal funding would not be available for the relocation of the
existing Airport. (see Attachment Six)
P&AA accepted the Analysis of Alternate Sites prepared by Community Development. The
Analysis recommends that all Airport development remain at its present location. (see
Attachment Seven)
P&AA approved terminating the existing RFP with all the firms for the Airport DR! and
negotiate with Greiner to prepare the DR!.
P&AA approved Supplemental Agreement No. 16 for $279,587 to the Greiner engineering
contract dated June 3, 1991 for the preparation of a DRI/ADA for the Airport.
FDOT increases funding participation by $30,000 for the preparation of the DR! to
$180,000 for a total project cost of $360,000. This increase will cover the RPC's review
costs.
Greiner submits the ADA for the DR! to the RPC for review.
RPC notifies the P&AA that the ADA for the DR! contains insufficient informa!ion for the
RPC to perform the regional impact assessment as required by Florida Statutes.
P&AA approves the scope of work with IRCC to prepare an Airport Business & Marketing
Plan.
P&AA approves the Airport Business & Marketing Plan mission statement and goals. (see
Attachment Eight)
Greiner submits the ADAlDR! Sufficiency Responses to the County and the RPc.
RPC notifies the P&AA that the revised ADA for the DR! contains insufficient information
for the RPC to perform the regional impact assessment as required by Florida Statutes.
Greiner notifies RPC that the P&AA is in the process of substantially revising the scope of
the DR! and additional time is needed.
P&AA approves an $43,500 increase in FDOT participation to $223,500 for a total project
cost of $447,000. This increase is for rewriting the DR! to conform to the amended Master
Development Plan for the Airport.
P&AA requests proposals from the Airport's four consultants to evaluate the Airport
Business & Marketing Plan and develop a cost estimate to obtain permits for all of the
projects listed in the Master Development Plan.
FDOT notifies the P&AA that a request for consultants to submit a cost breakdown is a
violation of the Consultants Competitive Negotiations Act (CCNA) which states that "the
agency may request, accept, and consider proposals for the compensation to be paid under
the contract only during competitive negotiations." After clarification ofthe request by the
County Administrator, FDOT approves the consultant's selection process.
RPC extends the time to respond to the second round of sufficiency questions to August 2,
1999.
-
~ W
~\f\~ ~
~ ¡;;~ ~. lÎ ö ~ ~ U':)
o<~ ~ HI OC\]
~ ~. g ~~ l' ~ ¡2
~ e~~ .w w ow ~ ;! z
gw~ ~. ~ =~
Q ~ z u .1
~æ!2 ã '1æ æ !i:£ II ¡;,..
z .~~ ~ .~S! e 5::: I~ 0
~ ~~~ ." ~ ~. ¡I L
w ~ ¡8~ ~ ~
?¿ ~ \
~ II ~
~; ~ E-o ~
8 U ¡I; ;>-<p;:; <
"I " :::g
..J ~ ~I ~ ¡¡ 8'- E-00
z ...:;! ~ zP-.
51 - ~~
~ . 9 @~ ¡¡¡ ;:
~: 8 ~: ~ ! I ! ;::>:::
i " o w' i<! ; 0<
01 ~ z ~ ~ -
~, ~ U
§
;¡
.."
Z
E-<
æ
æ
><
¡;.;¡
Q
Q
~
""
"
m
¡
ã
~
it
'"
,.
..
vi
'"
~
~~
aè
ð ~
~ ì!
u ~
"
~
i
~
~
~
I
. I'
1
I
.
I
g
Ui
w
s
~~
.2
iI
-f.-.. \~
~\\
{\Ù
- .....
~
1.082886
Attachment One
"-'
ST. LUCIE COUNTY PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY
PORi MW l~h\PORT
D!RECiOR
Sf. LUCIE COU~HY. FLORIDA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-35
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS JOINT
PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT BY THE ST. LUCIE
COUNTY PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ST. LUCIE
COUNTY PORT AND AIRPORT AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE
THE AGREEMENT AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT BY
APPROVING IT AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS
WHEREAS. the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority has made
the following determination:
1. This Authority has sought approval for a Project to provide
for the undertaking of a Development of Regional Impact StudŸ (DR I )
for ultimate buildout of St. Lucie County International Airport (Work
Program Item No. 4829256).
2. This Authority should authorize and approve execution of the
Joint Participation Agreement with the State of Florida Department of
Transportation Division of Public Transportation Operations to provide
~ for the undertaking of a Development of Regional Impact Study (OR I )
.'
"
.~ for ultimate buildout of st. Lucie County International Airport.
~
.:.,
~ NOW.. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED by the St. Lucie County Port and
""
~~ Airport Authority:
~ A. This Authority hereby authorizes and approves execution of
j
the Joint Participation Agreement with the State of Florida Department
o
J..-
~
1,
r:V
....)
.-/'
of Transportation Division of Public Transportation Operations to
provide for the undertaking of a Development of Regional Impact Study
(OR!) for ultimate buildout of St. Lucie County International Airport.
Rec Fee S / IJ ,S1) ~~s DìxON
,
Add Fee S
$1. Luci.: County
Clerk of Circuit Court
By ~
Deputy Clerk:
~071 8 HI 85.3
D~)C Tax S
lnt Tax S .-J
.s
T.~'''' .: / D
-
.....,
..."
B. The Chairman and the Clerk of this Authority are hereby
authorized to execute the Joint Participation Agreement approved by
this resolution. and further. the County Attorney is hereby authorized
to execute the agreement by approving it as to form and correctness.
After motion and second the vote on this resolution was as
follows:
Chairman Jim Minix AYE
Vice Chairman Judy Culpepper ABSENT
Commissioner R. Dale Trefelner AYE
Commissioner Havert L. Fenn ABSENT
Commissioner Jack Krieger AYE
,.
,." .'
ATTEST: .'
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED t his 1 9t h day of November. 1990. . "'t~::'"
..:....., .
".' /---_.
ST _ LUCIE COUNTY ';:./ \ (; \: .~ ':" ,
PORT AND AIRPORT AUT~~~~~,': '. .f.-~>·,'
't-'~/: ,~o'-1fX:C- ",
BY: - -~i~~~~;~¿~;~;1.~~f~J)o·.c-
APPROVED AS TO FORt1 AND.~'-;-"··; ,~:'i.~:".-:'~:.
f1¡¡;¡; :!''·It{~y·
.,.....
a.¥Æ~,k~
.
,.,
-.',
..>:. - ;'.-:~
COUNTY ATTORNEY
1/
1.082886
~ ŒC10 A9:57
r"'IL~!1 , ..~ "~'r-r>-,'"
....v .....riL, t<t.t,'P":~-
DOUGLAS DiXON i:;-:-,
51. LUC ~ COUNT < ;
-~
Rro7 r 8 PAEfl854
·
·
·
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
.1
...
ITEM
UI
Of'f"IC.&\. ..'....o.n (L(Va'IO" I_
_.... ....IIIU.. T(lIf'(ftaTUfII(
Attachment Two
AIRf'OttT "C.£"4;(·"n: '.....Lr
"'.PeNtT TlIII......\. .".AIDS .01
"'''tPOftT .[f"£IUEffCt: PO..IT, LA'. a
COOftOI.,aTfl ...... l.0fitG.1
-F
I
fOf" CLEAR tON£ DIM£NSIONS SEE
SHEETS 5 ( r Of ,.
. SOURCE: ,_.... "0
(ASSUM£S THIll [( ".IW
CLOKDI.
__1...
....~"""...(..f't:n
""""'---
~~£:gf;~J
'''L
- -
fUT""
FOR A/- -- -- ----.J
'*DER___
,00
I
l-..
,
"-
"-
,
,
\
\
\
.--, I
-- - ----+--
I
" /-
'0/ --
--
-.-
EXI NO
! I NOU R I A L
P K
I
, I
. '
! :,
_ CW£_.
MkL_
!!.!!!!! !!.!!!!!
RUNWAY
4-22
LO.fIIC¡-RMG£
1O.A~
.,. ,..Zf
.,....·IZ
"'" .....
.,..-
..I....
-...
-...
.......
..,...... Net
........
....... ftlED
...-
.-
tt£vtStOflI
.., .... 0f0f"E
..
--
!!!!!:!!
........
1&.10'"
-...
GrI!InerElIIIIII!t!ñIll5denœS.h:.
_'*_ _R_
......
..-,........
.,. -'1' . 1.·11
.,. ...ø a 4""
.,. ..., . ....
........
AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN
_11_:
. CAL_'01Wl sø .....-....1'0...,
'4ØO-t1.M..... . M.eO'"
..... -.-
'0'-
........
.. _I
OeM CMC-I:
I
ST_ LU<:IE COUtITY tNTÐINA11ONAI. AIRPORT
"eMIT ..1tCC., fl.OIUN
......x: MT......... CUllATtC CUfT".
......'1..0.: _I' P-.. ."CM. ,LDIIt6&
PDItOO: ...-een
....", .....,...: AO.Þso
-~
_ ---U!!œI.
---
--
.Ie..,...
...
Mft: _....
.MEET .Q.
01 14
·
·
·
·
--
·
II
II
·
·
·
·
..
·
·
·
·
·
·
LEGEND
ITr.
U!!W!!' ~
--
f'ttOP(_n to.: iICOIIIMO
....,... ÞSI:.N'
~t[....fW I(MI:'"
---- -----
~
----
----
~ IlU:nllCTIOItL"(
-,-
acaS'li~T-of""""" .
UAU UM(I
-.
a.øG_P\MIII:CtrT.TOK
............ 0lIl _1IOiIIID
-.....tE)____I..~I-
----
----
_r_€~=
--.--
~__C:::::I
:"::5-"/-
NOTES
411&L1'...........~.....___
~.....,.€- ......... ,. ....,..u ......l1li ('1'£". ..,..
-..YIIIIRr"- _......... ~~.
~...nca.mes... --=,,_UA ~
......~. --.......cA~........
CU... ~. c...... ."....... AHlPOtn .._
--
...... ........a 1Œ11E..,...~ [.TIO. eA'"
~...~.. -..cr 10 D£1'oIAnI
... ..-
6L&.__-.w~:ra"'Ø1WAftD.
-
--
,
-
--
I.ANIJ 1I'£000000D
'Oil N'l#1tØACH MICAS
UlilllEIfULT'IIIATC ~'TY
--+
-
\~..:
t
~
Attachment Three
_r-..w...,.-
Q.f--Cl.....·..n __
<-~~ (= -(J
b,~
ULTIMATE
AtIIATION ../tCUTCD
OCVCtOl'MEwr
,-
-- r- ----=-__:::.==¡-
j).-='F"~~"
.I;: ~"I i
1:&.(" h.,.. I ~.; "
"'-:10.. ----;;;;;b;-,J;;-- ¡-. ---.-..
-.r-.. ~ __ j
=-~\-:..:;.-~.
:::~~~&.:: .....!!.Jw:. _., I
_L- ----------!
--
...
,____.¿..c
+
.
~
...-....; .......·u·
AIRPORT DATA
....
""ColI. -.... 1"''''_
.... ...... fI-.:.....
.......' ac-.:_ . fU ....u
-.....- -..
_, _....iIIU...-r.
c........ .-.
='rl.:'·:-"r:'='I-:':~':'C~o':.r·-'
....
-"':....,.....
c....:ctc.. ...... ...c_.
.............. ..--..
- -....... ""
."'Ie"'""&....... N
... w.c.... C __,._ I ""
---
--
--
--
--
---
_~c__
c.otcao.___tlllC_1
CIIftC&4._,--,-
--.... .......oct._
(If I""",
..'-.
..'
f'U1'UfI(
....
".:"-(
...
..
I,".
....fIIItC_
L.' .....,.....-..
~"'Il·"-.
~::.. -;'"':'~'t.
,.;-
RUNWAY D
......,. "-I
£...,..... 'UT ,-,
........ - _....
- -.. -..
-. - -
.... - -
.r.....'...... - -
- --..-. -
- - -
.. ..........- -
- ....
- ...,
.-..~,...'" . ..-..'.rL-.... ....
- ---. -
-......-. ....- ...
-......--- ,,'....
.. ,-..
.......~
ST. lUCIE COUNTY
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN
AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN
EXHIBIT 8.1
-
....",.¡
OF TRANSPORTATION
LAWTO" cnllzs
GOW~
605 Suwann« StreeL Tallahas.~. Florida ~2~99-0450
8m G. WATJ'S
1f11!""c-'\r,~u
li':t' i¡ ~~ ¡1 i4. &"
:.,¡ .~..:.;;:}~j f;J _
OCT 20 1992
October 16~ 1992
PORT AND AIRPORT
Mr. Curtis King
Airport Director
St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority
2300 Virginia A venue~ Room 104
Fort Pierce~ Florida 34982-5652
Sf. LUC:E COUNTY, FLORIDA
Attachment Four
Dear Mr. King,
We have reviewed the September 16th letter from the Honorable William", G.
Thiess, Mayor of St. Lucie Village~ to Commissioner Judy Culpepper fhat
expresses opposition to St. Lucie County International Airport improvements.
The Mayor's proposals for alternative airport siting or alternative airport
configuration and operating policies are not feasible with current
environmental regulations and available aviation funding. As such~ they
cannot be supported by the Florida Department of Transportation.
A proposal such as relocating St. Lucie County International Airport~ faces
environmental, political and financial barriers. The cost alone would be
prohibitive. And~ due to prior legal commitments to the Federal Aviation
Administration and the State of Florida, the cost would have to be funded
entirely from local government sources.
St. Lucie County International Airport has a well-though-out airport master
plan that has been approved by the Federal Aviation Administration according
to federal requirements. It describes improvements necessary to provide
needed air transportation services to the businesses and residents of St.
Lucie County and the surrounding region with minimal impact on the
environment. Following the Plan's recommendations will provide necessary
current and future airport capacity at far less cost than building a new
airport. With individual project approvals~ these costs will be eligible for
federal and state funding.
The proposed reconfiguration of the airport runways would requÏl'e significant
changes to. the airport master plan and subsequent approval by the FAA. The
Department would oppose these changes because they degrade the airport's
operating capability with an attendant decrease in capacity. The Mayor's
proposed night time operating prohibitions are solely within the FAA's
authority to establish. The Department can not~ however, support these
restrictions as they also will degrade the airport's operating capability and
capacity.
Airport runway directional orientation, displacement~ length and use are
functions of aircraft~ airspace and meteorological operating requirements
detailed in the master plan. Redesign of an airport's basic configuration
such as requested by Mayor Thiess must be justified using the same
aeronautical operating requirements. It is the Department's position that a
'-'
'wi
Mr. Curtis King
October 16, 1992
Page Two
redesign to accommodate Mayor Thiess' requests would not support the long
term operating capability and capacity requirements projected in the Master
Plan.
A master plan also considers existing land use and development in establishing
runway configuration. While the east-west runway orientation is aeronautically
necessary, it is also more advantageous in avoiding impacts to existing land
development in the airport's overall vicinity. St. Lucie County has a FAR Part
150 study that identifies incompatible land use based on airport noise
exposure using recognized national standard guidelines. U sing these federal
guidelines, noise exposure levels incompatible with residential land use do not
extend into any portion of St. Lucie Village. either currently or for fu~ure
operations. Runway reconfiguration will not result in a significant decrease in
size of forecast noise exposure levels in the Village but will likely result in
instances of incompatible use in areas where the exposure levels will increase.
Overflight of the Village will certainly occur when aircraft operate on an east-
west runway as occurs now and will in the future, regardless of run way
configuration. East-west flight however, spans the least distance across the
built-up area represented now by St. Lucie Village. On this flight path, an
airplane as a potential noise source, exposes the built-up area for the shortest
possible time. Runway redesign may reduce these overnights, but will result
in longer overflights of far larger built-up areas north and south of the
airport.
I hope these comments make the Department's position concerning Mayor
Thiess' proposals clear. Please do not hesitate to call me at (904)488-8444 if I
can ans we.' any questions or provide additional assistan~e.
flty J/
~ William Johnson. A.A.E.
Manage.'
A viation Office
cc Mr. Charles Blair, Manager Orlando Airports District Office, FAA
Mr. Rick Chesser, District Secretary, FDOT Dist IV
~
'-'
RECEIVED
Attachment Five
DEC 22 1992
e
PORT AND MRPORT
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
Or lando Airports District Of tsldéJC1E COUNTY..fLOIUOA
9677 Tradeport Drive. Suite 130
Orlando. Florida 32827-5397
December 16. 1992
Mr. Curtis King
Airport Director
St. Lucie County International
Airport
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce. FL 34982-5652
Dear Mr. King:
This is in response to your letters of June 24. 1992. and
October 9. 1992. concerning a Preapplication for a site
selection study and a request for review of a revised
Airport Layout Plan (ALP) as it pertains to land identified
in a Land Acquisition and Use Feasibility Study Report.
respectively.
Preapplication - Due to the existing Master Plan and the
Draft Master Plan/ALP currently under FAA review and
coordination. it is not appropriate at this time to embark
upon a site selection study for a new airport. We do not
believe such a study is necessary and it is. therefore, not
eligible for Federal funding. However. if you wish to
pursue a project for an environmental assessment for the
proposed parallel runway which would include all feasible
alternatives. we could be receptive to considering such a
project when funds become available.
Revised ALP October 9. 1992 - By telephone on December 10.
and 15. 1992. you requested an immediate advance approval to
add additional land to the ALP which is currently under
review and coordination by FAA. As far as your October 9.
1992. submittal is concerned. our preliminary review
indicates no problem with the proposed land acquisition from
an ALP approval standpoint.
None of the above comments are to be construed as a
commitment of Federal funds.
J W. Reyna ds.
Assistant Manager
~ -
1."\4"1"0" cmus
(iOVt~KN.OR
- -~ ~
h......J
-
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
-
--
-
DEPARTMENT
......,
OF
f7 "k: jJx e-Jrcn-
~ or PfZ-;::::
TRANSPORTATION
605 Suwannee Street. Tallahassee. nor1da :12.399-0450
Hf:N ('.. WATTS
SI-:CRf:TAKY
Aviation Office, MS-46
April 26, 1994
:.~~ :-: ~ E 4: ~}1-~:J
. .
;-
"J'
;:.:.~: .',
- ..
~ ." _ ~. '~:.' _:;:~~'. f':~~~}~~:'~);"
Mr. Curtis King
Manager
St. Lucie County International Airport
2300 Virginia Avenue
Ft. Pierce, FL 34982
Attachment Six
Dear Mr. King:
My staff has evaluated St. Lucie County's study of potential new airport sites to
relocate St. Lucie County International Airport. St. Lucie County conducted a
thorough and professional study. You adequately addressed the issue and we concur
with the conclusion that it is not cost-effective to relocate the airport.
Further. the Florida Aviation System Plan, which is both the aviation component of the
Florida Transportation Plan and the State of Florida's input to the FAA's National Plan
of Integrated Airport SJstems (NPIAS), does not indicate a need for a new airport or for
relocation of the existing airport. In other words, it is not likely that state or federal
funding would be available to assist with such a relocation.
We congratulate you for your hard work to develop St. Lucie County International
Airport to its full potential. The citizens of Ft. Pierce and surrounding communities in
St. Lucie County will enjoy the substantial economic and transportation benefits of
your fine airport long into the future.
Willia ;]. Ashbaker. P.E.
Administrator
Aviation Development
cc: Nancy Bungo, District 4 Public Transportation Manager
.,
Tf
~RECYCLED
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
·
·
I
·
·
I
II
¡
I
I
I
~
....
.... ......... ...
--
r-~ --- ------- ------ -- -
I
,.--
\
-..- -I
-7. Attachment Seven
TRANSITIONAL
w
z 0"
o
N
:r:: .. ..
U 0 0
<x:: 0 0
o N
OC _
CL
CL
<x::
..
o
o
o
..
o
o
0)
~--
~I ._~.
-----
oj
J2
*
I
-
~
t
,
\
t
,L0
--------
,
PREPARED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DE
TECHNICAL SERVICES DIV.
0 RESIDENCES ,
)
. SUBDIVISIONS
* PRIVATE AIR STRIPS
 TALL TOWERS
EXISTING
AIRPORT
ULTIMATE
BUILD-OUT
EXHIBIT 16
,~
~
~
-
~
~
~
~
~
~
,
,
1
,
t
,
,
I·
I
'-'
.....,
Attachment Eight
ST. LUCIE COUNTY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
1998 - 2002 BUSINESS AND MARKETING PLAN
WITH A 2010 PLANNING HORIZON
~~<;.~--;:;:::~
.0'..... \. ~ r· r.-....:::~
/"_ \ ,\ v t··. "/':'::-'
(;~G~~~;i:f~â'.,
.... . , ~ " ..... -'
.;. "'<·:~G·Çi·! \~1>/' . i/o'
,..... . ^ .......:~... " /;
< IV! ......".,,~ \;.. //
'-:'~:~'LtL\Y~~\>" '
Submitted to
The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982
Submitted by
The Airport Business Plan Committee
November, 1997
I,
'-"
.~
I
ST. LUCIE COUNTY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
BUSINESS MTJ> MARKETING PLAN
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I
I
The airport business and marketing plan establishes a mission statement as well as goals and objectives
that provide the guidance necessary for effectively managing the airport in the most cost effective
manner possible over the next five years. . The mission of the Port and Airport Authorit~· is to
operate and manage the St. Lucie County International Airport to serve general aviation and the
air transportation needs of the community on a fmancia1ly self-sustaining basis, . generating full
use of Authority-owned properties for commercial and industrial business.
I
I
While the business and marketing plan has a 5-year time frame. it also includes an Airport Capital
Improvement Plan (ACIP) covering a twelve-year span that coincides with the time frame for the newly
modified scope of the Development of Regional Impact (DR!) study. Overall. the Business and
Marketing Plan and the ACIP outline a development program which will make the St. Lucie County
International Airport a first class executive general aviation airport that accommodates small
commercial jet and/or turboprop scheduled service as the need is presented. The plan limits the use of
the airport to the type of aircraft already using the facility. therefore eliminating a need for
strengthening the existing runway. The plan also identifies ways to improve the airport's perceived
image, operating efficiency and revenue generating capability while minimizing envirorunental impact·
and mitigation requirements.
I
I
I
I
EXISTING OPERATING ENVIRONMENT
5t. Lucie County International Airport's runway system, instrument approach capability. and
supporting infrastructure make it comparable to other airports located in the Southeast region. The
airport is presently classified in the National Plan for Integrated Airport Systems (NIPIAS) and the
Continuing Florida Aviation System Planning Program (CFASPP) as a general aviation airport.
Inclusion in both the National and State plans qualifies the airport to receive funding assistance for
eligible capital improvement projects at various funding levels.
I
t
The airport offers a full range of aviation services including fuel sales, airframe and power plant repair.
avionics sales and service, aircraft painting, aircraft rental, air taxi and charter service, and flight
instruction. It also has a federally operated control tower and a customs facility. The entire airport site
is designated as a general purpose foreign-trade zone (Zone #218). Within the past year, the Micco
Aircraft Company (formerly The New Meyers Aircra1Ì Company) has begun production of a two-seat.
high performance single-engine aircraft. Other aviation related companies have also indicated a desire
to locate at the airport.
]
I
I
Over the past 10 years. the Authority has purchased approximately 2,300 acres of property in a joint
land purchase program with the Federal Aviation Administration and the Florida Department of
Transportation. When added to the airport's original 1,400 acres, nearly 3,700 acres are available for
airport infrastructure. industriallcommercialland uses. and areas designated as buffer zones to other
adjacent land uses. In total. it is estimated that approximately 720 acres of Authority-owned property
are available for light industrial/commercial, and aviation related development.
I
,
I
,II .
""
II
II
I]
I
U
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-'
""wI
Development of Regional Impact (DR!) and Environmental Assessment (EA) studies have been on-
going over the past two years. The DR! study was to project long-tenn demand (20 to 30 years) for an
airport infrastructure and address the social, economic and environmental impacts of an additional
parallel runway, as well as other supporting airport developments. The focus of the EA was [0 address
the environmental impacts of a new parallel runway nonh of the existing main runway. On September
19, 1997. County staff introduced a modified DRI plan which covers a period of 12 years. This
modification, which was approved by the Port and Airport Authority on October 7. 1997. contains a
reduction in total environmental impacts and presents a more realistic planning horizon when
considering the present level of activity at the airport. At the same time. the EA was temporarily
postponed by the FAA due to the current level of operations at the airport.
MANAGEMENT AND OPERATING ISSUES
OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT
The ABPC identified several areas of the existing operation that presented opportunities for
improvement in support of the mission statement, goals and objectives.
Redefinine the Scope of Airport Development
Discussions within the ABPC produced a consensus that the high level of aviation activity projected in
the original DR! will evenrually occur at the airport, but not within the near-to-intermediate time frame
(five to 15 years). Since the business and marketing plan and the ACIP cover a period of five years and
twelve years respectively, the ABPC agreed that the focus should be on improving the operation and
quality of the existing facility.
Capitalizin~ on Existin~ Revenue Sources
The ABPC concluded that the leasing of available property for aviation and industrial/commercial
development is a top priority for the airport to achieve financial self-sufficiency. The ABPC is
recommending that staff make ready-for-lease 265 acres of airport property.
Streamlinine Existin~ Leasin~ Procedures
The ABPC found that the existing procedures for leasing Authority-owned property are somewhat
cumbersome and time consuming. The committee consulted with the County Attorney and made
recommendations for the Authority's consideration [0 improve this process.
Developin2 a Standard Lease Packa2e - Consistent with "streamlining" the leasing process. the
ABPC is recommending that a standard lease package be developed by staff. This package would nO(
only provide a standard source of lease infonnation. but also serve as a marketing device in attracting
new lessees.
Allowin~ Commissions to Real Estate Brokers - The ABPC recommends that staff develop. with the
approval of the Authority. conditions under which qualified real estate brokers could earn ~
commission for introducing and securing a lease agreement on Authority-owned property. The ABPC
believes that the network available to the real estate profession could be very effective in getting more
acres under lease in a shorter period of time.
11
--
! "
\..(
......,
Updatin~ Airport Minimum Standards and Leases
Minimum standards were developed for the airport in 1978 to create a fair and competitive husiness
enviromnent. Since that time, the airport has matured and seen many changes in the operating. and
regulatory enviromnent warranting a review and update of these standards. Changes in en\'Ïronmemal
legislation and regulation also make it necessary to review and update the airport's leases to assure thaI
the lessee and the Authority are adequately protected. and that each has a clear understanding of their
responsibilities. The ABPC is recommending that the airport minimum standards and leases he
reviewed and updated accordingly.
Identif,in~ Proiects to Improve Airport Aesthetics and Imaee
The ABPC visited the airport for a briefing on past. present, and future capital improvement projects
and to develop a first-hand impression of the facility in tenns of general aesthetics. For the air
traveling public. the airport is the first. last. and sometimes the only element upon which visitors hase
lasting opinions about the community. The Committee discussed their views on what they saw. and
identified several areas of the airport that need attention. The ABPC is recommending that staff
develop a program that systematically addresses each of the areas identified.
Reali~nin~ Mana~ement and Staffim!
A recommendation is being made to have one director for the port and the airport. while incorporating a
lower to mid-level operations supervisor for each operation. For the near tenn. operational needs
represented by positions such as the financelgrants coordinator and environmental manager can be
accommodated as has been done in the past using existing staff.
BUSINESS AND MARKETING PLAN
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND STAFF ACTION PLAN
The business plan identifies certain projects and staff actions that focus on improving the operation.
aesthetics and overall quality of the existing facility over the next five years. The plan also identifies
capital improvement projects over the next twelve years that are consistent with the mission statement.
goals and objectives, and the level of activity projected for the plan period.
Proiect Costs and Schedule by Fiscal Year
Projects identified for FY97/98 are designed to improve the general aesthetics of the airport and
maintain existing building structures. Staff actions will focus on making ready-for-lease approximately
265 acres of Authority-owned property for aviation and industrial/commercial uses. Local project costs
for contraét work in the current year are accounted for in the approved FY97/98 budget. The total cost
of planned projects in FY97/98 is $1.907,559.00.
Projects identified for FY98/99 and FY99/00 continue the airport improvement theme with landscapmg
and signage projects, vehicle control fencing. and aircraft parking apron rehabilitation. The Authority
currently has Joint Participation Agreements (JPAs) with the Florida Department of Transportation for
the landscaping and signage projects: however. it will be necessary to pursue additional state funding
during FY97/98 for the aircraft parkmg apron rehabilitation and vehicle control fencing. Staff actions
focus on updating the airport's minimum standards and leases. The total estimated cost for FY98/99 is
$252,555.00. These projects will be funded with transfers to the-capital account. Projects scheduled
for FY99/00 continue to improve airport landscaping. signage and vehicle control. The local cost for
ll1
--,
·
·
,
·
III
·
III
II
II
II
II
'I
II
II
II
II
II
II
- --
'-'
~
....,
these projects is estimated to be 5140.000.00 and will be funded with transfers to capital.
The capital improvement plan for Fyoo/Ol and FYOll02 identifies the third phase of the landscape and
signage projects, and an overlay project to improve the air operations area (e.g.. existing runways and
taxiways). The total local cost for FYOO/Ol is estimated at 5144.600.00. The FYOll02 COSt is
estimated to be 592.200.00. Projects for both years will be funded with transfers to capital.
Projects for the remainder of the capital improvement plan period focus on pavement maintenance and
improvements to the operational efficiency and safet)' of the runway and taxiway em'ironment. These
projects would be initiated based on need. local funding capability and the availability of federal and
state grant money. In the current year (FY97/98) the Authority has set aside $100.000 in local match
money to accommodate projects when state andlor federal grant money becomes available. This set
aside will be available in each subsequent year through the year 2005 when the amount will be
increased to SI50.ooo.oo annually to allow for anticipated increases in project costs.
The following lists the primary capital improvement projects that are anticipated for the planning
period. These projects will be funded by federal, state and local matching dollars.
Construct 1.500 foot runway extension on Runway 9R127L (no strengthening)
Construct new 3.700 foot Runway 9U27R (as operational demand dictates)
Construct connecting taxiways. lighting. and marking for new Runway 9L127R
Develop Authority-owned property for aviation and industrial/commercial uses
Complete Land Acquisition (approx. 100 acres) within current airport boundaries least of Kings Highway)
Expand passenger terminal. parking. and apron area as market demand dictates
Construct new 10.000 square foot cargo building with vehicle and aircraft parking areas
MARKETING PLAN
This plan identifies areas of economic development potential for the airport that require similar. hut
separate, marketing efforts. These areas include marketing for the development of:
·
Scheduled commuter airline service
Increased use of the airport by general aviation and corporate aircraft
A viation use property
Industrial/commercial use property
·
·
The primary alliances identified for assisting staff in administering the marketing plan include:
·
Enterprise Florida
The St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce
The St. Lucie County Division of Tourism
The National Association of Realtors
Other national, state and local economic development orgamzations
·
·
·
Marketin¡: Strate!!"
The following provides a strategy for each of the areas of economic development potential described
above.
IV
II·
..
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
'-'
'"
....,
Scheduled Commuter Airline Service Development -- Staff will develop an air sen'ice marker prl)fik
for consideration by prospective airlines to provide commuter service at the airport. Due [0 rhe facr
that the Treasure Coast has a significant northeast presence in the community. a focus will be placed 011
those carriers exhibiting a strong east coast market and route structure. Airlines targeted include US
Airways (US2), Comair (Delta), Continental, and American Eagle. Low cost carriers such as K.iwi.
Southwest, and others will also be contacted periodically as a means of measuring our marker wirh
airline requirements. Alliances identified to assist staff in this effort include the Chamber of
Commerce, the Division of Tourism, and the PGA.
General Aviation and Corporate Acthity Development - Staff will work with the FBOs and other
airport businesses to develop a joint marketing campaign for increased awareness of area ameniries and
the services available at the airport. The campaign will include advertising in prominent industry
magazines that cater to pilots, aircraft suppliers and buyers. and corporate flight departments. to entiœ
them to use St. Lucie County International Airport. Staff will also prepare materials for distribution at
industry expositions such as the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOP A) Conference. and the
National Business Aircraft Association (NBAA) Conference. Staff will coordinate these efforts with
the Chamber of Commerce. the Division of Tourism, and airport businesses.
Aviation Use Propert~' Development -~ Staff will continue to work with Enterprise Florida and the
Chamber of Commerce to identify other companies that may be interested using networking and
industry conferences as the primary method for making contacts. This method has proven effecrive in
the past. Staff will also develop a lease information package for marketing Authority-owned property.
Industrial I Commercial Property Development -- Staff will continue to work with Enterprise
Florida. Bureau of Tourism. and the St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce to target markets and
specific companies within these markets. The following markets have been identified by the Chamber
of Commerce as desirable and suitable for locating within our community:
- Pharmaceutical
- Warehouse and Distribution
- Agribusiness
- Plastics
- Biomedical
- Marine Manufacturing
- Electronics
- Sports Related Manufacturing
- Aviation and Aircraft Manufacturing
The strategy for marketing businesses in these industries will include use of availahle data hases and the
Internet. Other contacts will be made as a result of the networking. advertising and exhibition effom.
Staff wíl1 also develop a lease information package for marketing Authority-owned property. The total
marketing cost for FY97/98 has been budgeted at $13.000.00.
FINANCIAL PLAN
The ABPC reviewed the history of airport revenue and expense for the years covering FY~ 1 192
through FY96/97. Airport operating revenues have increased from $260.877.00 in FY91/92 to a 111gh
of $560,944.00 in FY95/96 due mostly to increases in the amount of property under lease.
Additionally. one large lease payment of $150.000.00 was received from the golf course in FY95/96.
The net operating result during this period required that ad valorem subsidy be applied to the airport
each year. with the greatest subsidy occurring in FY91192.
v
II·
.. .' ...
.
II
'I
III
II
,
II
,
,
,
,
,
,
II
II
II
II
II
- -
.,
-
-
''w-
,
....
Financial Forecast
A conservative financial forecast was developed for the airport based on the general assumption thar
operating revenue and expense would grow at a rate consistent with past economic trends. and thar
planned capital expenditures would be fully accounted for in each year of the airport' s capital
improvement program.
Break-even ADalvsis
Earlier analyses indicated that a priority should be placed on the lease of available Authority-owned
property to provide a means for attaining financial self sufficiency. The ABPC believes that securin~
20 additional acres under lease each year is a reasonable and achievable goal. An average leasehold
value of $2,500.00 per acre for industrial I commercial use property at the airport was determined
reasonable for planning purposes based on discussions with local area real estate brokers. Success in
meeting this goal indicates that, from an operating standpoint. the airport could be financially self
sufficient by the year 200 I where additional airport revenue from land leases is sufficient to Ctwer
operating costs. It is also estimated that the airport could be totally self sufficient by the year 2005
where additional land lease revenue is sufficient to cover both the airport's projected operating and
capital expenditures.
CONCLUSION
The plan outlined herein is developed to be financially responsible in providing for airport
improvements through the year 2010. It will limit the use of the airport to smaller aircraft and thus not
require the strengthening of the exisling runway. The use of smaller aircraft and reduction in the scope
of the proposed development will minimize environmental impacts and the amount of mitigation
required. The plan promotes the development of new commercial and industrial businesses and
positions the County to continue receiving State and Federal funding. thereby eliminating the need (0
repay $9 Million in matching grants related to the purchase of airport lands over the past 10 years.
The plan also promotes upgrading existing facilities at the airport and indicates that the airport
operation can become totally self-sustaining by the year 2005 if the land lease program is successfully
implemented.
VI
...
....
'-'
.....,¡
MEMORANDUM
from
~1~
St. Lucie County
International Airport
Subject:
Frannie Hutchinson, County Commissioner
Paul A. Phillips"Airp'Ort Director f¥Q
April 19, 1999
Airport DRI response
To:
From:
Date:
CO/~· .": C'T:CE
,'...--.-- ..__._--~,._.~- -'_.__.~-" . .~-. --...-
In response to your questions regarding the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) at St. Lucie
County International Airport, I offer the following responses:
Question 1: What is the requirement imposed by the Joint Participation Agreement (JP A) between
the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) and the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) for the property purchased for future airport development? What is the
penalty for not using the property as agreed to with FDOT?
According to the JP A with FDOT, the BOCC "agrees to complete the land acquisition, update
the airport master plan and airport layout plan and make application to the FAA for a Federal
Grant Project with State Participation for airport improvements."
Additionally, the JP A states that "the amount of the State Grant will immediately become due
and payable to the Department (FDOT) if the Agency (BOCC) does not use the acquired land
for aviation purposes or is leased for non-aviation purposes with derived income being used for
other than capital improvement projects, airport operations or airport maintenance."
Ifthe BOCC fails to use the property that was purchased with the FDOT funds for the purpose
stated in the JPAs, then approximately $17,000,000 will need to be reimbursed to FDOT.
Question 2: Can the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) claim a default ofthe grant assurances
if the BOCC fails to use the airpOli property for aviation purposes?
Every grant assurance executed by the BOCC with the FAA requires as a condition of
acceptance that "if a change or alteration in the airport or its facilities is made which the
Secretary (U.S. Department of Transportation) detennines adversely affects the safety, utility,
or efficiency of any federally owned, leased, or funded property on or off the airport and which
is not in confonnity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary, the owner or
operator will, if requested by the Secretary (1) eliminate such adverse effect in a manner
-.
....
'-'
'-'
approved by the Secretary; or (2) bear all costs of relocating such property (or replacement
thereof) to a site acceptable to the Secretary and all costs of restoring such property (or
replacement thereof) to the level of safety, utility, efficiency, and cost of operation existing
before the unapproved change in the airport or its facilities."
Question 3: What are the costs associated with the projects listed in the Airport Business &
Marketing Plan?
construct 1,500 foot runway extension on Runway 9R/27L (no
strengthening)
$5,100,000
construct new 3,700 foot Runway 9L/27R (as operational demand dictates)
$3,500,000
$3,100,000
construct connecting taxiways, lighting, and marking for new Runway
9L/27L
develop Authority owned property for aviation and industrial/commercial
uses
$3,700,000
complete land acquisition (approx. 100 acres) within current airport
boundaries (east of Kings Highway)
$1,700,000
expand passenger terminal, parking, and apron area as market demand
dictates
$1,875,000
construct new 10,000 square foot cargo building with vehicle and aircraft·
parking areas
$1,000,000
TOTAL projects
$19,975,000
If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
cc: Paula A. Lewis, Chairman
Jolm D. Brulm, Vice-chairman
Cliff Barnes, Commissioner
Doug Coward, Commissioner
Douglas Anderson, County Administrator
·
1
'-'
"""
AGENDA REOUEST
ITEM NO.
1
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [X]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [ ]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
SUBJECT:
Resolution No. 99-96 - Supporting a new post office to be located in the northern area of St. Lucie County,
Florida.
BACKGROUND:
At the regular Board Meeting of April 13, 1999, Mr. Robert Bangert requested the Board support a new post
office be located in the northern part of the County. The attached Resolution No. 99-96 has been drafted for that
purpose.
FUNDS AVAIL.:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution No. 99-96 as drafted.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[(µPROVED [] DENIED
[rOTHER: Send the resolution to the
Federal rep. also.
NCE:
---------.J
o as Anderson
County Administrator
County Attorney:
Jr
Review and Approvals
Management & Budget
Purchasing :
Other:
Other:
Originating Dept.
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)___
Eff. 5/96
'-'"
.....",
RESOLUTION NO. 99-96
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A NEW POST
OFFICE TO BE LOCATED IN THE
NORTHERN AREA OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY,
FLORIDA
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made
the following determinations:
1. There are approximately 9,800 residents living in the northern area of St. Lucie County.
2. The residents living in the northern area of St. Lucie County have to drive North to Vero
Beach, or South to Orange Avenue in Fort Pierce to handle their needs at a post office.
3. This Board believes that it would be beneficial and more convenient for these residents to
have a new post office located closer to their homes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St.
Lucie County, Florida:
1. This Board supports a new post office to be located in the Northern area of St. Lucie
County, Florida.
2. The County Administrator is hereby directed to forward a copy of this resolution to Mr.
Herbert R Owens, Post Master, United States Postal Service, 5000 West Midway Road, Fort Pierce,
Florida 34981-9998.
After motion and second the vote on this resolution was as follows:
Chairman Paula A. Lewis XX
Vice Chairman John D. Bruhn XX
Commissioner Cliff Barnes XX
Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson XX
'-'
....,
Commissioner Doug Coward
xx
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 1999.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
CHAIRMAN
DEPUTY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
"
'-"
""'"
AGENDA REOUEST
ITEM NO.
,., -
CJÂ
DATE: April 20, 1999
CONSENT [- ]
REGULAR [ 1- ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
Leg. [ ] Quasi-JD. [ ]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY (DEPT): Public Wprks DeDarþnent ~ /¡Jc~
partmen t .l ad,
. . ~ J
.
SUBJECT: Request for County Commission to declare unsafe a· block st;ucture at
I
5004 Elm Avenue, White City, Fort Pierce, FL.
BACKGROUND:
The Building at 5004 Elm Avenue, White City, Fort Pierce, Florida,
has been determined to be unsafe by the Building Official. The
County Commission must take affirmative action to declare the
building unsafe and hold a public hearing to take appropriate action
to remove the safety hazard.
FUNDS AVAIL.:
Other Contractual Services, Acct No. 102-2415-534000-200
PREVIOUS ACTION:
After inspection, the Building Official declared the building unsafe
and a public nuisance on February 17, 1999.
RECOMMENDATION:
Pursuant to the provisions of Article III of Chapter 2-5 of the St.
Lucie County Code of Ordinances and Compiled Laws, County Staff
recommends that the Board declare the building located at 5004 Elm
Avenue, White City, Fort pierce, Florida, to be unsafe and that the
Board hold a public hearing on June 15, 1999 to take such further
action as is appropriate under Article III of Chapter 2-5 of the
Code.
[
[
/
]
APPROVED
OTHER:
[
]
DENIED
.-
COMMISSION ACTION:
Anderson
Administrator
Coordination/Sianatures
County Attorney:
Mgt & Budget:
purchasing:
Originating Dept:
Other:
Other:
Finance: (copies only):
(45AgaD4a.1.t - 5004 1:181 AVaDue)
UP. 11/4/93
'-'
...."
MEMORANDUM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CODECOMœUANCEDI~SION
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
/! .
Raymond L. Wazny, Public Works Director /-,(1--'
April 20, 1999
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Request to declare the block building at 5004 Elm
Avenue, White City, Fort Pierce, Florida unsafe and
to request a public hearing to consider appropriate
actions.
Under the provisions of Article III of Chapter 2-5 of the St. Lucie
County Code or Ordinances and Compiled Laws the block structure at
5004 Elm Avenue, White City, Fort Pierce, Florida, was inspected on
February 17, 1999, and it has been determined to be unsafe and to
constitute a public nuisance. A copy of the Certified Report of
Inspection of the Structure describing the condition of the
building for filing with the Board is attached to this memorandum.
Under the provisions of Section 2-5-43 it is recommended that the
Board accept the Certified Report of Inspection of Buildings for
filing and declare the building to be unsafe and that a public
hearing be held so that the Board may take such further action as
is appropriate with regard to the unsafe building at 5004 Elm
Avenue, White City, Fort Pierce, Florida.
RLW:ewc
Enclosure as noted
H:\WP\CONDEMN\45MEMO.1
'-"
....,
BUILDING OFFICIAL REPORT
DATE: February 17, 1999
BUILDING AT 5004 ELM AVENUE, WHITE CITY, FORT PIERCE, FL
(ACROSS FROM THE WIDTE CITY MERCANTILE STORE)
The white block building at 5004 Elm Avenue, White City, Fort Pierce, Florida,
has been damaged and is manifestly unsafe and unsanitary for use as a single family dwelling.
This building is in such a condition as to constitute a public nuisance.
Specific conditions which exist include:
open and unsecured structure,
damaged interior walls and ceilings,
damaged plumbing
damaged electrical wiring
missing doors and windows.
damaged roof
damaged floor structure
Under the provisions of Section 302.1.1 of the Standard Unsafe Building Code, the
building at 5004 Elm Avenue, White City in Fort Pierce, FL is determined to be UNSAFE.
RLW:ewc
45inspection.lst
ADDRESS:
5004 ELM A VEN1Æ, WHITE CITY, FORT PIERCE, FL
A
B
B
I
I /
I
I
CONDEMN A TION
-¡--I-¡--I-
I I I I
/8 I /7 I /6 I /5 I /4
I I I I
I I I I
__L__L_L__L-
--I-
I
/31 /2
I
I
_J.__
--1--
/I I /0
I
I
I
_J._
r T ,
I I 1/5
/8 1 /7 I /6 I
I I I
I I I
'7J' I, ,
U I I I I
/4 I /3 I /2 \ /I I/O
I I I I
_L_J.__L_.l__
(])
:=J
C
(])
>
«
(])
-T-,--T
I I I
I I I
91 8 I 7 16
I I I
-,--,-,-- -,--I-
I I I I I
9\ 81716 5\ 4:3
I I I ~I~ I 2 /
_...1__L_.J__ _:!I__L
rTì,-r T--rIT,-r Tì-
271 I I I 12 120 I I I I I /31 I t
1z61Z512h31 2/1 /91/8,/71/61/51/ 1121//1
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I
I 1 I I I 1
c
(])
>
«
West
Midway
Road
I
I /9
I
I
if)
if)
(])
L
Q...
>-
U
I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I
I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I 1
1151143 211/1/0 9181716151413121/
I I I I 1 I I I I I I I
...1_ J..J__LJ..J.J_LJ..J...1
, ,--,- --1-'--
I I®I I I
27 26 125 24 1231 22 2/ \ 20 \ /9
I I I I I
I I
1s t
Street
West
2
I I I
I 1 I
91817 615
I I I
_..J__L_ __L_
I I I
4 : 31 2: /
1 I I
__L ..l__L-
/0
I
I
91
I
.J L
-,--
I
/81/7
I
I
I I
5 I I
~4L
-,--I-¡--I-
I 1 I 1
/6 1 /5 I /4 I /3 1/2
1 I I 1
1 I I I
-¡--ìlJ@-- -¡
/6 I /5 I /4 I /3 /2 I
I I I I
I I I I
-I-
I
1/1/0
I
I
,
I
/8 I /7
I
I
--I-
I
/I I/O
I
I
~1S~
(])
c
(])
>
«
L
CD
U
C
o
CD
o
5004 Elm Avenue
Community Development
Geographic Information Systems
Map revised April 8, 1999
This maP has been compiled for general planning and rafarenca purposas only,
WIllis <WSi'/aUort h... been mada to prøv1da !he most currant and accurate N
information posslbla, It Ie not Intendad lor usa ... a legally binding documant
-
~
~
'wi
AGENDA REOUEST
ITEM NO.
- -
a ~ß
DATE: April 20, 1999
CONSENT [. ]
REGULAR [ ~ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
Leg. [ Quasi-JD. [ ]
PRESENTED BY:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Request for County Commission to declare
Weatherbee Road, Fort Pierce, Florida.
,...,
/
./;'/ I ¡ (
[~~ -V3/-1
epartmen . _ ea4-
unsafel a bUild(ng'" at 501
SUBMITTED BY (DEPT): Public Works
SUBJECT:
BACKGROUND:
FUNDS AVAIL.:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION:
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ / APPROVED [
[ ] OTHER:
The Building at 501 Weatherbee Road, Fort Pierce, Florida, has been
determined to be unsafe by the Building Official. The County
Commission must take affirmative action to declare the building
unsafe and hold a public hearing to take appropriate action to
remove the safety hazard.
Other Contractual Services, Acct No. 102-2415-534000-200
After inspection, the Building Official declared the building unsafe
and a public nuisance on February 17, 1999.
Pursuant to the provisions of Article III of Chapter 2-5 of the St.
Lucie County Code of Ordinances and Compiled Laws, County Staff
recommends that the Board declare the building located at 501
Weatherbee Road, Fort pierce, Florida, to be unsafe and that the
Board hold a public hearing on June 15, 1999 to take such further
action as is appropriate under Article III of Chapter 2-5 of the
Code.
]
DENIED
Dougl sAnderson
County Administrator
Coordination/Sianatures
purchasing:
originating Dept:______ Other:
County Attorney: Mgt & Budget:
Finance: (copies only):
(48Agenda.18t - 501 Weatherbee Road)
BFF. 11/4/93
Other:
~
~
.....,
MEMORANDUM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CODE COMPLIANCE DIVISION
FROM:
Board of County Commissioners
Raymond L. Wazny, Public Works Director.¡f Új
'--
TO:
DATE:
April 20, 1999
SUBJECT:
Request to declare the building at 501 Weatherbee
Road, Fort Pierce, Florida unsafe and to request a
public hearing to consider appropriate actions.
Under the provisions of Article III of Chapter 2-5 of the St. Lucie
County Code or Ordinances and Compiled Laws the building at 501
Weatherbee Road, Fort Pierce, Florida, was inspected on February
17, 1999, and it has been determined to be unsafe and to constitute
a public nuisance. A copy of the Certified Report of Inspection of
the Structure describing the condition of the building for filing
with the Board is attached to this memorandum.
Under the provisions of Section 2-5-43 it is recommended that the
Board accept the Certified Report of Inspection of Buildings for
filing and declare the building to be unsafe and that a public
hearing be held so that the Board may take such further action as
is appropriate with regard to the unsafe building at 501 Weatherbee
Road, Fort Pierce, Florida.
RLW:ewc
Enclosure as noted
H:\WP\CONDEMN\48MEMO.PWD
~
'-'"
'...,/
BUILDING OFFICIAL REPORT
DATE: February 17, 1999
BUILDING AT 501 WEATHERBEE ROAD, FORT PIERCE, FL
The fIre damaged white building at 501 Weatherbee Road, Fort Pierce, Florida,
has been damaged and is manifestly unsafe and unsanitary for use as a single family dwelling.
This building is in such a condition as to constitute a public nuisance.
Specific conditions which exist include:
damaged interior walls and ceilings,
damaged electrical wiring
missing doors and windows.
damaged roof structure
Under the provisions of Section 302.1.1 of the Standard Unsafe Building Code, the
building at 501 Weatherbee Road in Fort Pierce, FL is determined to be UNSAFE.
¿ ~(J¿ cJ '
: in~~~~iaIWAz2(
St. Lucie County Y \{
RLW:ewc
48inspection.lst
ADDRESS:
501 WEATHERBEE ROAD, F01t'I' PIERCE, FL
A
B
CONDEMN A TION
..-
(f)
:::J
~
..c
..¡...J
:J
o
(f)
-----
i]@
i]i]
----------
501 Weatherbee Road
Community Development ~
Geographic Information Systems
Map revised April8.1999
This map has been complied fofgøneraíplaMlng·and.Mlanmee putp0888 only,
WhRe w&f'j effort has been mødð to pKWIdø the mostOOtt'el'rt and açcurata N
Infofmallon pos6lble. It hi oot Intended lot use U 8 Iega!¥ binding document.
,
'-"
.....,
AGENDA REQUEST
ITEM NO.
9
DATE: April 20, 1999
CONSENT
REGULAR X]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
Leg. [ Quasi-JD.
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development
\,
TO:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PR
SUBJECT:
South A-1-A Bicycle Path
BACKGROUND:
In september 1998, the Board granted conceptual approval to the plans for
developing an extension of the existing sidewalk and bike path system on South A-1-
A from its current end at the Ocean Towers Condominium, north to the City Limits
of Ft. Pierce. Since that time the County has received a proposal for completing
the design and permitting for this project from one of our planning and design
consultants that we have on continuing services contract.
This project has been divided into three phases. Phase one involves approximately
the first two miles of the project, north of the Ocean Tower condominium site. The
second phase carries the project through the FPL Power Plant property. The third
phase completes the project to the city limits of Ft. pierce. It is our intention
to concentrate our initial efforts on Phase I so that construction of this Phase
may be completed by the end of calendar year 1999, as previously promised to the
Board.
On March 23, 1999, the Board asked that the proposal be reevaluated to consider
only doing a portion of the project design and permitting and what cost savings
that might entail. This project is being funded in part through the County's Road
and Parks Impact Fees. Reducing the scope of the project would result in some
project savings but it would not result the quality of project that we are trying
to achieve. This proj ect has been envisioned from the onset as being a key
component in our regional recreational system. Funding is currently available to
construct approximately ~ of the entire 11 mile project. The remaining portion of
the project could be funded through other revenue sources including FDOT
enhancement funds, state recreation funds, private development contributions or
other special grants that we may be able to obtain. However, we cannot apply for
these funds with any real exception of approval without the project designs being
competed.
FUNDS AVAILABLE: $50,000 from 310002-15101-563000-(tba)
$100,000 from 10102-4116-563000- (tba)
PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the work authorizations between the County
and Glatting, Jackson, Kercher, Anglin, Lopez and Rinehart, in the amount
$149,000.
Do la
Count
Coordination/Siqnatures
--- -----
M. Anderson
Administrator
COMM SSION ACTION:
[ ..J' / APPROVED [ DENIED
[ ~ OTHER: Bike Path to extend in front
of Sand Dollar Shores condo.
County Attorney:
Mgt & Budget:
Purchasing:
Originating Dept:
Other:
Other:
Finance: (copies only) :
(AGEND426)
..... -rr'
~ .
~
....,
Commission Review: April 20,1999
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Administration
MEMORANDUM
TO:
County Commission
FROM:
Dennis Murphy, Asst. Community Development Director
DATE:
April 20, 199
SUBJECT:
South A-1-A Bicycle Path
In September 1998, the Board granted conceptual approval to the plans for developing an
extension of the existing sidewalk and bike path system on South A-1-A from its current
end at the Ocean Towers Condominium, north to the City Limits of Ft. Pierce. Since that
time the County has received a proposal for completing the design and permitting for this
project from one of our planning and design consultants that we have on continuing
services contract. Attached, is copy of the proposal that we have received from Glatting,
Jackson, Kercher, Anglin, Lopez and Rinehart. Please note that all ofthe time lines in this
proposal were based on a start date of January. If approved, this start date will now be in
late May. This table will be adjusted accordingly prior to the final execution ofthe required
work authorizations.
This project has been divided into three phases. Phase one involves approximately the
first two miles of the project, north of the Ocean Tower Condominium Site. The second
phase carries the project through the FPL Power Plant property. The third phase
completes the project to the city limits of Ft. Pierce. It is our intention to concentrate our
initial efforts on Phase I so that construction of this phase may completed by the end of
calendar year 1999, as previously promised to the Board.
As mentioned the project has been divided into Three phases. It is our intention to
concentrate our initial efforts on Phase I so that construction of this Phase may completed
by the end of calendar 1999, as previously promised to the Board.
On March 23, 1999, the Board asked that the proposal be reevaluated to consider only
doing a portion ofthe project design and permitting and what cost savings that might entail.
This project is being funded in part through the County's Road and Parks Impact Fees.
Reducing the scope of the project would result in some project savings but it would not
result the quality of project that we are trying to achieve. This project has been envisioned
from the onset as being a key component in our regional recreational system. Funding
is currently available to construct approximately % of the entire 11 mile project. The
remaining portion of the project could be funded through other revenue sources including
FOOT enhancement funds, state recreation funds, private development contributions or
other special grants that we may be able to obtain. However, we cannot apply for these
funds with any real exception of approval without the project designs being competed.
--
--
"...
"-"
....",
April 20, 1999
Page 2
Subject: South A-1-A Bike Path
Staff recommends that the Board approve the work authorizations between the County and
Glatling, Jackson, Kercher, Anglin, Lopez and Rinehart, in the amount $149,000. Funding
for the project will be from the County's Parks ($50,000) and Road Impact ($100,000) fee
programs.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
velopment Director
DJMI
SA1A1(a61)
cc: County Administrator
County Attorney
04/19/99 ~ LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD ..¡ PAGE 1
~,.;
FZAå\tAAA YARRANT LIST #29- 10-APR-99 TO 19-APR-99
FUND SUMMARY
'~ -
FtJND TITLE EXPENSES .'J
PAYROLL
001 General Fund 185,826.70 246,047.26
";:r 001116 See 112/MPO/FHWA/Planning 98/99 216.57 4,605.85
001120 COmmUnity Services Block Gmt 98/99 1,180.11 437.50
001228 White City Park DEP 202.80 0.00
~i: 001235 TDC Planning Grant 98/99 0.71 29.34
001242 98/99 E. M.. P.A. 2,976.72 0.00
001805 SFVMD/SLSYCD EQIP Program 8,976.53 0.00
101 Transportation Trust Fund 96,797.42 88,283.68
101001 Transportation Trust Interlocals 40.59 0.00
101002 Transportation Trust/80% Constitut 765.50 0.00
101003 Transportation Trust/Local Option 13 , 980.00 0.00
101006 Transportation Trust/Impact Fees 12,931.50 0.00
102 Unincorporated Services Fund 1,995.87 33,768.06
102001 Drainage Maintenance MSTU 35.42 2,917.14
102103 Urban & Community Forestry 97/98 5.75 0.00
105 Library Special Grants Fund 1,658.53 1,524.68
107 Fine & Forfeiture Fund 106,893.14 54,184.59
121 Blakèly subdivision Fund 66.03 0.00
140 Port & Airport Fund 8,497.04 7,464.87
140274 FOOT/ Termihal Expansion 500.00 0.00
145810 98-99 SWIM Imp. VIII Restoration 251.01 0.00
160 Plan Màintenance RAD Fund 1,142.80 2,021. 64
182 Environmental Land Acquisition Fund 17.48- 1,431.39
183 Ct Administrator-19th Judicial Cir 78.70 3,673.11
183001 Ct Administtator-Arbitration/Mediat 295.02 2,449.60
183004 Ct Admin.- Teen Court 969.72 897.60
1832Ö4 Court Reporter Grant-In-Aid 98/99 5,080.50 0.00
183206 FDJJ-Teen Court 98/99 13.80 1,138.46
185203 FHFA-SHIP 98/99 6,638.26 1,232.80
186 Recycling Operating Fund 37.22 1,334.69
1862Ö2 DEP-Recycling & Education 98/99 36.00 444.89
235 Becker Road I&S Fund 48,692.50 0.00
282 Environmental Land I&S Fund 24,425.00 0.00
310001 Impact Fees-Library 27,897.00 0.00
j15201 DOS-315-Fort Pierce Branch Library 55,393.00 0.00
316 County Capital 18,348.98 0.00
401 Sanitary Landfill Fund 148,517.60 25,145.34
401217 DEP-Yaste Tire 98/99 1 , 691. 36 0.00
418 1 Golf Course Fund 7, 102. 77 16,351. 94
421 i H.E.Y. Utilities Fund 12.25 145.52
441' North Hutchinson Island Utilities 6,312.52 2,425.14
451 S. Hutchinson Utilities Fund 16,207.02 2,279.63
461 Sports Complex Fund 8,018.19 9,106.54
491 Building Code Fund 294.62 14,449.16
501 Automated Services Fund 15,634.64 55,237.98
505 Health Insurance Fund 18,017.00 0.00
505001 Property/Casualty Insurance Fund 1,372.80 0.00
510 Service Garage Fund 9,311.20 8,332.78
í~""'A
........ ....,.
d4/1~/99
PWVARR
~ LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD
......,
PAGE 2
VARRANT LIST #29- 10-APR-99 TO 19-APR-99
FUND SUMMARY
,. '--.'
<<',,...;-IT FtJNIJ TITLE EXPENSES PAYROLL
611 Tourist Development Trust-Adv Fund 1,337.79 2,754.22
615 Impact Fees Fund 18,809.87 0.00
625 Law Library 6,618.87 0.00
GRAND TOTAL: 892,087.46 590,115.40
7:t.Æ'!!o,.
-'I
'1
'-'
AGENDA REQUEST
.....,
ITEM NO. C-2-A
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [XX]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): PURCHASING
CHARLES BICHT
SUBJECT
Award of bid #99-40 - Disposal of Scrap Metal
BACKGROUND'
On March 3, 1999 bids were opened for the disposal of scrap metal at the landfill. Ninety six
vendors were notified (fifteen are minority owned), eight sets of bid documents were distributed
(one is minority owned) and two bids were received. The high bidder is Trademark Metals
Recycling (Yorke Doliner) in the amount of 52.75%.
INCOME ACCOUNT:
401-3651 00-300
PREVIOUS ACTION:
N/A
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends award of bid #99-40 - Disposal of Scrap Metal to Trademark Metals Recycling
(Yorke Doliner) in the amount of 52.75% and authorize the chairman to sign the contract as
prepared by the County Attorney.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[yI APPROVED [] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
.-.--
g nderson
County Administrator
County Attomey:(X)
iÀ/
\(. ,
coordination~~i~atu~
Mgt. & Budget:(X) '} C, ~
')
Purchasing Mgr.:(X) ("(D
Originating Dept:
Other:
Other:
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if Applicable)_XX_
Eft. 1/97
H:\WP\AGENDAS\BIDS\99-40 award.wpd
....
'-'
""wI
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
SOLID WASTE DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
99-126
I.
..... .. .... ',' .. Yo' !>... .. ,,', ... . ...... .. ..... ..... "09." ..YO.... ...
. iI. ....... ...... .,f.i'....... . .....0;..... ................. ..........0;............... ..... ............... .................................V....
TO:
Charlie Bicht, Purchasing Manager
Harvey Lincoln, Management & Budget Manager ~ ~ ¿,
Leo J. Cordeiro, Solid Waste Manager8 ø 10'11
March 10, 1999
VIA:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Award of Bid #99-40 / Disposal of Scrap Metal
Please take the necessary steps to award Bid #99-40, the disposal of scrap metal at the
Glades Road Landfill, to the highest bidder, Yorke Doliner, in the amount of 52.75%.
The vendor, Yorke Doliner, will be paying fees to the County for the processing/disposal
of the scrap metal. The revenue account number is 401-365100-300.
LJC/am
c: Ray Wazny, Public Works Director
Attachment
I
f-'
W
)-OW
f-::I:
ZUJ
:Jz
00
o-
f-
W<c
-..J
0:J
:Jm
~<c
f-f-
UJc
-
m.
..;.. ~
-
en
~
a:::
o
~
o
-
..J
m
:J
a. T-
::J ;t
<C:IE a:::
of-<c 0
Wo c
:i 0 Z
.. W
a. 0 >
«~
a:::J-
0«
cnQ)
U-Q)
OM
-..
O-lM
'-<Cc
Q)enw
moz
:;tc..w
cenc..
meo
'-'
N
;t:
c::
o
c
z.
w
>
.
o
w~
o ..
ZW
<cC)
::I:~
0..J
c <C
~en
æ C)
<C z .-.
- c::
:i.en..Jw.w
W ..J 0 ~' z
~~~~::¡o
ft IWw
'~ :s a::: t.. c
.
~
~
c
o
M
~
c
LC')
,.....
.
N
LC')
c
-f-
mz
..J:J
~o
o:i
Of- <C
....,¡
~g~
ZZ~
-w
==~
-
I,
5
I
CI
J
c
~
c:I
æ
ë ~I-
W ~
¡:¡: c
~ f!! ë
o z w
z w :>
en == w
~ :;) U
Z Uo W
c:c 0 0:
D. C en
== C C
0_;;;
u c:I ...
u.. u.. u..
000
0: 0: 0:
W W W
c:I c:I c:I
== == ==
::I ::I ::I
Z Z Z
...
-- .--.......
-
...
,"'"'
¿
Î
'-'
AGENDA REQUEST '-"
ITEM NO. C-2-B
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [XX]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): PURCHASING
CHARLES BICHT
SUBJECT:
Award of Bid #99-41 - Construction of Hurricane Walls
BACKGROUND:
On March 3, 1999 bids were opened for the construction of hurricane protections walls for the
landfill generators. Thirty four vendors were notified (six are minority owned), eight sets of bid
documents were distributed (two are minority owned) and four bids were received (one is minority
owned). The low bidder is Adnan Investment in the amount of $16,890.00 and a Public
Construction Bond cost of $375.00.
FUNDS AVAIL:
401-991 0-599300-800
PREVIOUS ACTION:
N/A
RECOMMENDATION'
Staff recommends award of bid #99-41 Construction of Hurricane Walls to the low bidder Adnan
Investment in the amount of $17, 265.00 to include the cost of the Public Construction Bond and
authorize the chairman to sign the contract as prepared by the County Attorney.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[~APPROVED [] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
~
County Attomey:(X)
/""\
,I/j
,;t./<
Coordination/Signatures
Mgt. & BUdget:(X) f\lrJ.h
Purchasing Mgr.:(X)
,n
60
Originating Dept:
Other:
Other:
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if Applicable)_XX_
Eff. 1/97
H:\WP\AGENDAS\BIDS\99-41 award.wpd
·
,
'-'
....."
L.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
SOLID WASTE DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
99-127
I.
... .··.·...·.·.9.·.· .. .......... 'Y.O;'·.·.·.· ....... . 1'0...... .......~. ',..,.',. ............ .0;', ............................". ..... ,', .', '0; ','iI'. ',' ......... ','..... ';¡' . ................. ," O!.'I....' . ....o;....o;..........y;. ........o;.........i1..............~.............
TO:
Charlie Bicht, Purchasing Manager
~V
Harvey Lincoln, Management & Budget Manager W ./ "19."
" /// ¿; d/Ør¡¿¡
Leo J. Cordeiro, Solid Waste Manager e.::--- ~ 'l ' J I
VIA:
FROM:
DATE:
March 10, 1999
RE:
Award of Bid #99-41 I Construction of Hurricane Walls
Please take the necessary steps to award Bid #99-41, the construction of hurricane walls
at the Glades Road Landfill, to the lowest bidder, Adnan Investments, in the amount of
$16,890.
Funds are available in account number 401-9910-599300-800. Upon Board approval of
award, funds will be available through a line-to-line to account number 401-3410-563000-
300.
LJC/am
c: Ray Wazny, Public Works Director
Attachment
1
~ --
~
\ ;"'.'
.' ~
~
AGENDA REQUEST
.,
"wi
ITEM NO. C-2-D
I>
DATE: December 22, 1998
',. ')
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
I,
CONSENT [XX]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITIED BY(D.EPT): PURCHASING
SUBJECT:
Permission to advertise for bids for Solid. Waste:
CHARLES BICHT
A Construction of Protective Walls
B. Disposal of Scrap Metal
BACKGROUND:
See attached
._-
, ..
"_.j
FUNDS AVAIL.: Will be available in 401-3410-563000-300 transferred from 401-991 Q-59930o-aOO
. ) PREVIOUS ACTION: "..-...... ----- - -:-.' --
NIA
RECOMMENDATION: .
Staff recommends approval of the request for pennission to advertise for .bids for the Construction
of Protective Walls and the Disposal of Scrap Metal.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[i APPROVED [] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
Doµg derson
County Administrator
Purchasing Mgr.:(X)
other.
Elf. 1/97
cD
County AUorney:(X)
Originating Dept;
Fmance: (Check for Copy onIy,lf Applicable)
,:Jz;
CO~rdiDa~iOD/Siana~~
Mgl & Budget:(X) mcD '0/
other.
J
1I:\WP\AGE!IDAS\OTBER\eolid waste per to ad.wpd
-
t
~
ø:;.
<
At
r:r.1
Q
t1J
~
ø:;
0
.. -r:::
U
H
..:I
.E-t ø:¡
~ þ
'~ At
== .......
tfJ tfJ
Z ..:I
..:I
0 ~
H
E-t .
< ~ ~
..:I .
Þ <
ø:¡
~ H 0
E-t ø:; 0
ø:; ..
Q Þ ri
H == ri
ø:¡
~ 0\
0\
H 0\
E-t r-f
U
- ~ ...
E-t M.
0
ø:;~
AtU
r-f ø:;
~ t;~
I
0\ ~Q
0\
#~f;]
QZr:r.1
HOAt
ø:¡UO
p·"_n_... __.
.'.- ---........._-_.._~...--- .
'( '"
,..,..
~ t1)
0 ~~
~: HH
~ ~g: 0
in
O~ 0'1 N
~f:r1 . ~
8~ 0'1 0
~ \"'!
(I)
t1)
~
f:r1
~ ~
0
Orr') ~
:Q
fi# 0
>t ~
~ ~ \C
· In
0 \C
~ ~ :;
~
0
~ :;ä~
0
~~ tJtJ
Hþ 0
. ~ ~ 0
~IE-t in
:> o t1) · 0
tJ ~ 0'1 0
000 ~ ::
~tJtJ
~ t1)
0 ~
§; ~ 0
0'1
~ ~ '. ex)
:> · in
\C f'
~H ~ ~
~
0
:Q
.
E-t
t1)
~
.. 0
~ tJ
H
:Q tJ
H
f:r1 ..:I
t1) ~
~
:Q PI
~
~II
...,¡
""-J.
..
~
f:r1
f:;
:Q
H
00 .~
~. E-t
r:r1 tIJ 1
I-f H
rz. Q
H 00
E-4 tIJ .-~
~ I ~
H
tI.1 f:r1
r:r1 tJ
H f:r1
~ 0 ~
Q
~ tI]
Q Q
0 H H
U :Q :Q
rz. rz. rz.
0 0 0
~ ~ ~
fit f:r1 f:r1
:Q :Q ~
~ ~
-
..- .... -- .' .
....
'-'
AGENDA REQUEST
...,
ITEM NO. C-2-C
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [XX]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): PURCHASING
CHARLES BICHT
SUBJECT:
Award of Bid #99-051 - Publication of Delinquent Tax Notices
BACKGROUND:
On April 14, 1999 bids were opened for the Publication of the delinquent tax notices. The low
bidder is The Tribune in the amount of $0.35 per square inch for the first insertion and $0.16 per
square inch for the second and third insertions.
FUNDS AVAIL.:
Paid by the Tax Collector - costs reimbursed through tax deed sale
PREVIOUS ACTION:
N/A
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends award of bid #99-051 - Publication of the Delinquent Tax Notices to The
Tribune in the amount of $0.35 per square inch for the first insertion and $0.16 per square inch
for the second and third insertions.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[~APPROVED [] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
Dou Anderson
County Administrator
/'
~/
County Attorney:
Tax Collector: /2¡:r-
Coordination/Signatures
Mgt. & Budget:
Purchasing Mgr.:
Other:
c:ß
Other:
Finance: (Check for Copy only. if Applicable)_XX_
Eft. 1/97
H:\WP\AGENDAS\BIDS\99-0S1 award.wpd
, ¡.
'T~ H'~
j' ;-
i ' ,
~ . .
í ; ~,.
~
v
......,
RI'NE
"Si. 1.~c5e C~IUHmty~S iN10st Read ~le"N~!p;ai;)e~11
Apri112, 1999
Charles Bicht
S1. Lucie County Purchasing Department
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce FL 34982
Re: BID #99-51 - Publication of Delinquent Tax Notices - Purchasing Department
The Tribune is a newspaper of general circulation for the County of St. Lucie. The Tribune meets all legal re-
quirements of Florida Statutes, Chapter 50. We propose to publish legal advertisements of notice of delinquent
1998 taxes on real or personal property in S1. Lucie County and notice of the 1998 tax certificate sale.
Proposal Bid: In consideration ofboth meeting legal requirements pursuant to Chapter 50 and section 197.402
and 197.403 and best serving all geographic areas of the County, The Tribune is able to reach a fur larger portion
of S1. Lucie County taxpayers than any other Chapter 50 newspaper. The Tribune would distribute this notice to a
total of27,OOO S1. Lucie County households in increments of9000 on each advertising date of May 6,13, and 20 at
the following rates: thirty-five cents ($0.35) per square inch for the fint insertion and sixteen cents ($0.16)
per square inch for each subsequent insertion. Distribution will be by our regular, local carrier force, as a sup-
plement of each day's newspaper.
Two types of presentation of these notices may be used, charges per page for each are shown based on the square
inch pricing quoted above. It is understood that the list will be provided on CD-Rom.
First Insertion
Second Insertion
Third Insertion
Tab Size
139.75 sq. in.
$48.91
$22.36
$22.36
Broadsheet Size
279.5 sq.in.
$97.83
$44.72
$44.72
The people authorized to negotiate on behalf of The Tribune are Maureen Saltzer Gawel, Publisher; Lynn Ferraro,
Operations Director; Robert Riney, Classified Advertising Manager. All maybe reached at 561-461-2050.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve the BOCC and the Tax Collector.
Sinc.~elY, I /"ì J
C/V'-~!../h!I.~~/'---
Maureen Saltzer Gawel
Publisher
600 Edwards Road
Fort Pierce, FL 34982 (561) 461-2050
1932 S E. Port St. Lucie Boulevard
Port St. Lucie, FL 34952 (561) 335-7070
'-'
'-"
SCOPE OF WORK SUBMITTALS - The Tribune
1. Map showing areas of distribution in St. Lucie County is attached. .
2. Week-day and Sunday distribution (Source: Audit Bureau of Circulations Audit Report for 12 months ending
3/31/98 -latest audit available)
Fort Pierce
Lakewood Park
Port St. Lucie
St. Lucie
White City
Weekday/Saturday
17,516
3,110
12,933
355
2,547
Sunday
15,931
3,331
12,075
350
2,533
Total St. Lucie County Distribution 36,461
Ave. Projected Paid Circulation 26,136
34,220
28,576
3. Distribution Methods in St. Lucie County:
Carrier Home Delivery - Approx. 78% By Adult Carriers with Automobile Routes
Single Copy Sales _ Approx. 18% Single copies sold in metal racks or over the counter by merchants
Mail Subscriptions - Approx. .04% By Second Class Mail
Newspapers in Education - Approx. 2.9% Through the St. Lucie County Schools, to students
Employee Copies - Approx. .7% By carrier delivery or picked up at work
4. Sample Description of Format: Attached (from last year's list).
5. Bid Notice: Attached
Note regarding numbers of days before publication after receipt of legal notices: Because of the large scope of this
job, we need at least 12 days between delivery of the information on CD-Rom and the first distribution date if dis-
tribution will take place on the dates outlined in the bid. We understand that the tax collector has an interest in
waiting until the latest viable date to provide the CD-Rom in order to limit the number of properties listed for
which taxes are paid during the last days of April. If the Tax Collector would like to change the distribution dates
to May 10,17 and 24; we can receive the CD-Rom as late as 5:30pm on April 30 and still meet our production
deadlines. I believe these dates would still be within the legal time ftame for notice of a Tax Sale on May 26.
n
In
t.
..
o
<:')
<J:)
<:I)
:::I.
..
4
¡ 34945]
y
1\1
dff\'"
w
.,
,.
'-'
......,
81D FORM
All bids must be submitted in a sealed envelope addressed to the St. Lucie County
Purchasing Manager, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 228, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982, plainly
marked on the outside with bid number, date and time of bid opening.
81D #99-51
Publication of the 1998 Delinquent Tax Notices
PRICE PER SQUARE INCH 35<1:
1 ST INSERTION
PRICE PER SQUARE INCH 16<1:
SU8SEQUENTINSERTlONS
---------------------------------.----------------------------------------------------------
9 COLUMN FORMAT x
SELECT ONE:
6 COLUMN FORMAT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL COPIES FOR THE TAX COLLECTORS OFFICE ?OO.
Number of days to advertise after receipt of legal notices Approx 1.2*
Bid Obligation
It is understood that this Bidder is bound by the bidding documents and that the bid
may not be withdrawn during a period of 60 days after bid opening.
The Board of County Commissioners and reserves the right to waive any informalities or
minor irregularities, reject any and all bids which are incomplete, conditional, obscure, or
which contain additions not allowed for, accept or reject any bid in whole or in part with or
without cause, and accept the bid which best serves the County.
NAME OF BIDDER: The Tribune
ADDRESS: 600 Edwarc'1s Roað
PHONE: 561-461-2050
SIGNED BYiQ:.¿tau~
TITLE: Publisher
DATE: 4/12/99
1591 FOHT ST .Uj'CI.E''- "'.;2~·/,:'~..(.~.D
STj-:IT'E K ......_---.J
PORT ST. L:]CIE, FLG~ 34:)52
......,
407 930-5200
407 :;37~580Q
FA.X (.to? 335-'7103
The Port St. Lucie News
April14, 1999
Sl Lucie County Purchasing Depl
"Tax Notices - Board of County Commissioners"
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fl Pierce, FL 34982
Re: Bid #99-51 ''Publication of the 1998 Delinquent Tax Notices"
Letter of Transmittal:
The Port St. Lucie News is a newspaper of general circulation in St. Lucie COWIty and
meets an legal requirements of Florida Statutes, Chapter 50.
We propose to pubJish legal advertisements of Notice of Delinquent 1998 Taxes on Real or
Personal Property in Sl Lucie County. The bid will include a two column by six inch (2x6)
advertisement to run in the Port St. Lucie News two (2) days prior to the delinquent tax
notice, free of charge. This will effectively infonn Sl Lucie County residents to watch for
the notice.
In consideration of meeting legal requirements and best serving the County, The News
proposes print and distribution of the Tax Notices to our full circulation in Sl Lucie
County, in three increments, at the fonowing rates: thirty-eight cents ($ .38) per square
inch for the :first insertion and sixteen cents ($ .16) per square inch for each subsequent
insertion. There are two types of presentation of these notices and the charges for each are
shown below based on the square inch pricing already given:
1 st insertion
2nd insertion
3rd insertion
Tab Size
139.75 sq. inch
$53.11 per page
$22.36 per page
$22.36 per page
Broadsheet
279.50 sq. incch
$106.21 per page
$44.72 per page
$44.72 per page
People authorized to negotiate on behaJf of The Port Sl Lucie News are as fonows: Greg
Anderson, Advertising Director and Chris BuD, Classified Manager. Both may be reached
at (561) 287-1550 by phone or at P.O. Box 9009, Stuart, FL 34995
Ji:!!"'''''i!':i:
III
.~ SCffi'"PPS HOT.¡VARD NEvVSP.-4PER
'-"
....,
Organization Prome & Qualifications:
The Port St Lucie News is a registered trademark of Scripps Howard Publications. We
also pubJish The Stuart News in Martin County and The Jupiter Courier in the
Jupiterffequesta market. We have been in continuous operation for over 50 years in this
market The Port St Lucie News is a morning, 7 days per week, newspaper of general
circulation in St Lucie County. Our newspaper is entered and admitted as second-class
matter at the Ft. Pierce Post Office. This entry meets the requirements of Section 50,
Florida Statutes and qualifies us to publish legal notices in St. Lucie County, Florida.
As SUC~ The Port St. Lucie News commits that such de1inquent advertisements sha1l be
published pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 50 and Sections 197.402 and 197.403
of the Florida Statutes.
The people responsible for supervising this work will be Chris Bull. for the Advertising
Department and :Mike Johnson for the Creative Services Department. Both are in
roanagement and have adequate support personnel to accompJish the publication of the tax
notices.
Scope of Work, Set-up Time:
Our approach to this project shall be guided by the presentation requirements of the St.
Lucie County Tax Department. The amount of set-up time required for this project, after
receipt of your CD-Rom, is two weeks prior to the first publication date. Ms. Bull and MI.
Johnson will coordinate the activities for the newspaper and will assure that those
requirements are met. Based on our experience with these types of projects, no problems
are anticipated in meeting publication dates or any other scheduling as may be required to
complete this project.
Sincerely,
/':;"'-!.':.- i . // ,~"
G- (0<, /. '.j / v l.:.l:;-:;'"7'--,
_ '(''' '- ,-; .L-.,.....
Greg..Anderson,
Advertising Director
The News #1780
"-'
...,;
SUB~fiTTALS REQUIRED
1. Include a trulp showing areas of distribution in St Luèie County. (attached)
2. Provide weekday and weekend circulation levels in St Lucie County.
13,550 Daily
17,650 Sunday
3. Demonstrate distribution methods in St Lucie County.
Combined home delivery and single copy rack locations, single copies sold over the
counter by merchants and an additional 6 locations as listed below:
Lakewood Park area - Winn Dixie
Kings Hwy & Indrio, Ft. Pierce
County Library branch
7605 Santa Barbara Drive
St Lucie Cty. Admin. Bldg.
2300 Virginia Ave., Room 103
Main Post Office
17th Street & Orange Ave.
St Lucie Cty Library
124 N. Indian River Dr.
Zora Hurston branch library
606 North 29th Street
4. Include sample description of format for notice.
Tab size: 139.75 sq. inch page
Broadsheet: 279.5 sq. inch page
5. Executed Bidder Acknowledgment Fonn. (attached)
"I , = :~ "'~~~.. ~'C ~
(iñ)"~: ~~¡3 '~ ~. ~~~~~ ~\\PRQI _
¡, 2 PARK ~ .. ,...... :
i . INDRID '~' R 5. L'Z".
,. ". INRtO
'5 . , ¡ . 1I!tr LUCIE ~ ~ - ~
.~ ...,..-- -. I- 0----1----· . '\VlLLAGEFIoIo~' ISLAND
! - ¡ · ~...! iì ~ 0 ~~'f' '~: ..;
21 Z2 < . 2C ~\ 'ù. 211: ~~ :!3~
ij : smal ~ ~~ ~ 'C"
-.-"- ._L~._ !Ï!.- ~~øum.. ·1 -aÞ'-~".. "B -!\\
, I ~ 1M ! ; f::1 AIR"'RT , í "i,\. _PwIt ~
:P~E 20 ,30 21 ': %7!! i" à$ Jr<::¡f 3= L f (~~ ~
._.'_ ~ lOT 1:1 :""'~ :; /JO..n èo\. ~~_
J~ I" ~O«3) ¡ ~ 1 @!" A ~ A~' ~ \'~ß ~ ~
I ,~....~ c.. ~ 'u ~ ;t :-dfi\ ~~~ ~r.ur:a
c._ Ia.. -~ ""\S~ ~ 1NU:'l' _
AD '10. AHGU i ~ AD; ~ ¡ "" ~. t ~ .....
~ , : ð 5 ,!,: i"""lii,: ,~.w. ¡ ;"CIõ l" ~ k ..~~
: 'V ...~ IdTG!~ ~n. .. ~=~:.::rr '?' ,. -
. '&8'. 1 "'RANG~ i. ¡ III ~ \. IAVC': ~, ~ _:.- I \
." i i 0 . i : ~o ::¡ I \::I) DlLA....R A'~ .~.., WA..e ~ ~~~ '
-~ i: _ ~ .~ _'_j ~. _~L~~io 1~1t'·;:"=:fXffüR~Çf' ~ \. ~ t" ~."
ä-,'i,: :,. I:. ~."""",. RD8, - fi. ~ It ~~;:'''P'ER £\ \ \13 l~
RD r.'I ¡ ë ß .~ ,~"" -,n it'1\.. t:1J. ..."" tA If V I \ ....,.,..~Pr~
I ¡:; ~ ~ ; : "'~~~~ .....':1.. 70 'a.) ~ §!./'- r.-'~. ,ë! \ Pm'
~ :,! . I:: ':J 211 %1' Z2 Ë Z% ; Z4 ~~' 20 at. .: . 1:!3 ~.\ =r
~ ~!" D '~ 11 1M =I~ ~ '\, AlA
- ,--.--.--. ..V" -~ 1 -¡Ii &1 . ~
u.~~: ¡ !~;_ ~¿~~".~~.1~~~H~~'~· '~~ _~~~,-
¡¡¡; 1 ' À7ìi! . 1. .~ I d .- ~ .. ....,1~ - ~:'
b..~TOH.1D""'" J:. i;"\ .' ,;-~.. <! .. fi ¡ ~.i~ i-¡... r~ ~ y~~ ~ ~ \ ~
. æ I Kg, 00 .Æ:' RD . ~ ~~. y l:J ~ _ ~ \ \\ ~'~\
_~L" ~ __~i--.;- ~~~ !:. j ¡,v~ R .,'\\ 'Z-',
!I~ I ~ ¡D _. ¡ 71 . A ~.~-_ ~.~ ITI ·~1 h ~\ --'" ¡..,
,¡..-~ i L">.. , - MIDWAY' A"~' 'ROI:I "_,, ~n, U1ZJ, 1~. El.DRED C', \\
--:".-, ,~ ~~ -----iìff.· ~":IIC .-~-\\-_~,\ '~,u- ----~) \ :~~
-4 roo - Z F . ,:!?~. -, \, ~~, (~' 5; r~:· " ff~ ?-. '~g.. ',1SLAND
'j ~~_.___~.- --- -...- I' - aI.'ORn.' '~':~IAvr--- ~~ 7::·ff·
, - ..- :¡¡ --"- 3' ~~_. ~X1'WY ~ . . , --v: \ ,..__~'f \
! .. , .- !II" I" ~ \: T : ~o~ If \," ... ""{.R'~ "'Yn""~~ If \
I '"t 'a: : ....~--;r "1\ <;, ('. ~),... ,ANKONA .... _____ ·f'.
1.-1' . , :::II' / . . - . .-'-'<~:.l ~ ~ _.~\ " -.......r "
_AL):- ':""'1 - ;..--""- = ~', .-- '-"--.1-,1 \ ~-J<]~~~'\'--~'-- :\~":Ll~'\:.\· l>:,.,
-. ff' '. ¡ V :-f. )'V \) . ,\0.. \- .. ~ " \
.. 1 ' ..~RIV~R. ~-.. r\ ___ --__rr...'" '\ "
g- --.--- -.- - i"- ._-- - .- ------ ,.--- If -; '/: . PARK , ~-~ I - '-.; \~ \.,. '1',
c: .. en I- "Im..--:: ____0.." ""'\ /" \\ _ '
:- i~ _ .uvtl ëc f" . ,AtMA ... I I - ~ "'&I - ~.; \ ' \, 0 ..c. '\
.¡:¡:: x __:z: ,.o::~ :L~ ::.,\/---! .: ~ ",. 5 - ", r:--::::. ..'
~ ï- -:~ It9 - .--- .--:-:"'~r -:;,:.-;.f\\- ~j ¡ :--~~. -~_! - ~~~\\w,,__ / ~.
~ 3t. ~,,'r .... ¿J...:::S' Dl'\ðT ' (' \. '-.. : ;: A.....--:' ;~ '.
--:~'/-- ~:..!."_. - ·1 i: - j": ~\0:!:.Y~ -~- f ~IT~:,'\~'ti' \ 1I£mú~'
~. ' ¡ ". ',"-. <::. '.J-<-. -\~ \ ÚJ~ ,. ""q:~i' (,. ' \... >ILUI1I..:J''- :',
G~ J "" x.---~· ~--._¡/!, ~,~ r \ \ 'It, ,-<.
~ _.~--_._. - ~'Ç( -'-"--e.~.~ :-~~vn'~(\\- ~ J \lD~.. -L.'·uciË¡£~·:\. '
.~-.!' ,: ~ '. '" .. ~~"".",-<.. ---...... ~'¡:7J}"'" '\', ~~. '. Ñ3 !. ' . ~ \\~
_.:= "ATt.IN "VA". ..,VD....,!~. ';.,._. "J._f../:_, -.""'. . l1!....:.. = '';'-~---=
--. "--. --rm ì{ øL.VIo' J Î'. -. ~ _ç,~",: ~j -¿. ::: QUI\' ï Y
.. ~~ IS . ":" C'"' ¡ ': .,~,~. or .:,~~~-I':("", if: Iz\,
----u t" . '._.n. .~;,:;\;\~._. . A' " -
_______ -.---- - ---....- -.-..- '-r- ------. , ~~ ~~ .-~~\ ¡-
III ; __ .. _ \ ~. ~ ----- =
2< ~" - 2' 22 :" .. ........ \' ,.-..: :"w.ö ¡ <
¡..-/'~....~... \d
-.-.----.-"~.-- . .--..--,--. ... .-. .--"? '._~~ }l~·~l:æ
¡ . -"._.~ :, :;~·_..~·-·--~·_·~';~r~~f~:l·
t. .. _. ~.. .ã : n :. :: \~,., 38.~
.... - a"~ II" iJ ,.~ IECX- .... I.J.
\ ,U 'r"':. .... _ ,0 d
I
1:. ~ 7
_.~.
") ..... R~ i.
. 0 :1
. . c .
æ L
--~: '1-
,
i
1:;\
,~ i
I
~.
-.
.--
"JJ '
2D
-.---.
¡
.-
H::' ,. V
-- - ----.. -.--
"
" !
MARTIN
COUNTY
-
F. ~~ =
51
o
I
.. L 0 f'ID A
1 2
I I
~J:¿U":;'~ CO.. INC
Fort~. FL~J30";'
=:::'--~~~_,
~~--=-.::::.;:-..:
---_-::.:.::::...-:.:.::
o
~
't
R -'': E
'--
.....,.
BID FORM
All bids must be submitted in a sealed envelope addressed to the St. Lucie County
Purchasing Manager, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 228, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982, plainly
marked on the outside with bid number, date and time of bid opening.
BID #99-51
Publication of the 1998 Delinquent Tax Notices
PRICE PER SQUARE INCH .38 (thirty-eight cen
1ST INSERTION
PRICE PER SQUARE INCH ., ñ (~; xt.p-p-n cents)
SUBSEQUENT INSERTIONS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 COLUMN FORMAT
SELECT ONE:
6 COLUMN FORMAT X
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL COPIES FOR THE TAX COLLECTORS OFFICE 300 .
Number of days to advertise after receipt of legal notices 14'
Bid Obligation
It is understood that this Bidder is bound by the bidding documents and that the bid
may not be withdrawn during a period of 60 days after bid opening.
The Board of County Commissioners and reserves the right to waive any informalities or
minor irregularities, reject any and all bids which are incomplete, conditional, obscure, or
. which contain additions not allowed for, accept or reject any bid in whole or in part with or
without cause, and accept the bid which best serves the County.
NAME OF BIDDER: The Port ~t - T,1JC"'; P Npw~
ADDRESS: , c:;q, 'PnrT St Ll1C'i~ Bo'lle"Tard. 'à'li te K
Port St. Lucie
PHONE: (5611.. 2~1-4270
~; /1 ¡i
/ -í/ / . h..l ::i Ii
SIGNED BY: :,,:UI.. //'jU./(
--:....-..:- -.-/ I
'~ ,--,'
TITLE: Classified Inside DATE: 4/'4/99
::>a.Les Manager
c!)
'!"'f
co
(j)
c:>
~
LO
o,¡
cè:!
\--
-<
C
-
c.L
ß
\;J
...J
~
\~
~
~
"
LIi-
:iL
;:) ".. '"
...l.,; (iI;
'O'~
:>'1
-'
CO"
.-1'
~..
'3;.
~'.
ea,;..
~"':'
-:..
..'"
li.loiIr
z;;
:::b,:
æ-
cc,:
'=....
LII:
:C',.,
~¡¿~
0;'..
~..
...~
Z:,', ,
1&1"
:,:;:.
w·
o.;¡. ""
Q.~
g;;"'" .'
;:) ::c;.
CI)... .
~ ro"
(f:)~'
~(\..
0';
.-1-'
a)"
E~'
:::J-
-r-'
.ge,
N'
;:¡;
¡
::
Z
u.
0=
.....'"
;::~i
.~~!~
:ìqo....
õ ~-a::
9;;;~Q.
N, __ :',,~a: CD
~~a::'o¡:~
~~w$æS
~8 ~~,§ t:
!!1~~~:æ!;2
èIS«.__::
~~';¡:~:I:
~·~o~'~
Q.o,...,._~;;:::
.(iI; a: w
, IØCZ
::
(J)
'u.
o
~
~
;:¡; ~
gj :;:
... CJ)
u.
0
~
u.
o
! ~
~ ~
u.
0_
:tæ
~'"
~:b
u.~
0a:_
~Q.~
!.!!! ::
§ ~(ñ;j;
.N 0 a::.1e
~ ~'Ë¡S
",z~¡§ø
~~::;.~~
~~~~:æS
~ ~::J~~;t:
·u.~OI-C:O
~r6r6~5i!~
ðð::~~
is æ¡~ ~-~
. "(iI;~;;;
.CD·(J)Z
;:¡;
.,;
'"
...
u.
o
~
¡¡¡:
~§
...,;,
;: æ!.
~¡§
u. '-'
o~
~a{
w~
(J)t::
u.a::
o~_
CD ~~Ji
~, .~~;¡
o :0 :g-¡:e_
'~-" ~,""'a:
:8 .....,"70
.... (J) *ø,
_~.~ a:~
'8·,(1)·",0
'... > 3è\¡::::!2
-~0::¡õJt:
<ULL......
~ fE·~ 0 G:~
CO)<::E~<:;:
-5 ~w~p.
'i'~'~'~~"
(iI;;i;;;
CDUJZ
...
'"
co;
'"
...
;:¡;
co;
~
u. u. "-
;:¡; 0 0 0
~ ~ ;:¡; ~
cD oj
~ ~ ~ ~ ::
(J)
u. u. "-
0 0 0
!. ~. ~
~
::
(J)
u.
o
~
::
(J) w.
u. z.
o IL_
! _ o~_
~ . ~ ~'i~
,~. U.",œ ~ IL m
:'.8" .~~~.~ ~l~
g ~ æ! Q.'~ -.... Q.
Z "!I!.-' Z as eo
.~ ~8¡r: ..,~ .~~.~.
$; ~;::12 $ tJ) ~ ~12
.~ 6:0<= (J) æ t: .- ~ :O<=::13t:
. ·u ~ 1.1. a:' '~'. u ~IL -
; ~ ;;!Œ 0 Q.!;2, .~ ;i. a:o'§!;2
~::E<~~:: ~::E<~ìi::~
?f~::~~?f:;wc~
,'~'.~ ~'~':i ~ 2 ~~:i
;: (il;a:;;; (iI; ~;;;:
CDCZ CD(J)Z
w
Z
IL
o
~ i
~ (I) ~
~ ~..'~
ç ..~,.,.;;..,gs
.~. U'J.I.O-
. ~ . ~u.::~
.~ ~i~~c:i
"'WWN-F
-Ii)¡;;r:~t:
",~ð!!st)!;2
~~¡~~::
ææwc~
!!~~:i
(iI;~;;;
CD<nZ
W
Z
u.
o
~ i
~. ~ i
~ ~'a::
-q .,.. ŒQ.
~ ::E(J)~eo
¡:;¡-.~~¡¡¡f(
8 a::æ!!' CDO
...WW,ci5·_....
~1-:l:W~t:
fß.t< u... C\I
CD-IU0t;~
~:¡:':¡:'~~3:
~ ~ ::'=-~
!~~~:i
. (iI;~;;;
CD(J)Z
LL
o
'" ~
'" ~
....:
¡¡ u.
0
~
~
"-
0
~
3:
Z
~rè
...~-
:;::,;,¡ß
~ ~æ!;¡;
õ LLa::(Q
ö oQ.....
Ñ ~::a::
g -<;¡Q.
èì) :I:<J)' a: eo
¡:j::Eu.,..,0
rh<o'I::~~
~ 3'~í5 S
-~CJ)~t:
",g-!!i¡~
~ ~ ~,i==
Ow......:I:
æol-I-:
Q.;-.:rst~
(il;a:;;;
cøCZ
::
Z
u.
0_
~g¡
gj~
~~
~í5i
It) ----("'J
c; "~"~;¡
g oa:~
¡ ~~¡§
,f '.: ~~í5 ø
'?~:o~~
~~~~¡S
'7~~ ~ ~t:,
....:l:o· - ""
;::>i'¿:C1~;
~w,w-a:>
ð{53;c~
..ª r6'~;! ~"':-
(iI;:: ;;;.
cø -CIJ Z
...
'"
.,;
.~
~
s:
(J)
u.
o
~
::
Z
u.
°iñ_
~::¡ß
~;;;~~
8 LLæ:œ
o ocr;-~
M "~ona::
~'~~Q.
~ u..Nal
Me oa::~'
$~·~§:S
~ is·1%: w.'" t:
~~u..'~ .
¡:::<6cñ°t)!;2
CO)e.:g,,~<::
;;;!;;j::~~
ifif~~:i
(iI;~;;;
CD(J)Z
~ ~
,;" .','~"
'8 .
~iå~iñ
.~-;-~ ~'~.¡
",,00f6
'.~ ~.~ Lñ
<6:: ~.'
5ol-!
-J-.:t ~.
(iI;.a::,
<Ø '=-:
..
;.,
~ '~ § § ~. .- ~ § ! .'~. ~ ~ ð
g g g
'" '0 .~ .,~ ,.:. "':~ "'. cO M ,;"
~. g õ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ M .... ~ .~ ; ~ ¡:¡ ¡:j ;
¡:j '" '" '"
CO) .CO) CO) CO)
CD ¡g ~ ~ ¡g ..~ ¡g ¡g ~
0'
~ » ~ ~. :! ~ ~
co '" 0 ;:: ~ ¡:,; ~ ¡;; ¡; .... co
¡!¡ CD ~ ~ ....
CO) CO) CO)
8 .·~w
'" o~
..; 't: a::
¡¡ :88
~w
::a::a::
u.~Q.
OcOu;
t:~~
¡§~5i!
I!O (I) '=-~
èi u. £:[Ji:
g O-'u
cO t: Z·iU
º It)-~'~~
~, .,;Oc;:)
.g. ,::q~-'~
'~:Za)::
¡:<~,u.:·E
- Œ~,o ~
-1; ,;"
"'~~::~
(il;åffiu..¡§
::E.ø:O_
~5i!t::u;
tJ);w",~
:~$!u
'0..<'5<
I
õ
on
~
...¡
'"
....
c
;::
£j
w
Z
ëL:
a::
o
_u
~~a::
:g~Q,
~~ffi
Ol-a::
::::5i!5i!
~¡:¡:W
ð .... '=-~
g ~~c..
"¡ß i~frl
8 15~§ê
8 ..J~::;>
Lt)Ow......~-
~~iS~~
""~~o~
'::E;:)¡;¡g
!5<50::CO)
CO)Z8LLa:
;:).~0Q.
!E~t:u;
(J)~",~
::E~5i!
'.~
§
~
~
~
fñ
~
~
a:
;;!
Z a:
< 0
~~~
eëL:W
a:: a:: a::
rno5i!
e.! æfrl~
8 ~§êëL:
~ --~u
. g! I- ~
'~<05i!::;>
N Z·>-' T;cr:!
.';':Ë Z·;::...._
.~ < @ w'-.c;
.:-- ~.<-CI)...~;:t:.
~.iJ5 :5. §:¡g
~-~ ~~'~~~~.
b:b:(J)¡: -Q.
00~í5u;
.:I::I:~::::~
~~.5i!
....
~
¡¡
§
~
M
...
'"
,;,
CO)
~
;¡:;
C':I
a:
Q.
~
~
....:
!::.
~ .,~
a:: u;
..J W
< a::
~w5i!
u~W
i ~.~~
a:: 00
8!2frl:!:!,
gwa::z
O,..JZ;:)
/i .;..$~.:t.
,~ ..~t)~
":':~~~":'
~:;~,=-¡ß
.Il) -......~('I')
CO)~w_a::
;:)~õõ§:
~'~~æ
.' ~æ5
('I') a:> <
~
on
""
co
:i
l
8
o
o
o
..
,;,
~
'"
~
~ ~
~ b
~~
~~~
w8u;
iS~~
t::~5i!
~~~
.··~¡f¡.:..c..
.~ ;f 5t @
~;;!~§ê
~ æ~::;>
g. ~,"""~
d, "'~'<õ=-
g~~!~
: a::<- ~ t;¡;
.' ~(QO)
~wS:a::'"
. ~ a-Q.gs
.ffi~~Œ
a::~.~..~
~ s.Si
~
§
:...
~
Õ
.""
,;,
g¡
CO)
.on
CO)
o
o
on
'"
....
...
~
6
..Jw
<z
~~~
w8u;
i5~~
t:~5i!
e.!~~~
§ ~1-ëL:
'!1. !~ rD
~;;! c§ê
-~~~.
.:i! 'q¡__
l~ ~ ~.'~'
"ã:~t-
'·.;1;üh:~i
CO)s::ï:oa::
!Z£1;:::Q.
w':l:U-
a::tJ)<ffi
. c¡ ~.a::
~s.5i!
i
,;,
~
~
.~
...
on
CO)
g
uf ~
¡¡- '9
<~
:SëL:gs
eogs_
wo¡¡j
is:!:! a::
t::z5i!
z:;)
~. ~~.~.
,;,l~å
~;'3!~§ê
- .'. ¡:~::;>
'i!~!i
..;~¡ 81
~ :: c¡~~ '
!ž:Eô::::
'W(I)<(J)
a::~lf1:!:!
.~e.5i!
~
,;"
~
~
~
'"
~
:I:
I-:
t:t ts}S
~~(I)~:i~
g¡ ~~¡~t:~
~'. co w ~ t- LL
~ ~~~t::~~
.. "'ø-8:::::¡_~
~;;!~;~~
æ~æeo W
a::WW!!!~c¡
~~Sg9;;!
II:<..J >.
. t:a ~ Ii) ~ ~
....i~~~!S~~
I < :: ~' -. ;:¡~.!Ii
!!2a::a:I >"i!::
·!~8~ ~:::.¡::
- W :h~12 :: 13 '"
~ ff~)Zt: S3 ~
~, ~'z~ :2! ""tb "'.
,.. it !!i·1t ;:¡¡;:¡ ....0·. gs
ð""!2u---
¡qg;~;~i~
'~~c-sts}cn'~
<(iI;~:::::>l2ø
~~~~t:f(
i
~
ij
!
CD
'"
CO)
tJ)
c¡
~. ~
~ ~.
::J
. g ::
d æ
~ W
;;;c¡
(J) ..J
u.S~
~:i~
..~. ~t:~
8 '--'(J) eo
l.~·~~·
.;~~.! ~
~>;.%CI) ~
~:5~"9gs ,
.. U'u <. - .
t5'c:r~ ~ ~
<'J~>::""
~~W~
(iI;'1'ø
..~.~~
13
Ii:!
~
~
~
..
..,.
CD
~
[ìj
o
a:
tn (I)
;:: ffiS~
¡oj ..J.¿~
..... eCJ:ELL
£j t:t:g
!~~
(J)..Jw
~~~
0150<
t:(J)~
c¡(J)
E :s;;!~
~-~~~
æ:J!Z!2--
90w-....
:.;9.~æ~
i@~~i
~<u.gsa::
130-9-
C:Od'~~~
~a::w_""
~(fJ~~
~~&a
~;¡:eo
¡!¡æf(
~
~
..
...
~
¡q
g g¡
rn_~
~~~
~-o
~:2::J
o~::
::a::c:
c¡ Q.w
~69
...«
õfð~
..J -J"¡'CI'J
§< ;;'-:1:
z..Jo~1-
a: "- c¡ ~.~'
. , W "-LL ::
"'!Zooz .
~-0t:"--
õwz, 0'::::
S!:I:. ;:).~... "'.
.......... u.. æ---
j~¡:z~i
~¡g!Z~u.í5
::~t:0::::
~OWgt:5i!
@~-1§g¡
ê5"-~z~
aJ ~~.~ ~
~t:f(
S1!
00
~
'"
CO)
~
¡¡
~
...
CD
c;
o
,9
8
o ,
o ~
¡:j.¡: ,
¡g .j:i
·:to:
<,
-. '
æ! a:'
M-UJ !
:1:'
¡;¡i
¡¡:'
§
,;,
g
o
~
à
~
~
~
õ
g
o
'"
CO)
,;,
o
~
'"
on
CO)
o
<Ø
CO)
..,.
'"
0;
~
1.1.
o
~
3:
en
1.1.
o
-~
~
1.1.
o
~ i
~ z ~.
§ 1.1. iÈ
M'O ...
:3 ~ ~ê5
~OZ~. CD
J~ì ~.¡s ;¡; ~'
~Ir!ego
""O"'~r-
-~~~t
-0 I- 11).
~~~~~
.~ 3:J=,:t:
:~~':!:~
~;: ;;¡.
tD '" Z'
g
o
o
M
8
M
~
8
:!:
'"
...
C')
en
c¡
z
;¡:
1.1.
o
~~
~w
:-5c¡
:r::;;!
~~
ren
ií~
.Lm
...~
~-
~~
.1.10:-
§~
3ê5
;¡-
z!l
~II)
D~
~,~
..-
..Jm
~~
!len
~~
~""':2
~7u..
0;0
CCI);:j
a=>:;:
u.C¡¡¡:
O;i·w
3:enc¡
~¡¡¡~
",,:¡>
~~æ
.~ :,~'~~-
o om
g ¡S:g~
8 .z-
¿,;::enJ:::
~. .~¡:¡~
~-¡s;;:~
:!::¡ I-t a:
a:: 0
:5:!\CSi!:::
_--lWo.M(.)
~w!;(en<
cj:t:en:§¡
~;;¡:¡gj
...J:,-.::r;t-
~:;:~
on:t:c..
...
o
,..:
o
...
...
§
o
o
§
¿,
N
C')
.r,
o
:!:
~
1.1.
o
'"
'"
,..:
;;
~
3:
en
1.1.
o
~
~
1.1.
o
~ i
~.' -~ ~
:5 0 Ie
-§ ~~ ê5
's:'¡oZ:2;;
"è?~.~ ~,~
'~ê5 ~~~
-~3:~t
-. 0 ..1 ~'I- ~
~Æ~~:;:
~wt::.¡!:
ffi~~~
~;:;;¡
coenz
~.
§
M
C')
C')
8
:!:
~
oð
~81
:t:::::.
~~
x..
is en
o=>
ë5~~
~~~
CD~u.
c¡:¡o
~Cf.):::¡
~t~
g ~gw
,..... LL&nO
·c. OZ~
§ ~~?:i
o 3:wen
~ z~~_
~ ¡St~
:!:~!i:ª~
.~a:cn~
~ ðt;;zs~
M c6~~ ~
w0ci:a:
3;a::Q.
",frl6
01.1.<
o
II)
~
0;;
g
;:;
M
8
¿,
~
.r,
o
:!:
N
co
C')
..,.
'"
0;
N
...
~
~
1.1.
o
~
3:
en
1.1.
o
~ ã)
i 3: ¡1ì
en ;¡;
1.1. co
,;, 0 ...
8 ~ ~
s:'¡OZ m
èòSwu. 0
..(! O c..
~¡§~~~
""~~;t
,.........iO~~
~ æ ;g,~~.
~ 3: N:t:'
a: 0 I- 1--
C)~~~
~a::;;;'
co t::.z
~
<;>
§
~
~
õõ
C')
:t::::ï
I-Z
~.~
~~
1:Sz
00
o?;¡
a:;:
u.Z
O:t:
~i
~~~
S2 ....
~. ;:::;:;¡;
~' ~~~
8 ¡S~~
~ :::ï::-~
- ZL&.c..
~9u.J::o
"'=1"<.0('1)1--
-êS~:;:t
a:fo-o=:ëèco
¡¡¡t-"'<z-
ffiffi°3:
~aJ~:t:
~~~~
....z-
C')=>w
coa::z
o
""
~
;;
o
C5
~
;:;
:3
~
<b
o
:!:
'"
'"
'"
....
'"
0;
~
1.1.
o
~
3:
en
1.1.
o
~
w
en
u.~
o~_
~;¡;~
~ z:5o:-
o .~~"~.
~. . ~ <:}I-a:
~ -C\l0
.:s: .Z.;;;;
èòS 1.1.-0
8 ~~c..
....m(;¡_~
-en:;:æl-
Wu.C\.IL&.
N~OI-'~
~:~~3:
z-~
5~t::.~
c.~,:!:
~;::;;
COCDZ
~
i
~
8
:!:
~
C')
1.1.
o
w
Z
1.1.
.0
~éÕ
_N
~~
'"
",,0
~~
:;;Q.
~~
0a:
~~¡c
3:¡¡:~
~ cno.....
Si! u.:t:d>
~ Ol-CO
g¡ t~~
g~o~Q.
~ ä: gz~
~:I: Ø~CL
~~¡s..,~
-~!i:~t
....~~~~
~º!;(~:;:
ð¡!:m:t:
ê5~~~
..,.""-
~$~
~
o:i
1ó
~
...
~
o
~
:3
~
<b
o
:!:
~
C')
~ ~
0; 3:
~ en
1.1.
o
3:
en
1.1.
o
~ ¡-
~ ~. ~
o u.. en
~ 0 Ie
o ~ a:
<;> en Q.
~:t:"'¡S ~
~fu~~-o
VU)...,J--u:lF-
-Q§~::t
C') 000 §...
~~~;g¡¡;-~
~ ~.3: ~¡!:
ææ~b:{
~~:;;
co t::.z
!12
8
,;,
;:;
o
~
8
:!:
~
~
0;
~
w
Z
1.1.
o
~re
3:~
z,;,
1.1.:5
0a::_
~Q.~
~ .~~~
Oa::...·
~ '. ~>a:
:3 en -t::g;
c\¡ a: zê5m
¡;; :¡u.:t: 0
. wa:: 0l-c..
~ïrl;;;~~~
-~~~~
Il)~~o,,-~
~a::>"!12~3:
~~ ;:ê.¡!:
z~o.... -
w.-="'I:t;::::!:
~3::;;
COCDZ
~
o
M
;:;
o
c\¡
¡;;
<b
o
:!:
'"
co
M
ðÇ ~
0; 3:
~ en
1.1.
o
~
~
1.1.
o
~ i
§ w C')
o en_;¡;
o ;S~~
'" ~Ma::
8 ~:5Q.
i u..oD:l
. o~~
~> ~~g
-~~~~t
~~001l)
¡u.C¡on~
~~;::~3:
~;æ ~~~
~::E"¢'O~¡
~~:;;
cot::.z
~
8
~
C')
~
....
~
1.1.
o
~
~ ~
..~ ~¡c
u.~
0,;,
~~
:;;a::
zO
¡s~
~~êõ
3:~~
§ ~ ¡§;¡;
~..~¡!:~
~ ~~Q.
~ LL.N~
~(I)O fj ìt
~~~ ¡8 ~
- ..,~~t;:
",wO 0 ""
~~~ ~~
ÍÈ3: ~ ¡!:
CJ)o~ -
O~~~
~a:w
<0 t:..z
~
:3
§
o
M
¡;;
<b
o
:!:
co
~
....
~
'"
N
...
1.1.
o
~
3:
en
1.1.
o
~
~
w
en
1.1. ~
. 0'"'
~::i
-MC')
~ enï¡¡o:-
<;> ¡s ¡gìê
;; ~:;:ê5
9 Il:)-
~ ~~~
, oa::c..
~> 00 ¡n 9.0
...."':¡(;¡-I-
-~a:;:~t
a:gu.. I- IX) "
I.t)LLc( 0 u.....
~<:¡_~ ~ 3:
~~w !::.jE
~~¡~~
~:;:w
coCf.>Z
~
...
8
~
8
:!:
on
co
""
CJi
~
1.1.
o
~
:;:
Z
1.1.
o
~æ
:;:í)
z'"
u.ï¡¡
0a::_
~Q.~
~ ~~;¡;
~ o a:: Ie
8~~ê5
N zëE;o--
C\I 1.1.00
"?Qa::0¡!:c...
co Z -Il:) => 0
~5Ë~(;¡<1-
- 8 ~ ~ Wt
"w-u.i°b~
~~~~~:;:
~~~t::.iE.
õë5v~::!:,
~;::;;
coenz
~
:3
.¡.
;:;
o
c\¡
~
<b
o
:!:
...
'"
""
,
I
I
j
I
,.
'-'
AGENDA REQUEST
.....,J
ITEM NO. Jd!
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [X]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): ENGINEERING DIVISION 4115
~~£.(~ -/
í'Donald B. We4, P.E.
County Engineer
SUBJECT:
Release of maintenance bond for Bev Smith Toyota; improvements to Southland Drive.
BACKGROUND:
As part of the expansion of Bev Smith Toyota, Inc., the City of Fort Pierce required the paving of
Southland Drive and installation of a sidewalk. The developers of Southland Drive (Bev Smith
Toyota) submitted a performance and maintenance bond to the County for security prior to
construction. On December 11, 1996, the County accepted the construction of the road and
Subsequently reduced the security to a $5,000 maintenance bond.
FUNDS AVAIL.(State type & No. of transaction or N/A): N/A
Feb. 18, 1997
accepted security for Performance and Maintenance
Bond
reduced security to a Maintenance Bond
PREVIOUS ACTION:
June 28, 1996
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board approve the release of the Maintenance Bond in its entirety to Bev
Smith Toyota (the Developer) in accordance with the Maintenance Agreement and accept the public
right-of-way for maintenance.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ ¡'APPROVED
[ ] OTHER:
[ ] DENIED
RRENCE:
uglas M. Anderson
County Administrator
./'\
. o/:?
[x]County Attorney rf-i
Coordination/Signatures
[X]Originat~
[x)Finance J.. .
(check for copy only, if applicable)
-' (/~-
[ ¡Purchasing
[x]Road & Bridge r ."Y¡ ß
/o¡~
.
[ ]Mgt. & Budget
[x]Co. Eng .D.t~
{
~ -
'-'
AGENDA REQUEST
"'"
ITEM NO. C-3B
DATE: April 20, 1999
.......-.
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [X]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): ENGINEERING DIVISION 4115
PRESENTED BY:
r~~J~
County Engineer
SUBJECT:
Extension of Continuing Contracts for Stormwater Engineering Services with Hazen and Sawyer, P.C.,
and Lindahl, Browning, Ferrari, and Hellstrom, Inc.
BACKGROUND:
On May 13, 1997, the BOCC entered into continuing contracts with Hazen and Sawyer, P. C., and
Lindahl, Browning, Ferrari, and Hellstrom, Inc., to assist the County on stormwater/drainage related
projects and studies. These contracts will expire at the end of their two year term, which is May 13, 1999.
Per the contract, we have the option to extend the contracts an additional year. The consultants have
agreed to extend the contracts with the same terms and conditions, including their rates.
FUNDS AVAIL.: Not Applicable
PREVIOUS ACTION: May 13, 1997, the BOCC entered into continuing contracts with Hazen and
Sawyer, P.C., and Lindahl, Browning, Ferrari, and Hellstrom, Inc.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed agreement extensions with Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., and
Lindahl, Browning, Ferrari, and Hellstrom, Inc., to continue to provide stormwater/drainage engineering
services for an additional year; and authorization for signature by the Chairman.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ ~PPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
Doug sAnderson
County Administrator
(XlCouoly A!Iomoy :JY' L-
[X]Originating Dept. Public Works X
[ ]Finance
(check for copy only, if applicable)
Coordination/Sianatures
[ ]Mgt. & Budget
[X]Co.Eng~
[ ]Comm. Dev.
[X]Budget Coord. ß.f'I,",
-
'-'
'wi
AGREEMENT EXTENSION
THIS AGREEMENT EXTENSION, is made this day of
1999, between ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the
State of Florida, (the "County"), and HAZEN and SAWYER, P.C. or his, its or their successors,
executors, administrators, and assigns (the "Engineer").
WHEREAS, on May 13, 1997 the parties entered into an Agreement (the "Agreement")
for providing professional engineering services related to the planning, design, permitting, study,
and construction management of stormwater/drainage projects throughout St. Lucie County for
an initial term of two years with the option to extend the Agreement for an adcitional term of one
year on the same terms and conditions; and
WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to exercise the option and extend the term of the
Agreement until May 12, 2000 on the same terms and conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the
Agreement is hereby extended until May 12, 2000. Except as extended herein, the remaining
terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County has hereunto subscribed and the Engineer has
affixed his, its, or their names, or name on the date aforesaid
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
CHAIRMAN
CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
WI~ES:
-;;¿L// r ..
£J+ fhw~
HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.C.
BY:
At ItVf:~t)
Print Name: A/hc'i).- !1u/)/z-
Title: Ý/éP PÎ'C~;fl2....~
G:\A 1TY\KA. TIIERINEIEXT -IIAZF.:-I_ WPO
-
'-'
>..,I
AGREEMENT EXTENSION
THIS AGREEMENT EXTENSION, is made this day of
1999, between ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the
State of Florida, (the "County"), and LINDAHL, BROWNING, FERRARI & HELLSTROM,
INC., or his, its or their successors, executors, administrators, and assigns (the "Engineer").
WHEREAS, on May 13, 1997 the parties entered into an Agreement (the "Agreement")
for providing professional engineering services related to the planning, design, permitting, study,
and construction management of stormwater/drainage projects throughout St. Lucie County for
an initial term of two years with the option to extend the Agreement for an adcitional term of one
year on the same terms and conditions; and
WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to exercise the option and extend the term of the
Agreement until May 12, 2000 on the same terms and conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the
Agreement is hereby extended until May 12, 2000. Except as extended herein, the remaining
teI[111s and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
I
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County has hereunto subscribed and the Engineer has
affixed his, its, or their names, or name on the date aforesaid
I
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
CHAIRMAN
CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
WITNESSES:
LINDAHL, BROWNING, FERRARI &
HELLSTROM, INC.,
BY: 71~ ~ j}-
ß1~(fï
\ / " ,-n /J I. .r
V I,..{.. n t'11 CIt" '" I
Print Name:
1,
5,1." tko
.>J::1~~e WA/U~~ /ø )
. / ....-c'--..../
j¿'
I ,,.¡~v· ~-:::::----...
/ !
Title:
Û .'ATfY\KA nIUlNE\£XT·l~1I
'-'
....,;
ITEM NO. . e ... 3C,
AGENDA REQUEST
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR ~]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [')C]
SUBJECT: Anita Street M.S.B.U.
Amendment to Preliminary Assessment Roll
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): ENGINEERING DIVISION
BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum
FUNDS AVAIL. (State type & No. of transaction or N/A): N/A
PREVIOUS ACTION:
December 16, 1997 - Board adopted preliminary assessment roll and
authorized County Engineer to proceed with project.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt Resolution No. 99-095 amending the preliminary assessment
roll to lower the preliminary assessment amount for the subject property owner.
[~APPROVED
[ ] OTHER:
[ ] DENIED
Dou as Anderson
County Administrator
Coordination/Signatures
[X]County Attorney:
~J::r
!Vt-
[X] Co Engineer:
þJ
[]Purchasing:
[X]MSBU coor:~
[X]Public Works Dir:
[ ] Mgmt & Bdgt:
[ ] Finance:
'-"
'-'
COMMISSION REVIEW: April 20, 1999
ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM NO. 99-134
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Board of County Commissioners
County Engineer ~..~....
April 9, 1999
Anita Street MSBU
Amendment to Preliminary Assessment Roll
BACKGROUND
On December 16, 1997, the Board adopted Resolution No. 97-291 which approved the
preliminary assessment roll for the MSBU and authorized the County Engineer to proceed
with construction.
Prior to the adoption of the roll, all property owners were given the option to have their
entire swale piped in front of their property at an additional cost. Mr. and Mrs. Lawson
initially requested to have their entire swale piped. They have now changed their mind and
it is necessary to amend the assessment roll to take out the cost of piping the Lawson's
entire swale.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt Resolution No. 99-095 amending the preliminary
assessment roll to lower the preliminary assessment amount for the property belonging to
Mr. and Mrs. Lawson to reflect the reduction for limited rather than full piping.
cc: Staff Concurring
Tax Collector
Finance Director
OMB Manager
'-"
...",.I
RESOLUTION NO. 99-95
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA: APPROVING A MODIFIED
ASSESSMENT ROLL TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF THE ASSESSMENT
AGAINST A CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE ANITA STREET MSBU
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, on September 17, 1996, based on the petition of seventy-nine (79%) percent
of the landowners for drainage improvements and seventy-one (71 %) percent for potable water
improvements pursuant to Chapter 1-13.5 of the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances (the "Code"),
the Board of County Commissioners for St. Lucie County (the "Board") adopted Resolution No. 96-
207 which created the Anita Street Municipal Services Benefit Unit (the "Anita Street MSBU") to
levy non-ad valorem special assessments based on the equivalent residential connection and per acre
method of assessment to fund the cost of a project to provide potable water supplied by Fort Pierce
Utilities Authority ("FPUA") and drainage improvements constructed by St. Lucie County to
properties within the Anita Street MSBU in unincorporated St. Lucie County, Florida (the "Project"),
and authorized the St. Lucie County Director of Engineering (the "County Engineer") to proceed
with the Project pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 1-13.5 of the Code; and
WHEREAS, on December 16, 1997 pursuant to Chapter 1-13.5 of the Code and Chapter
125 and Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, the Board held a duly noticed and advertised second
public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 97-291 and thereby determined that the special
assessments for the Anita Street MSBU are just and equitable and approved the preliminary
assessment roll for the Anita Street MSBU, attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; and
WHEREAS, the original assessment levied against the property owned by Mr. and Mrs.
Lawson included the cost to place a culvert across the entire property, however, the Lawson's have
determined that they do not desire to place a culvert across the entire property and it is necessary to
modify the preliminary roll to reduce the amount of the assessment against the Lawson property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St.
Lucie County, Florida, as follows: ,
Section 1: The modified preliminary assessment roll for the Anita Street MSBU attached
hereto as Exhibit liB II reflecting the reduction of the assessment against the Lawson property is hereby
approved and confirmed and the assessment shall stand as a lien against the benefitted properties until
satisfied.
-1-
-
'-"
"'-"
Section 2: Except for the above modification of the assessment roll, all of the findings and
determinations previously made by the Board with respect to the Anita Street MSBU shall remain
in full force and effect.
Section 3.
This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 1999.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
Deputy Clerk
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
County Attorney
-2-
-- -
'-"
EXHIBIT" A"
PRELIMINARY ROLL
-3-
~
- -
~
..,,¡
EXHmIT "B"
MODIFIED PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
-4-
- -
"
II) ï1
'"
( ) 0
UI g
II)
~
( )
(fJ
0
:J
Q:
õ
~,
:J
CO
'0
Q)
CO
!II
tr
~
s:
::;:
..
~
~
o
i
~
~
-..
'-" 1-.' z
... -" -" -" -" -" -" -" co 0) -... CI CJ1 .þ. W N -"
-... CI CJ1 .þ. (.0) N -" 0 p
(.0) ~ (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) ~ (.0) (.0)
.þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ. .þ.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "0
~ (.0) If (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) If (.0) (.0)
¿, I I I I I I I I I I I ¿, ¿, »
(.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) ;:tJ
(.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.J (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) n
~ N N N -" ... -" ... -" -" N N ~ ~ N N N
6 6 6 I I b b I 6 b 6 6 6 b ..... m
0 0 0 ... r-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ......
-" ... -" -" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 õ
-" ~ (.0) .þ. .þ. b b -... ~ (.0) 0) -... CI CJ1 .þ. (.0) (.0)
b 6 6 6 6 6 I Ò 6 Ò b 6 6 z
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -" 0 p
0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0
(jj (;) :::::¡ - è3 (j; ¡;::s :::::¡ :Þ: ¡;::s (j; - õ :::::¡
-" -"
en ~ C/J ~ J: ~ m ~ c... J: 0 ~ ~ ~ OJ 2S ï1
~ š:: ¡;; ;:tJ 0 :::¡ :;;c c z c:
~ :;;c m (j) z JT1 c: ~ :;;c .(j) ()
en .z r- .en m .() r- z d 7'
z 0 .en JT1 .en c... ï1 i ~
m :E m ~ (j) tD Z 0 < 0 en "z -I "0
r F ~ m m ~ ~ ~ en m :;;c m 0 ~
(j) 0 < ~ m L ~ ?J ~ "U š::
en ~ m :;;c m z "U š:: :x: tn "0
o :;;c m :;;c :;;c en z :x: ^ J: () :x: m
(j) ~ m ~ 0 ~ (j) m 0
~ :E G) m :;;c ::0 ffi r- o ^ S
:;;c 0 :x: o È: o .....
"'0 () :E o m en o ....
o c... ~ c... ......
::0 o Õ m z 0 tD ~ ()
en ~ c... 0 0
J: tD o o m ~ :Þ
ª r- c... tD r- Z š:: :E
~ 0 0 -I 0
o ::0 r- š:: Z ::0 š:: Z
:Þ i3 0 m s:
r c... z :;;c ::0 0 c :Þ :Þ -< m
() m ~ s: ëñ ;:Q ::0 en :Þ s: ;:tJ
^ ¡;;
c... m m - r-
r-
ï1 m m
z
(')
1\1 0
"0
.fit ~ g DI
.... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .....
CiI) -" ~ ~ -" ... ~ ~ -" -" -" -" -" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3'
"0 111 CiI) 111 m -... ·co -" -" -" "0 co -... 0) CI CJ1 (') 1\1
co (.0) ~ (.0) CI CJ1 CiI) CiI) .þ. N N N 0 ~ 0) CJ1 0) CI 0 (Q
CiI) CJ1 CiI) (.0) (.0) (.0) CI CiI) CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 co .þ. ~ co 0) Gt III
èÐ Í\J -" Í\J :.. c.., Í\J :..,¡ Co c.., c.., c.., ~ :.. Co ... ::¡ :".
CiI) (.0) 0) c,) (.0) (.0) (.0) .þ. .þ. co co co -... N CI (.0)
(')
1\1
.fit "0 ~
W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... g
co 1'> N 1'> 1'> 1'> .N _N 1'> N _N 1'> 1'> j'J ~
c" -" .... -" -.... ... -" ... '"w ... ... -" -" ..... ... -" -" -" (') S'
N co co co co co co co co co co (Ø (Ø (Ø co co (Ø (Ø 0 ...
p CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 -" CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 Gt
0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ill ~ :.. ~ ~ ~ ill ~ ill ill ~ ~
0 CI .... CI CI CI
.fit C/J
r-
oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ." n
~ .....
(.0) (.0) (.0) ~ (.0) (.0) (.0) (.0) ~ (.0) (.0) ~ (.0) ~ ~ (.0) (.0) ~ III
CI CI m CI CI CI CI CI CI CI CI CI m ~
.... CiI) 0) CiI) 0) 0) CiI) CiI) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) CiI) 0) 0) 0)
:... c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., c.., 3
co -" -" -" -" -" ... -" -" -" -" -" -" -" -" ... -" -"
.fit OJ ."
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 3'
0 -" ... -" -" .... -" -" 1'> -" -" -" .... -" -" -" -" -" ::I
"en "(.0) ~ "0 W "w "0 "0 "0 ·0 '0 ..... Q. 1\1
... ... ... ... -" -" ... ~ ::I
W ~ (Ø w CI 0) 0) CI (Ø co (Ø CJ1 W CiI) 0 CJ1 ... ." n
en CJ1 co ~ N -" N CI -" -" -" .þ. 0 ... CJ1 ... .... m 3'
¡g ... :..,¡ Co ... Í\J ~ c.., Co :..,¡ :..,¡ :..,¡ ~ Co :..,¡ ~ 0 Co (Q
.þ. -" co CJ1 co CJ1 (Ø CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 (.0) W W VI
3' (')
S' 1\1
"0
..... ; g
en !Q.
...... [
.fit ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C'I 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N
~
0
.fit ." (')
.... ~ ~ ~ ~ :§ m Q.
"...I -" ~ ~ ... ... ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
N ... 0) (Ø ... ... (Ø (Ø co (Ø co (Ø co (Ø (Ø (Ø 0) 0)
,.. 0 (Ø ... ... (.0) 0 0 ... co (Ø (Ø CI .þ. 0 N -... .þ. ~
œ Co Co :". ~ c.., ~ :.. œ œ en :". ill :". :". Co ill
~ co .... CI (.0) ..... (.0) ... -" ... 0) W N 0 CJ1 -... ::I
0 ~
.fit §' 0
w ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ :9 -I
c" -" -" N -" ... (.0) N N -" -" -" ... .... 1\1
co (.0) ~ (Ø (.0) ~ 0) 0) :::I 0 !:::¡ 0 0 (Ø co co 0) -... c ><
w 0 -" N 0) 0) -... -... 0 CI 0) N W CI ::I ~
W ill ~ c.., :.. ~ Í\J :". c.." ill ill ill Co Co ~ :". 0 Í\J ...
w CiI) -... CJ1 0) co CJ1 w (.0) w (Ø .b. (Ø N 0
~ I "0 -4
~ .(A ~ ~ ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1\1 0
(Ø CJ1 .þ. .þ. CJ1 CJ1 .þ. (Ø "CJ1 "CJ1 _CJ1 CJ1 3 [ i
"00 "-... m "-... 'Co "co --... .-... ".þ. ... -" ... "0 -co ....... ·co "~ -.þ. III
W ~ ~ 0) 0 w 0 .... (.0) 0) 0) 0) N N 0 ... 0 ~
~ .þ. (.0) 0 CI ... W co ~ ~ .þ. w (Ø N CJ1 .þ.
N :". Co c.., :..,¡ ill Co Co :..,¡ :.. -" ... ::¡ t Í\J ~ ~ Co
CiI) (Ø (Ø -" w co -... 0 N .þ. .þ. .þ. 0 0
» "0 0
.fit 3 ; §'
00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ 0 "0
en ".þ. (.0) (.0) .þ. (.0) (.0) CI W (.0) W W W (.0) (.0) w _w C 1\1
...... .... -(.0) ".þ. N w ".þ. -.þ. -0) "-... "-... --... "CI "CJ1 ".þ. ..þ. "w -" ::I '< C
CiI) 0) <0 -... -" 0 -" -" .þ. CI ~ CI .þ. -... -" (Ø N (Ø ... 3 ::I
W N CiI) -" .... (.0) CJ1 co ~ .þ. .þ. !'> N -... ... 0 CI :§ III [
ën :..,¡ 0 ill ~ Í\J :". Co ... ill 0, ill 0 :". 0 Co 0 Í\J a
.þ. CJ1 0 N CI 0 0) CI .þ. .þ. .þ. 0 co N CI .þ. N
-g »
... VI
.f It "0 ~ ª"
~ 1\1
.... ñ VI ::I
0 ~ ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ .(A -" ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ VI c
"00 ~ ~ CI ~ CJ1 -" ~ CI CJ1 ~ ~ CJ1 CJ1 œ. 3 e!.
.... <0 (Ø -" CI (.0) N N 0 co CJ1 w ..... III
;001 .þ. (.0) 0) ~ CI -... CI .þ. .þ. CJ1 N !D 0 0 ... ::I
::i :.. Co -" Co -" Co :". 0 :..,¡ :..,¡ :..,¡ 0 Co 0 CJ1 Co :". oS ...
CI (.0) (.0) (Ø CI N ... -" CI CI CI 0) co co 0 (Ø .þ.
»
» ::I
3 ::I
C -4
.fit 0 e!. ~
c
.... .(A ~ ~ ~ ::I "0
00 -" ~ ~ ... -" ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ .(A ~ ~ ~ ~
N 0 0) co 0 0 co 0) -... (Ø <0 (Ø (Ø 0) co 0) 0) -... Ii!' 1\1 !?,.
Ñ ".þ. ". >. m ".þ. --... .CJ1 111 "0 ~ "~ ~ "!:::¡ -0) "CJ1 "CI "~ ëo ..... '<
3 :
00 -" CJ1 .þ. co ... 0 -" .þ. co 0 co CJ1 ...
....
00 N 0) .... (.0) N N :-" 0 -" -" ... CI W CI N .þ. CI ...... III
t t Co Co c.., :". Í\J Í\J ~ c.., c.., !::¡ Í\J Í\J ill Co en ::I
-" ...
N .þ. N .þ. W W 0 -... -... CJ1 CJ1 CJ1 (.0) 0
-u
II>
(Q
'"
tn
II>
m
><
:::T
c:
:+
..
~
?l
[
N
...
...
~
.
ï1
o
o
S-
O
(þ
(f>
o
:::I
Q:
õ
~.
:::I
(Q
"
OJ
(Q
~
~-'-'-"-'-'-"-" re
.~ æ rn ~ w ~ -" 0 (Q ~ ~ æ rn ~ w ~ -'
U:~~~ ~ ~.) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~
o 8 0 ~ ~ ~ I:~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8
~ .(0} w ~ $ ~ ~ ~.. ~ t5 t5
~ . ~J .~ J y ~. r-p ~
5 g 555 ~)~\5)~8g3
:J .... ~. ~ 3 3 ~. ~ 8 8
§ ~. 2 ~ 1c2 ~,,:> ~. 5 ~ 5 b .;,
~. ~. ~.. ¡¡ I¡~ 5 :> t~. ~. ¡ 5 ~ I §
q~~ J ~ ~ d f I~ ~
~ti II g ; h ~ Ig 11,1 ¡
\ ~: ..~:E 1-0./ I~ Qø ~... ....~ ·..~.·I~ I~ ~ · Ie ª
,,¡ I~ ~ ;;;ll~ ..~.æ! ~. ~ i Ii .~ ~
~ñ ~! I~·e; I~ 1~1 0 å2 (j) .> ~ ~
c... rn -r PJ
ï1 rn
z
p
nr
~~~ll~~~I~rnl~'~I~~1~~M
~~~ ~:;5~~~ ª;1.~~L~~--§
m~"" w ~ ~,:~~
m w co w. ~ IV} ~ W
n
I»
"0
~1~1~~~1~1~1~1~~~~~~~ª~ªª8~
~~~ ~~.~ ~~I~~~ ~
1!!!I!!!!il!I!:!!I!!I!~m
I~~~~ ~I~ ~ 1~1~1~,~~I~~i
1~lg~ ~ ~~~~~~j~ il
9'
!Þ
...
,.... (I)
~~I~~I~~~~~sa
N
'#.
,.... ." g
~ I~:ª ~ l¡g l¡g I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ 1~ ~ .1$ !! i s ~ ~
~il~~~I~~~~ g
~ ~ I~ I~ ~ u ~ ~ I~ I~ n 'i lij ''; \~ 3
~ ~ £L » ~ ~ ~~~ 8 I~ I~ Ii¡; 3 I~ >
Jim œ ~ 'tI
~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~i
g¡1~nJ¡ I~~ ~n"niœ.-
~I~~~ It~ t~~~~~
-..
:þ 'tI 0
~.~ ~lli1":;; .~ :::::: ~ ::: ::: I~ ::: j:! j:! ~ ~ ~
a ~~~ ~.~~¡~~I~~i!la
~ ~~~ ~1~~g~.ß~g~~a~
¡ >
... II>
~ 'tI II>
S~E~~I~:ê I~~:~~t~~~g!i
::f ~ ffi ~ ~Ia; 3:: ~ oj.m g g; ä: g¡ ~ t oS
>
::I
::I
c:
~ ~
~~~~~~gl~I~~i~~W~~~~~ '
! I'~ ~ "ª ~ I"~ ~ ~ i~ \š ~ "~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ :; ·
¡ z ~ -- -- -- -- 3 -- -- ~ :§ -- 3-.1
.... .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 .... .9
-i ..... m m m m m m m m ïJ 0
U1 f1:1 m m .a .a .a .a .a .a .a .a .., -
0- .a .a c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: 0 :;
c: c: III III III III III III III III -0 0
> III III iii iii iii iii iii iii iii iii (1)
~ -
CJ) iii iii :t :t :t :t (II 0 en (1) <Þ
en III 9: 0 0 r+ :J (II
m ::¡ (1) (1) (1) (1) ~ (Q 0
S- ~ ~ -
CJ) ::¡ !!!. Cf) Cf) Cf) Cf) :;' 0
CJ) c: c: c c: c (1)
!!!. -0 3 3 3 3 0 S- Q, (1)
3: III III (1) ~ .., "0
m III (; S- S- o S- -0 (i¡ :;' :;' @
;::+ ()
z Cf) - ro en ~ 0'
en ~ 0 0 0 0 c: 0
-i (1) III III III III III ~ III C c- 3 3
CJ) g¡ (/ -0 -0 -0 -0 (1) ::¡ ~ (1)
::I: 3 en [ ;::+ ;::+ ;::+ c- o en ro
(1) !!!. !!!. !!!. ~ (1) ce' ct. ::J
> III 0
(1) (/ 0 0 0 0 z¡ c- ? ::¡ II)
ï ~ en 0 0 0 0 3 ~
ï 3 (/ % en % .., -" III 0
-0 (1) .0 :;' s:
to (1) (1) .ut jit .f4 ::¡ en
m ., ::¡ & c- O>
.r" -0 -0 -0 -0 co 0 :;' "C
-0 -0 0
"C III III ¡: ¡: ¡: ~ .., :;.. III 0 (1) <Þ
~ 0 3 (/ Cf) Cf) 0 d", ::¡ c- o
s. {3 < ~ ::t Ør
~ 0 en C/J en en (1)
> ¡¿} ï ï ï (; c- o
(1) 0
to 3 () () () c- -0 0 0 3 :Þ
ï c: (1) ¡: !î ct,
m a¡ c- III III III III 0- (/ 0 ïJ III
"2- c- c- c- o. '< c- :J .., III
Z 0 ê. ê. 3 ê. :t 0 0
¡¡j' < :j' (1) 0 -0 <Þ
m 0. (1) :J :J :J (1) g !î (1) III
., & ~ ~ ~ ~ III
£) ~ ..... 'TI Cf)
c: CJ1 ~ ~ ª' ~ 5' (1) -6" 3
> .... ~ III S. ( )
ï CJ1 < :J ~ -0 ::s
III III (1) III III Q.
Z ~ .iiI it it it it !!!. Q -
~ ~ III III III III 6: @ (if ::c
!!!. Cf) (1)
.Cf) .Cf) .Cf) .(/ (1) \. &
III 0. -0 -0 -0 :S. < (/
r- f/
:J Š: ¡: ¡: ¡: 0 (1) ..,
r- (1)
3: ~ c- Cf) f/ f/ :" III 0
(1) ::II ::II ::II g 0
m c- :J :J :J ..,
Z .., 0> III 0> 0 c-
(1) 0- c: !1>
-i f4 :J :J :J
tJ '< 0 0 0 :J
?l (0 :;' 5' 5' .....
0 !XI (Q (Q (Q z¡
'TI (1) 0- 0- 0- co
"C S- o 0 0 '.þ.
:J :J :J CJ1
,;¡ co c- o. c- -"
Z I it it it 0
.....
(1 Ñ (1) (1) (1) {3
=õ .'$. .(/ .Cf) .Cf)
> -0 -0 -0 -0
ï ~ ~ ë ë ¡:
> (/ Cf) Cf)
õ' 0 0 0 0
Z '::T 0
0 III I\) III :J
(i¡ -0 -0 -0 VI
Z .... ¡if ¡if ;::+ 2'
DI
-i '$. ~ ¡;¡: ~ 9,
m (1) III (1)
;:0 0 c- c- o. 0
< :J
m III m: m: m: õ
tJ .,
;-I :T III
., @ @ :J
(1) ~
0 ja. ja. ~
0
.a -0 "'0 "'0 @
~ ¡: ~ ë
0 Cf) VI !4
:J 0 0 g
:T ~ 0 0
-. ~ ~ i
C"
;:;: S-
o. m: 9, ~
~ 0 0 0
@ :J :J :J
Õ Õ õ
!4 III III DI
:J :J :J
~ ~ ~
(1) (1)
., @ @
(1)
ja. .f4 .f4
-0 "'0 c-
¡: ¡: Š:
Cf) (/ c-
N N (1)
'$. '$. c-
o-
0 0 '<
Q. Q. (0
m m
9, 9, .co
0 0 ~
:J :J
it it :t
(1) III
.Cf) (/ (1)
"'0 c- ..,
Š: (1)
~ Cf)
c- c:
.þ. (1) ;::¡:
'$. 0. 3
0- c:
~ '< a¡
(0 "2-
~ .m ¡¡j'
~ c-
o. 0-
~' '<
:T 0
c: III 1'>
:J @
r+
VI
c:
;::¡:
3
c:
a:
"2-
ëiï
c-
o-
'<
0
~
~
[
~
-"
~
.
"TI
~ ',-"
:J
~
q¡
o
:J
2:
õ
~.
:J
(Q
'U
III
(Q
~
m
)C
:J:
¡¡¡
::¡
a¡
~
;0
F
N
5='
i
I
, z
..... ..... ..... ..a. ..... ..... ..... ..... CO 00 ......0) U1''''' W '" .....
...... 0) U1 . W '" ..... 0 p
w w w w w w w w w w ~ w w w w w w »
J:>, J:>, J:>, t J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>, J:>,
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "C 'tJ
w w w w w w w w w w w w w w Cf' Cf' w :þ 2:
I I I W I I I I I I I I I I I
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W w ::u
w w w w w w w w w w w w w Id w w w 0 N
'" '" '" I\) ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... '" '" '" '" '" '" J:¡
6 6 6 b 6 I 6 6 6 6 6 I 66 I I I - m
0 0 0 0 0 ..a. r-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 - ..a.
..... ..... ..... ..... 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 6 t.O
..... '" Cf' . J:>, U1 0) '" w cp ...... 9>Y' J:>, w w CD
I I b I I I I I I I I I I Z CD
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 ..... 0 p
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 is 0 00 0 0 0
õs w Õ :::J - Õ3 Õì jiJ ::::¡ ~ Õì èÞ::ä: ~ Õ ::::¡
.....
00 ~ 00 ~ I ^ m ^ c.. I 0 () 00 I CD ^ "TI
~ ~ ffi m :;c m 0 :::¡ :;c » -I » C Z r
Z :::¡ :;c m (j) d3 z ..m r C ~ Z :;c .(j) Õ
z .N I en .00 .Z r m .Õ r ~ -I 7-
z ..m . .00 c.. "TI 00 0
m :E 0 CD Z 0 0 00 ~ ~ -I
m ~Z (j) < Z "C
.r F r m m ~ ~ ^ 00 m :;c m r 0 ::u
~ (j) 0 < m m [ 0 .:;c .Z 0 "'0 ~ 0
00 r m r Z
» m ::u :;c r "'0 ~ ~ -I I ~ "C
QO :;c :;c -I 00 Z I 6 () I m
~ m (j) !< m I S; 0
~ (j) m :;c (j) m ~
:;c :E m :;c -I QO ~ r QO ^ -
» 0 "'0 () I QO ~ QO QO ..a.
:;c c.. :E c.. m 00 -
00 QO :;c ~ QO Õ m z 0 c CD » () ~
I CD QO QO m ~ .~ c.. 0 z »
c.. CD
» m r- ~ :;c 0 -I r Z 0 ~
~ r Z Z
r II » 0 m 0 ~ ~ » :;c ~ m
.r c.. z 0 :;c :;c c » -< ::u
() m :þ ~ ^ Cñ ~ :;c 00 » ~
c.. z m - r ffi
m m r
'T1 Z m
0
4It III C
'U
..a. ~ ER ER ER ER ~ ER s: !!.
...... ..... ER ER 4It ..... ~ ER ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ER ~ ER ER ER B
"w 0, ...... 00 C» "en ...... ...... ëc ..... ..... ..... "'0 co ...... 00 0) U1 -::J
...... W 0) W W U1 00 00 J:>, '" '" '" 0 w 00 U1 00 0) 0111
~ ~ !'> !» ~ ~ ~ !'> !» ~ ~ ~ !O :'I J:>, !» !O 00 o (Q
...... '" ..... '" I\) w '" ...... 00 w w w '" ..... m ..... ...... ~ q¡ CD 0
...... w 00 w w w w J:>, J:>, co co co '" ...... '" 0) ...... w lit ~
0
4It III »Z
'U
W ~ ER ER 4It ER ~ ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER -. ~ s::Þ
cø .'" -'" -'" I\) .'" .'" .'" J:>, -'" .'" .'" .'" .'" .'" .'" .'" .'" N [ III
~ ..... ..... ..... :.. ..... ..... ..... w ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... -OS" mC')
co co co cø co co co co co co co co co co co co co zm
0 U1 ~ ~ us U1 U1 ~ ..... U1 ~ ~ U1 U1 ~ ~ ~ ~ o ...
b (.n U1 U1 8: (.n (.n U1 :... (.n U1 U1 (.n (.n U1 U1 U1 U1 III C:Þ
0 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) ..... 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) lit mZ »
4It en Co Z
Ø) ~ ER ER 4It ER ~ ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ~ r- """C -
N ER 'T1 0 ~
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W :§ II ~O
Ø) 0) 0) 0) Ø) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)0) 0) 0) 0) ~
..a. 00 00 00 C» !» 00 00 00 00 00 !» 00 0000 00 !» 00 [:~
:... w w w Co! w W W W W W w W ww w w W 3 en
cø ..... ..... ..... ..a. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... !CJ
4It CD 'T1 Zï -I
I\) ~ ER ER 4It ER ~ ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER 0 :i' »m ::0
0 ..... ..... ..... ..a. ..... ..... ..... 1'> ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ::J ~
~ ·w "'0 Q W "'0 "'0 . . . "'0 "'0 III m
0 ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... 0 - a.
~ ::J »~
'" ...... co cø 0) 00 00 0) co co co U1 w 00 0 U1 ..... 'T1 n m
..a. ~ U1 00 C» '" ..... '" 0) ..... ..... ..... J:>, 0 ..... U1 ..... ..... m S'
:... ..... :..¡ iD ëø N N W iD :..¡ :..¡ :..¡ N iD :..¡ ~ 0 m 0.... -I
I\) J:>, ..... co cø co '" U1 co U1 U1 U1 '" U1 W '" W W III (Q Om
3'~ ~~ :s:
S"" O- en
... -. s:s:
- IX [ OJ
4It ER ER ER 4It ER ~ ER ER ER ER ER ~ ER ER ER ER ER .2! - -. m""C c:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p p 0 8- Z~
b 0 0 0 b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ""0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 ~<
N
-;¡e. .m
.s:
4It 0 m
..a. - 'T1 0
':...I ER ER ER S m = Z
..... ER ER 4It ..... ~ ER ..... ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER
0 ..... 00 co cø ..... co co 00 co co co co co co co 00 00 It ....
us 0 co ..... ..a. ~ 0 0 ..... co co co 0) ~ 0 '" :'I J:>, en
~ i:n iD m 00 00 w ~ ..... i:n i:n i:n ~ U1 ~ ~ 00 (.n õ'
w 00 ..... 0) Ø) ...... ...... ...... w ..... ..... ..... 00 w '" 0 U1 ...... ::J
4It C .
::e
w ~ ER ER .,. ER ~ ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER iii' 0
U. '" ..... ..... ..a. '" ..... ..... w '" '" '" '" ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... :3 n ~
us w CD co cø w 00 00 ::: 0 0 0 0 ~ 00 co 00 ...... 0
I\) 0 ...... ..... ..a. ...... 00 00 ...... ...... :'I 0 !» '" ~ 0) c ><
en (.n w w Co! N N ~ W (.n (.n U1 iD iD w ~ 0 N ::J ~
us 00 '" ...... ...... '" 00 00 U1 W W W co J:>, ...... co '" 0 -
:þ
III
III
4It ~ CD "C i
C» ER ER ~ 4It ER ~ ~ ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER III
C» U1 J:>, · U1 J:>, co .U1 .U1 .U1 U1 J:>, J:>, J:>, _J:>, J:>, III III
= ........ -0) ........ ':...I ëc -...... ........ ".¡:,. ..... ..... ..... "'0 ëc ....... ·00 U1 .J:>, 3 [
..a. 0) CD ~ C» W ~ ..... w CD 00 00 '" '" 0 ..... ...... ~ CD
W J:>, '" · 0 ..... w !» !» !» J:>, w co '" ~ ::J
00 ~ iD W W (.n iD iD :..¡ ..... ..... ..... :..¡ ~ N ~ U1 iD -
Ø) co co ..... ..... 00 ...... 0 '" J:>, J:>, J:>, ...... J:>, 0 J:>, 0 :§
4It :þ"C C
Ø) ER ER ER 4It ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ~ ER ~ ER ER 3 ¡¡ iii'
. J:. w w w J:>, w w 0) w w w w .w w w _w .w O'¡ n
S ..... w .~ ~ w .J:>, ".¡:,. èo ........ ........ ........ "en U1 ".¡:,. ".¡:,. w ..... c '< 0
c
00 co 0 ..... ..... J:>, 0) 0) 0) J:>, ...... ..... co '" co :a. 3 ::J
'" 00 ..... ..a. W ~ CD ~ J:>, J:>, ~ 0) '" ...... ..... p 0)
00 :..¡ 0 (.n ~ N iD (.n (.n 0 ~ 0 m N -CD [
J:>, ..... U1 ~ ~:a.
. U1 0 '" 0) 0 00 0) J:>, J:>, J:>, 0 00 '" 0) '"
¡ :þ
... III
4It "C III :þ
..a. ER III CD ::J
0 ~ ER ER 4It ER ER ER ..... ER ER ER ER ER ER ~ ER ER n III ::J
ÕI III C
0) U1 U1 ~ ...... U1 U1 ..... 0) 0) 0) 0) U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 !!. 3
cø co 0) ...... ..... ~ 0) w '" '" '" 0 co 0) ...... U1 w !!!.
us ~ w !'> Ø) ~ ...... 0) J:>, J:>, J:>, U1 '" ...... co p 0 - CD
b iD :... ~ 0 :..¡ :..¡ :..¡ 0 m 0 (.n ~ ..a. ::J
..... ..... ..... 00 co 0 -
..... 0) w w w 0) '" ..... ..... 0) 0) 0) 00 CD 00 0 co J:>, -
:þ:þ
4It 3 5
..a. ~ ER ER 0 C ~
Ø) ..... ER ER 4It ..... ER ER ..... ER ER ER ER ER ER ~ ER ER
0 0 CD 00 C» 0 .CD 00 ...... co co co co CD 00 00 .00 ...... C III [
::J -
;. ".¡:,. .J:>, ~ ÕI ........ U1 0, ·0 w w w "'0 ·00 0, m '" ëc lit "0
I\) ..... U1 · ..... 0 ..... J:>, ...... ...... ...... ...... co 0 co 0) U1 III So
?I !'J !» ..... ..... !'J !'J ..... P ..... ..... ..... 0) w 0) '" ~ 0) -'<
..a. J:>, co iD ëø J:>, '" :... '" W ~ W N N N (.n 00 i:n ::3
0 J:>, '" J:>, w J:>, w w 0 ...... ...... ...... U1 U1 U1 W 0 -CD
~
:J:
ãi
:¡
I
IØ
I
>
"U
;0
F
'"
p
-'
<0
<0
<0
'-w'
z
S
~
~
en
m
en
en
3:
m
z
-4
en
:r:
:Þ
r-
r-
'"
m
"
?<
:Þ
'"
r-
m
Z
m
o
c
:Þ
r-
Z
en
~
r-
r-
3:
m
z
~
o
."
"
;Q
Z
(')
~
r-
:Þ
z
c
Z
-4
m
;Q
m
en
:-4
~~éãÕ)~ÐcOì~" ~
....O..........................................._~~·......
............mmmmmm "
mm.c.c.c.c.c.c.c a
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a¡
~~~~~~~~~:~
III S'CD CD (1) CD Om r+::J~
3 ~ 0 0 0 0 SI, ~ E!
c - c c ceo (1)
!!!. i 3 3 3 3 ß SI, CD' CD ..,
III .., 0 0 0 Q 'a, -. ::J. S'
0¡¡¡.::¡,.::¡,.::¡,....&f!2o~-
~-ßßßß~ëg- g
III 'a 'a 'a 'a III::J ~ ~
~ &f &f &f &f ~ ~ ~ ~, ~
~:g ----::J (1) IIIID 0
::J0iinnlD~~-::J::J
-3 mm;¡¡.....3 0
a¡ CD ~~ì1i.o:r~c-
.., ¡; .- - -. r+.....¡¡r~i.
i"m~~'2.~~~9'8~
, 3 0 0 ~ 0 0 A ~ ::J ~
!Lo cncncncn~.9äj!!\.:r
ar-r-r-r-(1)- i203
~IìIOOOO~'2. g,
a:~lIIlIIlIIlIIc-~ 0"
'a' 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ '< ~. ::J a
=<3333~CD ~'a
CD !!¡ S' ::ï S' S' (1) CD
~ -, _. _, -. 5t ~
~ tñ :g. ~ :g. :g. 31!G !iI'-6'-
.... '< III III III III III
CJ1 CD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S, 'a
'< III (1) CD CD CD -. ~ œ
~~fffr;'" ~
, ---- Q.¡ 0
III ~'a'a'a s.;!
=. :;;' ë ë ë ¡g (1)
::J5:000:'" III
IDCD:fI:fI:fI §
ëiJ ~::J ::J ::J
o c-IIIIII III C
-'<~~~ ::J
æ. æ ~. ~. ~. ~
SI,' 8'8'8' ~
m ::J::J::J CJ1
r ~~~ .....
5 rfr
.'If. ___
~
õ'
J
iii'
~
.....
'If.
~
..,
'a 'a 'a
ëëë
000
ß ß ~
'a 'a 'a
i!ti!t§t
Ñ' Ñ' Ñ'
8.3-3-
::J ::J S'
IDIDID
J _! J
'a 'a 'a
ëëë
000
888
::J ::J ::J
~~~
g,g,g,
000
::J ::J ::J
ggg
::J ::J ::J
i~~
i ¡g i
J+ .r+ j+
'a'a~
ë ë s::
o 0 ~
1\J1\J(1)
'If.'If.~
88..~
=-~
&!i-~
o 0
::J::J .
!i'i'~
ìñ 0 CD
:g" ~ is
c ~ C
:'8.;:+
'If.c-3
'< c
~. .g.
g;_æ~
ë: ~. c-
-. 9' '<
8 ~ ß
§ CD ,
r+ ¡g
c
;:+
3
c
a:
'2.
[
c-
'<
'a
ë
o
8
::J
~
g,
o
::J
~
(1)
8
c
'8
::J
æ.
SI,
~
i
r+
g
::J
:r
10
ã!
~
~
."
o
o
-
:J
o
;-
en
-
o
"'tI
ª-
3'
:;
IU
-<
en
'tJ
CD
n
i:
~
en
CD
en
en
3
CD
:J
-
::a
9.
~
a..
!II
..
--
.._-
'-'
AGENDA REQUEST
."-'"
ITEM NO. C-30
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [X]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): ENGINEERING DIVISION 4115
PRESENTED BY:
¿~~vts~~
County Engineer
SUBJECT:
Pod 26, Phase II at The Reserve - Approve Plat and corresponding Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
BACKGROUND:
Pod 26, Cypress Point at The Reserve is designed as a residential development within the private P.U.D.
community, The Reserve. The developers previously platted and constructed phase I and now have requested
approval of the plat for phase II and wish to record it at this time. Attached is a copy of the contract proposal
and posted bond for the associated roadway and drainage work. A letter of credit in the amount of $257,029.41
has been received by the County. Per the plat, the development will be private and The Reserve Association
will have all maintenance responsibility.
FUNDS AVAIL. (State type & No. of transaction or N/A): NIA
PREVIOUS ACTION:
Nov. 5, 1996 Site Plan approved
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board approve the plat and corresponding Subdivsion Maintenance Agreement for Pod
26, Phase II at The Reserve and authorize the Chairman to excute the documents subject to final review and
approval by County Attorney.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ ~ APPROVED
[ ] OTHER:
[ ] DENIED
n--
D uglas M. Anderson
ounty Administrator
[x]Co. Attorney
[x]Co. Surveyor ~d
~
Coordination/Signatures
;Ik
[x]Co. Eng.
(']0'("0""0' O~b¡;' Wa,k,
[x]Comm. Dev. I\.
[ ¡Other
[ ]Finance
(check for copy only, if applicable)
- "..-
'-'"
.....,¡
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, is entered into this
day of , 1999, by and between THE RESERVE HOMES,
LTD. (the "Developer"), and ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, (the "County").
WIT N ESE T H:
WHEREAS, the Developer is commencing proceedings to effect a
subdivision of land in St. Lucie County; and
WHEREAS, the Developer intends to record a certain plat of a
subdivision in St. Lucie County, Florida, to be known as p~àJ3~ at
the Reserve, Phase~, King.snlil'l (the "Subdivision"); and ., z.~
7!£ I Cy p;'U.6s P" IIU Î
WHEREAS, subdivision and platting ordinances of St. Lucie
County establish procedures and standards for the development and
subdivision of real estate and for the surveying and platting
thereof, requiring the installation of certain improvements and
providing penalties for violations among other things; and
WHEREAS, a
unincorporated area
the Developer has
guaranteed, to the
will be installed;
final plat of a subdivision within the
of St. Lucie County shall not be recorded until
installed the required improvements or has
satisfaction of the County, such improvements
and
WHEREAS, the required improvements of the Subdivision are to
be installed after recording of the plat under the guarantees
posted with the County.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the intent and desire of
the Developer as set forth herein, and to gain approval of St.
Lucie County to record said plat, the Developer and County agree as
follows:
1. COMPLETION OF REOUIRED IMPROVEMENTS. The Developer
agrees to satisfactorily complete the required improvements for the
above referenced development within twelve (12) months from and
after the recording of the above referenced plat according to the
construction plans approved by the County Engineer. The required
-1-
'-'
.....,¡
improvements are more particularly set forth on those certain plans
for construction improvements drawn by the Developer's engineers,
Lawson, Noble and Webb, Inc., dated H.:lrch. 24, 1999.
~ìZ4 '- I Z.
2. SECURITY. The Developer, in accordance with the
requirements established by the St. Lucie County Land Development
Code, agrees to supply the County with security in a form
acceptable to the County Attorney in the amount of ~ hundred
,4~ Sl-v~ . ~~lY' MINt... .¡,
tt'7~;Hlty Olgnc thousand tSlght hundr9a- ~.l.xty flv8 and ~/OO dollars
~'2$1pz..Cf.<-II($~20,865.2r), representing 100% of the estimated cost of the
required improvements as submitted by the Developer's engineer and
approved by the County Engineer.
3. REDUCTION OF AMOUNT OF SECURITY. The amount of the
security may be reduced once during the term of this Agreement upon
the completion of a portion of the required improvements by the
Developer and upon inspection and acceptance by the County. In no
event, ,however, shall the amount of the security be less than one
hundred percent (100%) of the cost of completing the remaining
required improvements.
4. SUPERVISION OF CONSTRUCTION. The required improvements
shall be constructed under the supervision of the Developer IS
engineer in full compliance with the specifications and
requirements of St. Lucie County, and when complete, Developer's
engineer shall furnish the County Engineer with a certificate of
satisfactory completion for approval.
5. FAILURE TO COMPLETE IMPROVEMENTS. It is further
understood and agreed by and between the parties to this Agreement
that, in the event said required improvements are not constructed
within twelve (12) months from the date of the recording of the
above referenced plat, the County shall have and is hereby granted
the right to cause the required improvements to be made and to use
the security provided herewith for payment of all costs and
expenses incurred in the construction thereof, including but not
limited to, engineering, surveying, construction, legal and
contingent costs. Furthermore, it is agreed by the parties hereto
that County shall be reimbursed from the security provided for any
damages, either direct or consequential, which the County may
sustain as a result of the failure of Developer to carry out and
execute all of the provisions of this Agreement and the provisions
-2-
'-'
....",
of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. In the event of
Developer's failure or refusal to construct and install the
required improvements in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement, the County shall have the option to do so, with County
employees and equipment, or pursuant to public advertisement and
receipt of bids. In the event that the total costs incurred in
construction and full completion of the improvements shall exceed
the amount of security provided, such additional costs shall be
paid by Developer on written demand by the County Engineer.
6. RELEASE OF SECURITY. Upon completion of construction of
all required improvements, the Developer's engineer shall certify
that the improvements have been constructed in accordance with the
regulations set forth in the St. Lucie County Land Development
Code. When the improvements have been certified by the Developer's
engineer, the County Engineer shall inspect the improvements and
review the construction and supporting test/control data furnished
by the Developer I s engineer. If all required improvements are
completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer, the County
Engineer shall confirm this in writing to the St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners. The Developer's security shall then
be released in accordance with Section 11.04.01 of the St. Lucie
County Land Development Code.
7. RECORDATION OF PLAT. Following execution of this
Agreement by both parties and approval of the form of security by
the County Attorney, the County agrees to record the plat of the
above referenced Subdivision at such time as the plat complies with
the subdivision and platting requirements set forth in Section
11.03.00 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code.
8. INTERPRETATION: VENUE This Agreement constitutes the
entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject
matter hereof and supersedes all prior verbal or written agreements
between the parties with respect thereto. This Agreement may only
be amended by written document, properly authorized, executed and
deli vered by both parties hereto. This Agreement shall be
interpreted as a whole unit and section headings are for
convenience only. All interpretations shall be governed by the
laws of the State of Florida. In the event it is necessary for
either party to initiate legal action regarding this Agreement,
venue shall be in the Nineteenth Judicial circuit for St. Lucie
-3-
'-'
...""
County I Florida I for claims under state law and the Southern
District of Florida for any claims which are justiciable in federal
court.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I the parties hereto have executed these
presents on the dates indicated below. The date of this Agreement
shall be the date on which this Agreement is approved by the Board
of County Commissioners.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY I FLORIDA
BY:
DEPUTY CLERK
CHAIRMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
WITNESSES:
THE RESERVE HOMES1 LTD.
BY:
Print Name:
Title:
C:\JWL\AGREE\RESERVE-HOMES-99.WPD
-4-
~
.I
'-"'
AGENDA REQUEST
..."..
ITEM NO. C-3E
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [X]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
~~i.~~ ___
~. We-at, P.E.
County Engineer
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): ENGINEERING DIVISION 4115
SUBJECT:
Pod 33, Phase I at The Reserve - Approve Plat and corresponding Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
BACKGROUND:
Pod 33, Kingsmill at The Reserve is designed as a residential development within the private P.U.D. community,
The Reserve. The developers have requested approval of the plat for phase I and wish to record it at this time.
Attached is a copy of the contract proposal and posted bond for the associated roadway and drainage work. A
letter of credit in the amount of $628,865.22 has been received by the County. Per the plat, the development
will be private and The Reserve Association will have all maintenance responsibility.
FUNDS AVAIL.(State type & No. of transaction or N/A): N/A
PREVIOUS ACTION:
Feb. 16, 1996
Site Plan approved
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board approve the plat and corresponding Subdivsion Maintenance Agreement for Pod
33, Phase I at The Reserve and authorize the Chairman to excute the documents subject to final review and
approval by County Attorney.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ /APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
RENCE:
--
D glas M. Anderson
ounty Administrator
[x]Co. Anom., éìt
[x¡Co. Surveyor ~cI
[ ¡Finance
(check for copy only, if applicable)
Coo......oo/Sl.n....... ~
[x]Originating Dept. Public Works . [x¡Co. Eng.~
[x¡Comm. Dev.~ [ ¡Other
\
r
t
t.
-
'-'
......,
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, is entered into this
day of , 1999, by and between THE RESERVE HOMES,
LTD. (the "Developer"), and ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, (the "County").
WIT N ESE T H:
WHEREAS, the Developer is commencing proceedings to effect a
subdivision of land in St. Lucie County; and
WHEREAS, the Developer intends to record a certain plat of a
subdivision in St. Lucie County, Florida, to be known as Pod 33 at
the Reserve, Phase I, Kingsmill (the "Subdivision"); and
WHEREAS, subdivision and platting ordinances of St. Lucie
County establish procedures and standards for the development and
subdivision of real estate and for the surveying and platting
thereof, requiring the installation of certain improvements and
providing penalties for violations among other things; and
WHEREAS, a
unincorporated area
the Developer has
guaranteed, to the
will be installed;
final plat of a subdivision within the
of St. Lucie County shall not be recorded until
installed the required improvements or has
satisfaction of the County, such improvements
and
WHEREAS, the required improvements of the Subdivision are to
be installed after recording of the plat under the guarantees
posted with the County.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the intent and desire of
the Developer as set forth herein, and to gain approval of St.
Lucie County to record said plat, the Developer and County agree as
follows:
1. COMPLETION OF REOUIRED IMPROVEMENTS. The Developer
agrees to satisfactorily complete the required improvements for the
above referenced development within twelve (12) months from and
after the recording of the above referenced plat according to the
construction plans approved by the County Engineer. The required
-1-
-
\
~
..."
improvements are more particularly set forth on those certain plans
for construction improvements drawn by the Developer's engineers,
Lawson, Noble and Webb, Inc., dated March 24, 1999.
2. SECURITY. The Developer, in accordance with the
requirements established by the St. Lucie County Land Development
Code, agrees to supply the County with security in a form
acceptable to the County Attorney in the amount of six hundred
twenty eight thousand eight hundred sixty five and 22/00 dollars
($628,865.22), representing 100% of the estimated cost of the
required improvements as submitted by the Developer's engineer and
approved by the County Engineer.
3. REDUCTION OF AMOUNT OF SECURITY. The amount of the
security may be reduced once during the term of this Agreement upon
the completion of a portion of the required improvements by the
Developer and upon inspection and acceptance by the County. In no
event, however, shall the amount of the security be less than one
hundred percent (100%) of the cost of completing the remaining
required improvements.
4. SUPERVISION OF CONSTRUCTION. The required improvements
shall be constructed under the supervision of the Developer's
engineer in full compliance with the specifications and
requirements of St. Lucie County, and when complete, Developer's
engineer shall furnish the County Engineer with a certificate of
satisfactory completion for approval.
5. FAILURE TO COMPLETE IMPROVEMENTS. It is further
understood and agreed by and between the parties to this Agreement
that, in the event said required improvements are not constructed
within twelve (12) months from the date of the recording of the
above referenced plat, the County shall have and is hereby granted
the right to cause the required improvements to be made and to use
the security provided herewith for payment of all costs and
expenses incurred in the construction thereof, including but not
limited to, engineering, surveying, construction, legal and
contingent costs. Furthermore, it is agreed by the parties hereto
that County shall be reimbursed from the security provided for any
damages, either direct or consequential, which the County may
sustain as a result of the failure of Developer to carry out and
execute all of the provisions of this Agreement and the provisions
-2-
-
'.
'-'
""'"
of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. In the event of
Developer's failure or refusal to construct and install the
required improvements in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement, the County shall have the option to do so, with County
employees and equipment, or pursuant to public advertisement and
receipt of bids. In the event that the total costs incurred in
construction and full completion of the improvements shall exceed
the amount of security provided, such additional costs shall be
paid by Developer on written demand by the County Engineer.
6. RELEASE OF SECURITY. Upon completion of construction of
all required improvements, the Developer's engineer shall certify
that the improvements have been constructed in accordance with the
regulations set forth in the St. Lucie County Land Development
Code. When the improvements have been certified by the Developer's
engineer, the County Engineer shall inspect the improvements and
review the construction and supporting test/control data furnished
by the Developer I s engineer. If all required improvements are
completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer, the County
Engineer shall confirm this in writing to the St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners. The Developer's security shall then
be released in accordance with Section 11.04.01 of the St. Lucie
County Land Development Code.
7. RECORDATION OF PLAT. Following execution of this
Agreement by both parties and approval of the form of security by
the County Attorney, the County agrees to record the plat of the
above referenced Subdivision at such time as the plat complies with
the subdivision and platting requirements set forth in Section
11.03.00 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code.
8. INTERPRETATION: VENUE This Agreement constitutes the
entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject
matter hereof and supersedes all prior verbal or written agreements
between the parties with respect thereto. This Agreement may only
be amended by written document, properly authorized, executed and
deli vered by both parties hereto. This Agreement shall be
interpreted as a whole unit and section headings are for
convenience only. All interpretations shall be governed by the
laws of the State of Florida. In the event it is necessary for
either party to initiate legal action regarding this Agreement,
venue shall be in the Nineteenth Judicial circuit for St. Lucie
-3-
-
'-"
.....,
County I Florida I for claims under state law and the Southern
District of Florida for any claims which are justiciable in federal
court.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed these
presents on the dates indicated below. The date of this Agreement
shall be the date on which this Agreement is approved by the Board
of County Commissioners.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
DEPUTY CLERK
CHAIRMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
WITNESSES:
THE RESERVE HOMES, LTD.
BY:
Print Name:
Title:
C:\JWL\AGREE\RESERVE-HOMES-99.WPD
-4-
-
~
....,
AGENDA REQUEST
ITEM NO. C-4
DATE: April 20, 1999
"Investment For The Future"
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [X]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
JJ<s'fI&t ~L--
/Donald B. Wes , P.E.
County Engineer
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): ENGINEERING DIVISION 4115
SUBJECT:
Orange Avenue Canal Stormwater System Improvements - Work Authorization to Amend Existing Work
Authorization with Hazen and Sawyer for Additional Surveying Services
BACKGROUND:
Construction plans have been prepared for stormwater system improvements to the Orange Avenue
Canal. During the course of the design, it was determined that the existing culverts are not located
entirely within the road right-of-way. Easements will need to be obtained in order to construct the
proposed improvements. Additional surveying services will be required to prepare legal sketches and
descriptions for the easements and to locate any encumbrances within the proposed easements. Staff
is proposing a Work Authorization for Hazen and Sawyer to perform the additional surveying services
with a Project Budget of $3,500.00.
FUNDS AVAIL.: 102001-3725-563000-4257
PREVIOUS ACTION:
_ August 12, 1997, the BOCC approved a Work Authorization with Hazen and Sawyer for the design of
the Orange Avenue Canal Stormwater Improvements
_ May 12, 1998, the BOCC approved a Work Authorization with Hazen and Sawyer for additional
surveying services to locate the Orange Avenue Canal right-of-way line
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the attached Work Authorization for Hazen and Sawyer to perform
additional surveying services for the Orange Avenue Canal Stormwater Improvements Project, and
approval of the Project Budget in the amount of $3,500.00 and authorization for signature by the
Chairman.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[~APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
\
[X ]County Attorney \. '--- .'
[X¡Originating Dept. Public wOr!<si. ¿~
/-
Coordination/Sianatures
[X ¡Mgt. & Budget·-- )
[X ¡Co Eng (' l.f~
[ ]Purchasing
[X ¡Budget Coord. '68\ n
-
'.
,.
'-'
.....,
WORK AUTHORIZATION
Engineering Services
Drainage and Permitting Services for Orange Avenue Canal
Pursuant to that certain Agreement Between County And Engineer
For continuing Engineering Services (the "Agreement") between St.
Lucie County (the "County") and Hazen & Sawyer, P. C. (the
"Engineer") dated May 13, 1997, Engineer hereby agrees to provide
professional engineering services under the terms and condition set
forth in Exhibit "A", at the compensation described in Exhibit
"B", and according to the schedule described in Exhibit "C".
this
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
Work Authorization,
, 1999.
County and the Engineer have executed
effective this day of
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
CLERK
CHAIRMAN
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
WITNESSES:
HAZEN & SAWYER, P.C.
By:
Print Name:
Title:
C:\JWL\AGREE\HAZEN-WA.WPD
'>f
,lit>
.'w'
....I
C-97 -05-413
WA #13
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
ORANGE AVENUE CANAL AMENDMENT
PROJECT BACKGROUND
During the course of design for the replacement of the four structures along Orange Avenue, it was
determined that the existing structures are not located entirely within the road right-of-way, and the
County has no supplemental easements. Additional research and surveying were performed to
verify this condition. Therefore, the project has been delayed until permanent easements over these
structures can be obtained. The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) had no other
comments (other than the need to obtain easements or additional right-of-way) regarding the permit
application for this project.
The scope of work provided by CONSULTANT includes all necessary professional services for the
following tasks:
STATEMENT OF WORK
In order to obtain the necessary easements to complete this project, 81. Lucie County has requested
Hazen and Sawyer to prepare the necessary sketches and legal descriptions. The following tasks
are included in the scope of work:
1. Identify easement needs required for construction.
2. Identify and locate encumbrances into the subject easements (so that they may be removed
or have license agreements developed). Prepare sketches and legal descriptions for the four
subject crossings.
3. Locate existing monumentation supporting existing reference lines.
4. Coordinate with surveyor and County.
A-1
FIP.4777c001
¡.
'( .
\wt
~
EXHIBIT B
BUDGET
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
ORANGE AVENUE CANAL AMENDMENT
The scope of work will be completed for a fee not-to-exceed $3,500.
B-1
FfP.4777c001
'(
;.
\w'
...,¡
EXHIBIT B
BUDGET
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
ORANGE AVENUE CANAL AMENDMENT
The scope of work will be completed for a fee not-to-exceed $3,500.
FtP.4777c001
B-1
, ,.,..
"'w'
"""
EXHIBIT C
WORK SCHEDULE
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
ORANGE AVENUE CANAL AMENDMENT
Work will be completed within two weeks of a receipt of Notice-to-Proceed.
C-1
FtP4777c001
C-97 -05-413
WA #13
...,
y
'-'
""'"
AGENDA REQUEST
ITEM NO.~·
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [X ]
TO: Board of County Commissioners
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
S1 ffiJECT: First Amendment to April 21, 1998 Agreement Between St. Lucie Country and Dawn G. Kirk,
P.A. and Stuart A. Webb, Esquire, For Legal Representation of Indigents for Dependency Cases
BACKGR01 JND: See attached memorandum 99-504
FUNDS AVAILABLE:
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the First Amendment to the April 21, 1998
Agreement and authorize the Chairman to sign same upon obtaining all necessary signatures
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ ~ APPROVED [] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
Dougla Anderson
County Administrator
County Attorney:
~
Review and Approvals
Management & Budget:
Purchasing:
Originating Dept.
Other:
Other:
Finance:
~
....,
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney
C.A. NO: 99-504
DATE: April 14, 1999
SUBJECT: First Amendment to April 21, 1998 Agreement Between St. Lucie Country and
Dawn G. Kirk, P.A. and Stuart A. Webb, Esquire, For Legal Representation of
Indigents for Dependency Cases
BACKGROUND
St. Lucie County entered into an Agreement on April 21, 1998 with Dawn G. Kirk, P.A., and
Stuart A. Webb, Esquire to provide legal representation for indigent persons in cases involving
termination of parental rights. Under the present terms, the Agreement expires on April 21, 1999.
The parties now desire to extend the term of the Agreement through and including April 21, 2000.
RRCOMMENDA TION/CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Board approve the First Amendment to the April 21, 1998
Agreement and authorize the Chairman to sign same upon obtaining all necessary signatures
DSM/mt
Attachment
~
......,
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
TO: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney
FROM: Katherine Mackenzie-Smith, Assistant County Attorney
C.A. NO: 99-517
DATE: April 16, 1999
SUBJECT: Whether A Judgment May Be Entered Against The Parent For Legal
Representation of Indigents in Dependency Cases?
After reviewing the Florida Statutes, I was unable to locate any authority authorizing the
entering of a judgment for legal representation of indigents in dependency cases. Consequently,
I called the Attorney General's office and spoke to Assistant Attorney General, Gerry Hammond.
Ms. Hammond's position is that in the absence of statutory authority, the Attorney General's office
would likely determine there is no home rule authority to enter a judgment for legal representation
of indigents for dependency cases.
Thus, there appears to be no authority to enter a judgment for legal representation of
indigents for dependency cases.
KMS/mt
·
,
'-"
..".¡
DAWN G. KIRI(, P.A.
217 Avenue A
Ft. Pierce, Florida 34950
(561) 468-2077
STUART A. WEBB, ESQUIRE
302 South Second Street
Ft. Pierce, Florida 34950
(561) 460-2121
March 25, 1999
Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 34948
RE: Contract Renewal
To Provide Legal Representation in Dependency Cases
Trial Level for Indigents in St. Lucie County
Commissioners:
Our law firms have been providing legal representation in Dependency and Termination of
Parental Rights cases for indigents in St. Lucie County for the past year under the terms of the
Contract executed on April 21, 1998. We hereby request that the contract be extended as written
for an additional one year period.
Following is a synopsis of the changes made in Florida law since the inception of the contract as
well as an overview of the financial benefits realized by St. Lucie County as a result.
l. Cham!es in Florida Law
Prior to October 1, 1998 attorneys were only appointed to represent parents in
Dependency cases if certain case criteria were met (ie: A Petition to Terminate Parental Rights
was filed; corresponding criminal charges were pending; or ifit appeared that the child(ren) would
remain out of the parents' home for more than one year.) That criteria resulted in attorney
appointments in approximately 30% of all cases filed in St. Lucie County.
Effective October l, 1998, all parents and custodians who desire an attorney and
cannot afford one must be appointed counsel. Additionally the statutory cap for dependency
cases was removed, However, the $1,000.00 cap for termination cases was retained (F.S. 39.013
and 39.0134).
'-'
"""'"
Board of County Commissioners
March 25, 1999
Page -2-
2. Economic Benefit to St. Lucie County
Based on the statutory changes, the economic benefit to St. Lucie County is
substantial. Since May l, 1998 one hundred and thirty-nine (139) attorney appointments have
been made to parents and custodians under the contract. Under pre-October 1998 appointment
criteria, it is estimated that only twenty-two (22) attorney appointments would have been made.
The current contract provides for a flat fee per parent/custodian appointment.
Without the contract, each attorney who was appointed to represent a parent/custodian would be
billing each case at $50.00 per hour in each of the 139 total cases. In contrast, the contract is not
predicated on hourly billing but rather is based on each stage of the individual case, regardless of
the time expended to reach that stage.
Illustrative of the financial benefit is the weekly court docket of March l8, 1999.
Generally Dependency Court is conducted from 8:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. each Thursday. The
docket of March 18, 1999 reflects a total of thirty-eight (38) parents/custodians which have
attorneys appointed. In the pre-contract situation, based on a cadre of five (5) qualified attorneys
accepting appointments, each would be responsible for an average of eight (8) clients. It must
also be noted that the docket times are 8:30 AM., 10:30 AM. and 2:00 P.M. Therefore
consideration has to be given to the fact that each attorney would spend at least six (6) hours in
court each Thursday. The annual economic impact on the County for docket appearances alone
would be an estimated $60,000.00 annually (6 hours x 5 attorneys x $50.00 per hour x 40
Dependency dockets per year = $60,000.00).
It must be understood that the $60,000.00 figure represents the estimated cost to
the county 011/Y for attorney time expended in court at the weekly dependency docket. It does not
include shelter hearings, mediations, client consults, administrative review meetings, reviews of
the Department of Children and Family Services case plans and reports, correspondence, client
conferences and calls and, most importantly, trial preparation (including depositions of an average
of20 witnesses per trial) and trial attendance, all of which would be billed at $50.00 per hour per
attorney per appointment. Obviously, when the above events are factored in for a client on a per
hourly billing bases, the cost escalates rapidly for the 139 cases to which attorneys have been
appointed since May, 1998,
Finally, with the contract there is an undetermined cost benefit savings to the county in the
form of employee hours, Under the contract, there are only three (3) billing events in each case
(Phase I, II and III) that are reviewed and processed by county personnel. The bills for all
attorneys are submitted together with a summary voucher once per month. In contrast, hourly
billing per attorney per client could result in county personnel reviewing petitions, time sheets,
stipulations and processing in excess of .one hundred thirty (130) orders for payments.
.'
"
'-'
"'-'"
Board of County Commissioners
March 25, 1999
Page -3-
3. Cost Comparison:
In an effort to formulate a cost comparison, attorney Dawn Kirk recorded all of
her time expended on contract cases from May l, 1998 to September 30, 1998. During that time
period, she worked on twenty-five (25) cases. She spent a total of l44.34 hours on those cases.
Under the hourly billing system, she would have submitted twenty-five (25) petitions for payment
and would have been paid $7,217.00 by the County. Under the terms of the contract, she only
billed 4 of the cases (for 1 phase each) and was paid a total of $3,800.00. Detailed time sheets are
available upon request.
In the pre-contract cases handled by attorney Stuart Webb from May 1, 1998
through March 3l, 1999,371.7 hours were billed and $18,585.00 was paid by the County. If the
same cases would have been appointed pursuant to the contract, the attorney would have billed
eleven (ll) stages for a total of$10,150.00.
Based on the foregoing, St. Lucie County is clearly receiving an economic benefit
from the terms of the dependency/termination contract. We both remain committed to provide
legal representation as set forth in the contract.
At the last commission meeting we attended, Commissioner Barnes inquired whether the clients
could be charged for a portion of the attorney fees in the same manner as criminal cases. Florida
Statute Section 27.56 allows the court to charge a criminal defendant for the fees and costs
associated with public defender representation. It appears that there is no comparable statute that
allows the court to charge clients who are appointed counsel in dependency and termination
cases. If any other means for charging clients is discovered, we will cooperate in implementing
the procedure.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you for your consideration.
DGK/tbh
~~SUb
D G.~r¡k
yistuart A. Webb
!'
.'-'"
....,
\
\
\
/
k.~
CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Katherine Mackenzie-Smith, Assista~t lounty Attorney
Sue Moses, Account Specialist II~
TO:
DATE:
April 7, 1999
SUBJECT:
Contract Renewal for Dependency Cases
Per your request, I have reviewed Ms. Kirk's and Mr. Webb's letter
dated March 25, 1999. The numbers stated on the last page are in
accordance with our records with one exception. The County has paid
Mr. Webb a total of $14,405.00 from May 1, 1998 through March 31, 1999
(an additional amount of $1,770.00 has been submitted for payment) for
Dependency Cases not under the contract.
The total paid from August, 1998 (start of the Contract)thru March,
1999 under the Contract billing is $111,800.00. This involves 116
cases @ $950.00 each and 2 @ $800.00 each.
If additional information is needed, please call me.
cc: Christann Hartley, Finance Director
'-"
....",
FIRST AMENDMENT TO APRIL 21,1998
AGREEMENT BETWEEN ST. LUCIE COUNTY AND
DAWN G. KIRK, P.A. AND STUART A. WEBB, ESQUIRE
FOR LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENTS
FOR DEPENDENCY CASES
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is dated this _ day of
, 1 999, between
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as
"COUNTY" and, DAWN G. KIRK, P.A. AND STUART A. WEBB, ESQUIRE, hereinafter
referred to as "ATTORNEYS."
WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Agreement (the "Agreement") wherein Attorneys
agreed to provide legal representation to indigents for dependency cases; and,
WHEREAS, the parties now desire to extend the term of the Agreement, pursuant to
paragraph 19 of the Agreement, up to and including April 21, 2000.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties
agree to amend the April 21, 2000 Agreement as follows:
1. PARAGRAPH 19-is hereby amended to read as follows:
PARAGRAPH 19-
This Agreement shall take effect on the 21st day of April 1999 , and continue until the
2l st day of April 2000, provided thåt the Agreement has not been canceled as provided herein. This
Agreement may be renewablè annually for up to two years at the same or different contract price
upon the consent of the 'contracting parties. This Agreement may be terminated by either party
without cause at anytime upon thirty (30) days written notice. In the event of termination pursuant
to this paragraph, Attorneys shall complete each case assigned to them through final disposition of
the case. Attorneys shall be compensated for those cases pursuant to this Agreement.
G:\atty\katherinelk;rk
'-'
....",
2. Except as amended herein, the remaining terms and conditions of the April 21, 1998
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County has hereunto subscribed and the Attorneys have
affixed their names and seal the date aforesaid.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
BY:
Deputy Clerk
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
BY:
County Attorney
WITNESSES:
DAWN G. KIRK, P.A.
BY:
Dawn G. Kirk, Esquire
STUART A. WEBB, P.A.
BY:
Stuart A. Webb, Esquire
G:\attylktltherinelkirk
~
...,
AGENDA REQUEST
ITEM NO. C. - (p
DATE: April 20, 1999
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [ '^]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY: Airport Paul A. Phillips
SUBJECT: Consider staff's request to pay up to 50% of the costs (not to exceed $750.00) for the
purchase and installation of a self-educting foam nozzle for tanker 4 owned by St. Lucie County Fire
District used for aircraft fires and pilot safety at St. Lucie County International Airport.
BACKGROUND: Station No.4 located at St. Lucie County International Airport responds to all
pilot emergencies at the Airport. Currently, the firefighters are required to use a hand line nozzle
to spray aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) on an aircraft fire. Captain Hall has identified a piece
of fire fighting equipment that can substantially increase pilot safety and save lives. As indicated
in the attached photographs, a self-educting foam nozzle will be able to cover an aircraft in seconds
with AFFF while maintaining a safe distance for firefighter safety. As safety is the primary concern
at St. Lucie County International Airport, staff recommends the purchase ofthis nozzle.
FUNDS AVAILABLE IN ACCT#: 140-4210-564000
PREVIOUS ACTION: n/a
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)
authorize the payment of 50% of the costs (not to exceed $750.00) associated with the purchase and
installation of a self-educting foam nozzle for equipment owned by the St. Lucie County Fire District
used for aircraft fires and improved pilot safety at St. Lucie County International Airport. As this
nozzle will be installed on the tanker located at the Airport used for aircraft fire protection, the
Airport's financial contribution for the fire safety equipment will be a donation to the Fire District.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[~PPROVED []DENIED
[ ]OTHER:
~
Reviews & Approval§.fh/
County Attorney: ~ OMB~
Originating Dept: iii Other:
Finance:(Check for Copy only, if applicable)
¥
Purchasing
Other:
"\
&~
co...
C) (!).
.11L 1::1
- OJ·
a: :~
. LL
IrIII ..
þIIIII
fn
C
E
~
'..j
~$,
?:- _$ ~ .;:.: :.: ~ lJ. ID 0; E
.~ M.'- ..... ~ ~. . '0. ~ m
.';;\ r....' C .. .¡<j . f;'J ~ X
:;"."" ""'j;-' .!,;. k.. ("'I- .... U ,::,}
..,. a¡ '2.~ ~ 4õ;¡ t: -0: t.t..
?". OJ·.... ~ $ '-, t: ,!6 ~ ....
.... .0 h,.;r., "'" .~ ~ :- ... ID
"",,. ............ ~ ~ ; .. .... 10-
~ 4.. C: ..., _¡ ¡. Q...!. V,1 ,..,',
ø . ,"'" t: "',;: .g,¡ ~ ! - m . .
~ ¿: .;::; ø :.:.., :).,~. ~ "5; '¿:' ::t--
$ ",- ~ "'" ~ 't"\ ..... ~ "'.ft: .
~ ::;; ~~ ~ Ið .e ~. ~ ~~ ":. ~~ '~.:~
~. ';;.;.;., ..... 1'\ ~- g !ñ c::.r(:{ \~.,. ..::_
.;::: "'"'"'. }>':::; œ t: ;:t;t E ~ - . -..
~ ~;:; ~~,~ «J ~.' ~ ,9 Ê :1'-
fl, ¡~~, 'I; ~ & i:: ~ ~ ~ ::- '. :-~.¡ :')-
~~~~~!~~i~-
~ tQ ~ t»J'. Ë -g~ ~ {ii.
~ g~ ~ g .= .Q l ~.
N"","'__ .th.Q;ItI_.
~ ~ ! !?t ~ 'â.i5' ,.. .~, ~ ~
c; u '- ¡::;' (s5' .",.. ":-" C,>
~. .~_ ~'. ~ '. _'.' _. . ~ ,cr
2 i:. -v..; A " (D .~..... -
.......... ~ "0.' ~ Q Q1. r;-.... t;
~ (,) ~. Gi. 1Zi. ~. ,"" t:. '- ...:.t. ~
-. .o~m·-~""m <...
~~<~~. 5. -"!~~E
,. ..... _ C> _ .... -- .,...
~ p ¢\ vi m ~..) JC G) -..i "".. ....
.~ :;;¡..,.......... ~!:' 0'"'" ~ y U
-r.._~'-'. ~.~. OC;~~fl'\;..
..,. ""- ','" iJ$ ; - ...., -'~ ,.J -s.;:
ø~ c ..... ~<I)- (t'....~....-
~ s ~ ;: C¡,''': ~ $:: ¢: U .:t;
15 o'f~ ¢; £.' ::; .~.: ~ ~ ~ g $i. '.:
~ JI! .s::. O'j ~ · " ~ ¡;: . "",,
_;;; r:.; tn r:- ;A,}....., - \to '~
;.,:?h.:J::S'i=\m£¡:¿.-~
fJj ~ ...: !';\ VJ """ ,.. -0 ........ ð ..~
5~. ~E'ô.~~;...~ùQ
5;t>~-2;;:~3:<=:.Q'P~
'- .:h ... ,"'l .r- 1::: f.t¡ {1:; .Q .... ¡,;<,
"b .~ '}¡) ~,~ 0 Ii? <h :::, !1 '~
.... 7'"'."'" . S - 0 ~ ... ..r,.;. ....,
!e ~.t.: o:t .þ ~.t:: e ~ f.(J c;:
<b. - .~ ~ V"'. ....- ~ .~;:: ~ "'~
-. 0- m v ~ Q m ...... ,- r~
~ ;? ,ß' :i' "11- 1; .~ g .~ 'ii ~
fj t.¡{;ø ~~ ~ CI) ~cn ~ ~
~"'CC:"""'~¢<'L~ .~ø
!ð ø œ <: ~ ,.Q :::,J '. ..
..... ......!";o, ~ ~ '- 0 ..... 0 f/f 5
..... _ 'a[..-,....¡¡.";t!; ..., ^ .t
~ ~~~.iJ~- ~ <J ¡b """.~-
I'-j (to .c.,; .,.... ~ ~ - ø- ~ .....
b Ñ.. ' -8 in. ..:;; ~ !! ~ ~ .,Q lU
..... N'-. g- -. Q .'-U'- Ö ~
'- {) ~~'..i1.O ~ ~ ~ e~
§ s.~. ,~1 ..: ;; A.~ ~ 'ii § -..
~ .t,': ~ ~. it! --;""fi ~ ~ ~ £~-::
;.'!-Ø ..0 '"*i V} . -" ...,.. 1= '- .... c..-"Ii" ,",,!#-o
4... ~ ~ c _~ .æ Jv.'S ,,= ;:r (..) ~
~ m ~ -:;:: zw::t~ ~ ~ '!o; ~ - ~
!L~ ~ Q.. ~ '~_ T';' .Q ~ Sf) ~
fJ'> ~ ø .... .... ". . . ?-. c::~ -
m , ~ C mfi.."'+ C!O ~ _. '\4.1- ~..- -J
~ 0 ~ u;~ {.) c: ¡¿~ ;;__--1-,t
<: ....... ....~¡..,--...,:"':I-
..... "'0 ID ù£ r:. ',.., ~ ~ f~'=-:; 4:
'r.'ø~,cÕ-Q¡:::(I)(J}
I"::t-.~ (!) '~'\) ..<b ~ ~. ";C. .::::.
~ ~ .... C; ~ -fl).@ ~~--c "-J. ~
<:J ..~. .0 ~, t;. -m-. ...... E 0 m "'5
t ; .,.(;:: i1.1 ~.¡p .....?' t:;;'2:! .
c:~ø1::0....t~ù~4)
c :::J ~ "10<. ð'!t:': J) 0 -:> 0
l4 ~ ~ -0 'þ; O::! Iri:r:: .t.. ~ 2
_',-, ~. ' v ....... .. '"' ...... -. ~ ..... ....;. ''''.
- n:.;.... ~ £!;: ,~ . 0'- t()
td . ~ ~ "tj .c I'IJ Q,\ :: <þ g)
¡;::: 91f1.)~~mÑ""~~
(p '1;:¡ ~0 t: Gj ..... i:..¿ ~ N ~;¡
.c:c:: ~,t: ~ 'E= ~ 2 t:; ~ 0
~ !r¡:....:: ~ (J ._ -.J .... __ ... t:
,.;:;. )!
... ~4o
') ··t
......:..;.
~.~
\,.. ;
.+
-''4-,
I '\
~y
t!..._.....
\. I
, l'
"-
:1'-
;;t;
~
-
fi~
~~
~. ":h
~ ..~
~'t,
~~ -':.'.i
,.,.
-
o
d~
#-~
MQ
~ .~
... !J..
't:.
~
.......
~ ~
::;.', cr". k
£t).Q
,.~
ð
. .'.\~~~~ ;.:-
....,¡
..:!c:
Q
QQ)
--J ð
~~ --
.... "'-'
ð~
G;f¡))
......
~~
:¡¡; "'c
....~
.~ ,fl~
~ ""
6~
:r:....
r;;;ç
-m.......
~. <Þ
C 1::): l
tU _!
it! !:"
.....t:'b
0·......
().gf¡
S ~\,
tJ)i5
E ~
œ .;:0.;
a d..
,.,
- ....
ii)jB
... .: .....~
'!'- ~
". .'~.~ .
"C""'·~"\ .. ,,,... -.....' '1' fl-
.... -.' 'T- ...-..-.. -.. '.. . ,-'
'.-'-. .,., , T'~' '.' l 'f' f· ".
;¡ " ' 'þ·.··,.l· <-.,.. : f·'
. - I .. ~ ,...~;...' ~
ç: ;= r ..~ .. .L~Jlt]lUIJ.1I)
:10.... d'
"-.~ p.\. ~~
·····.:~:·;i~'i
-i~~
.~;:r~:;:;. :~-~~~~ ;~.~~ r ~,;: ;.:_ ii, !":.:: !11~~
.....______. __ d__._·r_~·~_r~·."·r_'
:r·r·r·~-¡·rTr~:·r··r
~~t 4. -~~'_l.~:t~_~~.~ t:~~j,;:t~
.. . ...._.....~..._...4'y_. ....-..._ ..
. .... ~._ ..7..... __, ._~. _ .~.+_~. _____._~....'..dH_~ ~
. ·"___"Yu, _ _._,,_____....__ --.-- ~~----~'~......
,._ ., .,._~.~.._.~.'""'. ~,...~...4'~*'"".>__,....-__._. .;....... ...~::O::J.:.
rTi~ ]I
J~ j I
I~. ~..;:)
t'-- ~ '
f~L$~
1 I ~~~
I ""-r-~
.~
U.
I
!~
~ ~.'
)(..1
{¡}i
~
.....,æ
íJ,.!Ie-
~.¡l:
~æ
igl
hi
~,.I
.¡; g. '~
sc· g
..... ...
:c ,.' =
8'; ~
~~.':ï
~'i ¡
§eu
til~
-XI
~z
"'$J ~ .'
Nib'
~¡~
~$~
..... ifi·f"'-
j~~
S ð
~.1i I.
¡G:C
!:rN
€:-ã.
.!J.'Io¡ ~
"'s'-
qpij:§
~J.~
u..
~
~,
·i ~...
-,".
¡ .".. \. ,-¡-
n?,,~,..=.-;'--:\ -'"':~,: ~ ¡i' ... \ it ....
r~: \. d: ~JU ~ \0 ~
~¡C~:~l~~~;i''''~ ""i"~~ ~. i O~.
':r--' .F--'Ti .:........ '¥ LL.
-<....... ...~..._-';' !. ¡ . u..
.- "a.. ...
(:ï'\ ~ i!. B =F
li s'\ --~\ JiZ I:' 8
1i~Q~ '-~ ff I~äi
;3 ~ <'1 Ò ~ e c ~
¡ ct,"" ~ ..... N œ as...
..........--..1 'M
-,¥-
.....n\
t:f,a ~ ~ ·
0.~-~
4M-¢.....
CC....r--:Ó
co.........
¡
!
~
!;(t(!;(
ðÉ'~~
er(~~
gRf3
C? æ ~.
:;.:"(\J' c;¡.
ø
o
~
a::
%
I-
~
~..: ~ -""'-
~.Ioóo{~~
....1. :æ ft!:· .......
~. «
. ~ ,,'
..... ..
. . H; ..,.. ,...
µl......+~
.....u..~.....
.- fß :... !-"
.../¡" Z.....ì
Z :;:;-<.
Õ:.~~ð
I.. a... ..,
,_Y !- i.O }t.i
ID . J.ó.
~; ;:;.. ø
I: : :I: :
1i' .. f'.... J.
L') ;0 ¡'U ",Ij
{\j~t\4(\Í
~~ f?' t;" ~
--
e. _
-t::.
1-ì.t1
.00,
cu.:!!
~ê)C
<.>1;>0
~.u.
i2 :!
:;-E~Q
u.::J,Q
I c:....., "
< '.... u.. ~
U-;§'01l1
:E-c:......
N -< t}.",