Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-22-2007 Joint Meeting PSL/SLC AGENDA JOINT MEETING January 22, 2007 JOINT MEETING CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY 10:00 A.M. - NOON CALL TO ORDER · MAYOR PATRICIA CHRISTENSEN, CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE · COMMISSIONER CHRIS CRAFT, CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ITEMS REQUESTED BY CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE · · · ITEMS REQUESTED BY ST. LUCIE COUNTY · JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT STATUS · TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM - BRIEF EXPLANATION ON WHERE WE ARE · DISCUSSION ON SOUTHWEST DEVELOPMENT/UTILITY SERVICE TO SOUTHWEST AREAS OF COUNTY QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENT ADJOURN MEETING HOSTED BY TRADITION AT TRADITION TOWN HALL 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 the opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (772) 462-1777 or TOO (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "A CITY FOR ALL ESþ J·\'ê· January 8, 2007 Subject: htv(~(¡h W¡v.f.t rl e 0 f' r~~~(' Your Letter of October 26,2006, Received in my office January 5,2007 Mr. Douglas M. Anderson County Administrator St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982-5652 Dear Mr. Anderson: Please be advised the unilateral change in the proposed JPA, specifically Section 4.3, will not be recommended by this office to the City Council. The language in said paragraph is so opened-ended and unspecific as to allow the County to literally stop all development within the City of Port St. Lucie when there is not a reciprocal provision in the agreement for developments within the County which impact the City of Port St. Lucie's infrastructure. A specific example of this occurring was when St. Lucie County approved the Westchester DRI with the presumption that Westchester would connect to the City of Port St. Lucie's roads with no provision of any kind being made to mitigate any of those impacts. Based upon public comments by members of St. Lucie County staff, St. Lucie County is contemplating ORis west of Rangeline Road, whose developments will be impacting the City of Port St. Lucie and the City of Port St. Lucie's infrastructure. As such, any reasonable agreement should require that the City should have the same rights as reflected in this agreement that the County does. In the absence of such a reciprocal agreement, I cannot recommend said JPA to the City Council Sincerely, WJ~ DONALD B. COOPER City Manager DBC:eg c: City Council r~-0L. Roger G. Orr, City Attorney Department Heads Œ ® ŒÏi \'II Œ1 fñì'¡ .wi I 0 200l ; l!D I \ 121 S.W. Port St. Lucie Boulevard' Port St. Lucie, FL 34984-5099 . BOARD OF ... COUNTY COMMISSIONERS _.::-..... _"'0.' ,~T . "':" . _ ...,..>.:...f '<"",' . .,_..... .,- "::' ., . "" ';"".-' " . - " . . . .' .. ..4>U, ..._ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR DOUGLAS M. ANDERSON October 26, 2006 Donald Cooper, City Manager City of Port St. Lucie 121 SW Port St. Lucie Boulevard Port St. Lucie, FL., 34984-5099 RE: Joint Planning Agreement Dear Mr. Cooper: This is a follow up from my July 28, 2006 letter to you. I am enclosing a revised Joint Planning Agreement (JPA) for your review and comment. The only -... revision is the addition of Paragraph 4.3. The JPA is scheduled to be on our January 22, 2007 Joint Meeting agenda. ) .¡ J,,, ~~ DougJ,ás M. Anderson County Administrator DMA/ ms 06-207 c: Board of County Commissioners Ray Wazny, Assistant County Administrator Faye Outlaw, Assistant County Administrator Dan McIntyre, County Attorney Michael Brillhart, Strategy and Special Projects Director Attachment ..... JOSEPH E. SMITH. District No.1' DOUG COWARD. District No.2' PAULA A LEWIS. District No.::I · CHARLES GRANDE. District NO.4· CHRIS Cl\AFT, District No. .') Counry Administrotor - Douglos M. Anderson 2JOO Virginia Avenue . Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652 · Phone (772) 462-1450 · TDD (772) 462-1428 FAX (772) 462-1648 · email: douga@co.st-Iucie.fl.us web site: www.co.st-Iucie.fl.us JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT BETWEEN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA AND THE CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE This Joint Planning Agreement (the "Agreement") made and entered into as of the day of , 2006, by and between ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as the "County"), the CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE, a Florida municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City). (The County and City are sometimes collectively referred to as the "Parties".) WIT N E ssE T H: WHEREAS, it is the purpose and intent of this Agreement, the Parties hereto, and the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1969, as amended and codified as Section 163.01, Florida Statutes (the "Cooperation Act"), and Section 163.3171, Florida Statutes, to permit the City and the County to make the most efficient use of their respective powers, resources and capabilities by enabling them to cooperate on the basis of mutual advantage and thereby to provide the property, facilities and services provided for in this Agreement in the manner that will best accord with the existing and anticipated resources available to each of them and with geographic, economic, population and other factors influencing the needs and developments within an area ("Planning Area"), as designed on the attached map as Exhibit "A"; and, WHEREAS, it is the purpose of the Cooperation Act to provide for a means by which the Parties may exercise their respective powers, privileges and authorities which they might now or in the future share in common and which each might exercise separately; and, WHEREAS, the Parties recognize that proper intergovernmental coordination is essential for sound growth management; and, WHEREAS, a joint planning area agreement will provide a basis for the evaluation of future development applications as well as for the adequate and cost effective provision of public services within the Planning Area; and, WHEREAS, the County has adopted a Comprehensive Plan within an established Urban Services Boundary which is depicted on Exhibit" A"; and, WHEREAS, the City has adopted a Comprehensive Plan which applies within the current boundaries of the City which are depicted in Exhibit "B"; and, G: \atty\agreemnt\i nterlac \P SL-JP A -1- WHEREAS, the Parties seek to have compatible land uses adjacent to their common boundary; and, WHEREAS, effective intergovernmental relations will improve the delivery of public services; and, WHEREAS, Section 163.3171, Florida Statutes, authorizes municipalities and counties to enter into joint agreements for the purposes of joint action in the preparation and adoption of the comprehensive plan, procedures for the administration of land development regulations or the land development code applicable thereto and other purposes under the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act, Section 163.3161, et.seq., Florida Statutes. WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act requires joint agreements entered into pursuant thereto to be formally stated and approved in appropriate action by the governing bodies involved and the administration be governed by the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1969; and, WHEREAS, the City and the County have held public hearings with public notice thereof to consider the adoption of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants of this Agreement, the City and the County agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 AUTHORITY 1.1 Authority. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the provisions of Section 163.01, Florida Statutes, Section 163.400, Florida Statutes; Part III, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; Section 163.171, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law, all as amended and supplemented from time to time. ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS 2.1 Definitions. The following definitions shall apply to this Agreement: Agreement: The inter local planning agreement. ~ The City of Port St. Lucie, Florida. G: \atty\agreemnt\i nterloc \PSL-JP A -2- Cooperation Act: The Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1969 as amended and codified as Section 163.01, F.S. County: St. Lucie County, Florida. Development Permits: Development Permit includes any building permit, zoning permit, subdivision approval, rezoning, certification, certificates of occupancy, building inspections, special exception, variance or any other official action of local government having the effect of permitting the development of land. Parties: St. Lucie County, Florida, and the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida. Planning Area: The area depicted in Exhibit "A". ARTICLE 3 PURPOSE, FINDINGS, INTENT 3.1 The purpose of this Agreement is to provide the procedures for joint action by City and the County within the Planning Area in the preparation and adoption of changes to the comprehensive plan and on procedures for the administration of land development regulations or the land development code applicable thereto. 3.2 It is the intent of the parties to provide for the management of growth within the Planning Area by providing for the administration of comprehensive plan and land development regulations for the Planning Area. ARTICLE 4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 4.1 To provide for better integrated land use planning and land development within the Planning Area, the Parties agree as follows: 4.1.1. The City agrees to provide the County Administrator and County Attorney with 30 days prior written notice of all annexations into the City (first reading of annexation ordinance). This notice shall include copies of all annexation ordinances, staff reports and recommendations, and copies of all agreements, contracts or other similar instruments effecting any voluntary annexations. The County agrees to provide any written comments it may have on the proposed annexation to the City Manager and City Attorney at least three (3) days prior to the first reading of the annexation ordinance. Any comments G: \atty \agreem nt \i nterloc \P SL -JP A -3- submitted for consideration will be made a part of the record prior to final approval of the annexation. 4.1.2 In order to promote coordination of land use and development activities within the community, the County shall have the right to designate a non-voting representative to attend the City's site plan review committee and the City shall have the right to designate a non-voting representative to attend the County's development review committee. Each party shall provide the other party written notice of committee meetings. 4.2 Notwithstanding anything provided in this Agreement, neither the City's nor the County's duties, obligations, or responsibilities under any section of this Agreement shall affect the Parties' right, duty, obligation, authority or power to act in its governmental or regulatory capacity in accordance with applicable laws, ordinances, codes or other building regulations nor in the exercise of any discretionary act or power within its respective jurisdiction. In no event shall the Parties, due to any provision of this Agreement, be obligated to take any action concerning regulatory approvals for development permits except through its established processes and in accordance with applicable provisions of law. Failure to comply in any respect with this Agreement by either Party, including the providing of notice, shall neither affect nor serve as a basis to invalidate any land use development approvals. 4.3 The City agrees to coordinate the review of DRI's and large scale developments with the County pertaining to proposed development that will impact County infrastructure. The City and County will work with the applicant to ensure that adequate mitigation provisions are agreed to by all parties prior to final development approval. ARTICLE 5 MISCELLANEOUS 5.1 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended by the mutual written agreement of the County and the City at any time from time to time, which amendments shall become effective upon filing thereof with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, pursuant to Section 163.01(11), Florida Statutes. 5.2 Assignment. None of the parties may assign or transfer any or all of its duties, rights, responsibilities, or obligations under this Agreement to any other party or any person not a party to this Agreement without the express prior approval of the other party to this Agreement. G: \atty \agreemnt \i nter loc \P SL -JP A -4- 5.3 Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable, and it is the intention of the parties to confer the whole or any part of the powers herein provided for and if any of the provisions of this Agreement or any other powers granted by this Agreement shall be held unconstitutional, invalid or void by any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision of said court shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions of this Agreement. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the parties hereto that this Agreement would have been adopted, agreed to, and executed had such unconstitutional, invalid or void provision or power not been included therein. 5.4 Members of the City and County Not Liable. (1) All covenants, stipulations, obligations and agreements of the City and the County contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to be covenants, stipulations, obligations and agreements of the City and the County, respectively, to the full extent authorized by the Act and provided by the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida. (2) No covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement controlled herein shall be deemed to be a covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement of any present or future individual member of the governing body or agent or employee of the City or the County in its, his or their individual capacity, and neither the members of the Governing Body of the City or the County or any official executing this Agreement shall individually be liable personally or shall be subject to any accountability by reason of the execution by the City or the County of this Agreement or any act pertaining or contemplated hereby. 5.5 Term of the Agreement The initial term of this Agreement shall be five (5) years from the Effective Date. The term of the Agreement shall be automatically extended in five (5) year increments unless either party notifies the other party of its desire to terminate the Agreement which notice must be provided in writing at least ninety (90) days before the end of the then current term. 5.6 Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, is intended or shall be construed to confer upon any person, firm or corporation other than the parties hereto, any right, remedy, or claim, legal or equitable, under or by reason of this Agreement or any provision hereof. It is the intent of the parties hereto that this Agreement and all its provisions are intended to be and are for the sole and exclusive benefit of the parties hereto. G: \atty \agreem nt \i nterlac \P SL -JP A -5- 5.7 Notices. Any notice, demand, direction, request or other instrument authorized or required by this Agreement to be given or filed with the City or the County shall be deemed sufficiently given or filed for all purposes of this Agreement if and when sent by registered mail, return receipt requested, or by direct personal delivery: To the County: St. Lucie County Administrator (With a copy to St. Lucie County Attorney) 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 To the City: Port St. Lucie City Manager (With a copy to City of Port St. Lucie Attorney) 121 S.W. Port St. Lucie Boulevard Port St. Lucie, Florida 34984 5.8 Execution of Agreement. This Agreement shall be executed in the name of the City by its Mayor and City Clerk and approved as to form and execution by the City Attorney, and the seal of the City affixed hereto. If any officer whose signature appears on this Agreement ceases to hold office before all officers shall have executed this Agreement or prior to the filing of this Agreement as provided in Section 6.11 hereof, his or her signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes. This Agreement shall bear the signature of, or may be signed by, such individuals as at the actual time of the execution of this Agreement shall be the proper and duly empowered officer to sign this Agreement and this Agreement shall be deemed to have been duly and properly executed even though on the Effective Date any such individual may not hold office. 5.9 Filing with Circuit Court Clerk. The County is hereby authorized and directed after approval of this Agreement by the Governing Body of the County and the City and the execution thereof by the duly qualified and authorized officers of each of the parties hereto as provided, to file this Agreement with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, as provided in Section 163.01(11), Florida Statutes. G: \atty \agreemnt \i nter loc \P SL -J P A -6- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, by and through the undersigned, have entered into this Interlocal Agreement as of the day and year first above written. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: County Attorney CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE, FLORIDA ATTEST: BY: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: City Attorney G: \atty\agreemnt\interloc \PSL-JP A -7- COUNTY ADMINISTRATION MEMORANDUM TO: Faye Outlaw, Assistant County Administrator DATE: Michael Brillha~2trategy & Special Projects Director January 17, 2007 FROM: RE: Status on Implementing a Countywide Transferable Development Rights (TOR) Program At its October 10,2006 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed options for implementing a countywide Transfer of Development Rights (TOR) program. The three (3) options presented to the Board are shown on Attachment A of the attached October 10, 2006 agenda item request. On May 30, 2006, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 06-018 establishing a TOR program specifically affecting properties within the North County Special Area Plan (SAP) boundaries (see attached map). It was agreed by Board members that they wanted the Cities of Fort Pierce and Port St. Lucie to review the TOR proposal and determine their willingness to participate in this program. Any future countywide TOR Ordinance adopted by the Board would include both incorporated and unincorporated lands. It was recommended that a TOR presentation be made and discussed among the 2 City Councils during an agreed to public meeting date. At this time, it is unclear as to whether either of the Cities has discussed their willingness to participate in the TOR program within a public meeting forum. Aaenda Reauest Item Number: 6 "P' --yo-- DATE' . ()c~i /ð 2oC>~ REGULAR [X] I PUBLIC HEARING [ ] CONSENT [ ] TO: Board of County Commissioners PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY : Strateav & Special Proiects/Environ. Resources Michael Brillhart S. & S. Projects SUBJECT: Review and consideration of staff options pertaining to the implementation of a Countywide Transferable Development Rights (TOR) program. BACKGROUND: In consideration of the Board's desire to create programs that will assist in preserving and conserving agricultural land, open space, environmentally sensitive land, habitat protection, and greenway connectors, staff has developed 3 options (Attachment A) for instituting a planning study necessary for implementing a Countywide Transferable Development Rights (TOR) program. Such a program would affect properties outside ofthe North County Special Area Plan (SAP) boundaries. FUNDS AVAILABLE: NA PREVIOUS ACTION: On May 30,2006, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 06-018 establishing a TOR program for land within the North County Special Area Plan (SAP) boundaries. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is seeking direction from the Board [ ] APPROVED þ(] OTHER: [ ] DENIEC All concurrea to nave Comm. Craft and Comm. Smith get with each of the CONCURRENCE cities electea OTTlClalS to : present them with all of the information in order for tnem to pOSSibly participate. Comm. Craft and Comm. Smith will bring bacK to tne Ijoara on October 24,2006 SOCC meeting with an update. voora lr1a110m~ ia natu res COMMISSION ACTION: Environ. Resources: Purchasing County Attorney: _ Originating Dept: Management & Budget: Finance: - ,. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Michael Brillhart, Strategy & Special Projects Director RE: September 27 2006 Options for Instituting a Planning Study and Adoption Ordinance Necessary for Implementing a Countywide Transferable Development Rights (TOR) Program DATE: In consideration of the Board of County Commissioners desire to preserve and conserve agricultural land, open space, native habitat, and environmentally sensitive land west ofthe County's urban services area boundary, staff is proposing the implementation of a Countywide Transferable Development Rights (TOR) program. On May 30, 2006, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 06-018 establishing a TDR program affecting properties within the North County Special Area Plan (SAP) boundaries (see attached map). Attachment A represents three options for Board discussion and consideration for instituting a Planning Study and Adoption Ordinance necessary to implement this TOR program outside of the SAP boundaries. Based upon a preliminary cost estimate range of $50,OOOto $100,000 to undertake this study, staff is tentatively recommending Option #1- Preparing an RFP for Professional Consulting Services. A copy of a draft RFP #06-116 for this project is attached and includes a summary of the activities to be undertaken within this study are reflected within the Statement of Work - Parlll: Scope of Work 2.2. paae 9). The major work effort for this study includes land planning analysis and the preparation of implementing legal documents. A Countywide TOR Program study and its funding source(s) were not identified within the County's FY06/07 Budget. It is anticipated that $15,000 could be accumulated through various County Department professional consulting services and contingency line items. Additional funding options for this study include: a. Project cost reimbursement through TDR application fees. b. Financial assistance from the adjoining municipalities of the City of Fort Pierce and " Port St. Lucie. c. Possible grant funding assistance. d. Developer assistance from applicants that are proposing development west of the urban services area boundary. Staff is seeking direction from the Board pertaining to undertaking a planning study necessary for the implementation of a Countywide TOR program. Cc: Doug Anderson, County Administrator Faye Outlaw, Assistant County Administrator Bob Nix, Growth Management Director Dan McIntyre, County Attorney St. Lucie County Comprehensive ptan 3-3 =- -< ~ Z o ~ u o ,...;¡ ... ~ I';¡¡ Z I';¡¡ ~ ~ ... .....=-- I -< ~ ~ ;< bÐ... ~ :s u I';¡¡ =- 00 ì: z O;;¡ o U I';¡¡ .... U O;;¡ ,...;¡ ¡.: 00 == ;; o Z TVC Element May 15,2006 ATTACHMENT A Transfer of Development RiahtsJTDR) Proaram Options for Developing a Planning Study and Adoption Ordinance Necessary for implementing a Countywide TDR Program Option 1. _ Prepare an RFP for professional consulting services. The services will include: . planning services -land use inventory, identify criteria for land preservation/conservation requirements, designate appropriate sending areas and receiving areas, establish transferable credit values and multipliers. . legal services - prepare adoption Ordinance and related legal documents pertaining to administration, conservation easements and deed restrictions. Option 2. - Modify the "draft" proposed professional services contract with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) to include the development of a Countywide TDR program as part of their professional services. The TCRPC could serve as the project manager and use Tom Daniels (TOR planning) and Nancy Stroud (legal) as the consultants for this effort. The TCRPC provided the professional services pertaining to the implementation of the North County Special Area Plan (SAP) TDR program as adopted through Ordinance No 06-018. Option 3.- Expand the existing impact fee contract with Dr. Nicholas to incorporate a TDR planning analysis for this project. Dr. Nicholas consulted for Collier County on their 2003 adopted TOR program. He has experience in other TOR programs within Florida. Under this option, the County Attorney's office could use an attorney under their professional services contract to prepare County-wide TDR Ordinance and relevant legal documents RFP #06-116 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM DUE DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2006 DUE TIME: 1 :30 P.M. St. Lucie County Purchasing Department 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 228 Ft. Pierce. FL 34982-5652 (772) 462-1700 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Sealed Proposals will be received at the Purchasing Department, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, FL 34982, until 1 :30 P.M. local time on Friday, November 10, 2006, for the following: RFP #06-116 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM DEPARTMENT RFP documents may be obtained via the Internet by contacting DemandStar.com or by using the County's website at http://www.stlucieco.gov. If you do not have Internet access, you may obtain the documents by calling DemandStar by Onvia at (800) 711- 1712 and request document number #06-116 or contact the Office of the Purchasing Director at 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, 34982, (772) 462-1700. RFP's may be either mailed or hand delivered to the Purchasing Department, 2300 Virginia Avenue, 2nd Floor, Room 228, Fort Pierce, FL 34982. Any RFP'S received after the above stated time will be returned to the bidder unopened. The Board of County Commissioners reserves the right to waive any informalities or minor irregularities; reject any and all bids/proposals which are incomplete, conditional, obscure, or which contain additions not allowed for; accept or reject any bids/proposal in whole or in part with or without cause; and accept the bid/proposal which best serves the County. For Bids, RFP's, Bid Results and other information visit the 81. Lucie County Purchasing Web Site at: www.co.st-lucie.fI.us St. Lucie County is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer. CAUTION: It is the bidder's/proposer's responsibility to ensure that bids/proposals are received in the Purchasing Department prior to the date and time specified above. Receipt of a bid/proposal in any other County office does not satisfy this requirement. Board of County Commissioners St. Lucie County, Florida By: Maryann Collins, Purchasing Agent Publish: October 5, 2006 RFP #06-116 2 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TOR) PROGRAM Table of Contents Part I General Information 1-1 Definitions 1-2 Invitation to Propose; Purpose 1-3 Issuing Office 1-4 Awards 1-5 Development costs 1-6 Inquiries 1-7 Timetables 1-8 Delays 1-9 Proposal Submission and Withdrawal 1-10 Rejection of I rregular Proposals 1-11 Addenda 1-12 Equal Opportunity 1-13 Oral Presentation 1-14 Insurance 1-15 Lobbyist Disclosure 1-16 Feasibility Studies 1-17 Public Entity Crimes Statement Part II Statement of Work 2-1 Purpose and Objectives 2-2 Scope of Work Part III Instructions for Preparing Proposals 3-1 Rules for Proposals 3-2 Proposal Format Part IV Evaluation of Proposals 4-1 Evaluation Method and Criteria ATTTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Draft Contract RFP#06-116 3 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TOR) PROGRAM GENERAL INFORMATION PART I 1-1 DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this Request for Proposals ("RFptI), proposer shall mean contractors, consultants, respondents, organizations, firms, or other persons submitting a response to this Request for Proposals. 1-2 INVITATION TO PROPOSE: PURPOSE The Board of County Commissioners, St. Lucie County, Florida (the "Board") solicits proposals from responsible proposers to provide Consultant Services for the creation of a Countywide Transferable Development Rights (TOR) Program Report to establish and provide guidelines for the implementation of a Transferable Development Rights (TOR) Program for unincorporated St. Lucie County. The boundaries for this study do not include the land area located within existing North County Special Area Plan (SAP). An existing TOR program has been adopted affecting properties within the North County SAP (see attached North County SAP map). 1-3 ISSUING OFFICE AND LOCATION OF PROPOSAL OPENING S1. Lucie County Purchasing Department Administration Annex 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 228 Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 1-4 CONTRACT AWARDS The Board anticipates entering into a contract with a termination clause to the proposer(s) who submit the proposal judged by the Board to be most advantageous to the County. The County anticipates awarding one (1) contract, but reserves the right to award more contracts if in its best interest. The proposer understands that this RFP does not constitute an agreement or a contract with the proposer. An official contract or agreement is not binding until proposals are reviewed and accepted by the Board and a written agreement or contract is approved by both the Board and the successful proposer(s). A standard St. Lucie County draft contract is included with this RFP. This contract will form the basis of the contract between the successful proposer(s) and the County. At the option of the County, additional terms and conditions may be added to the contract through negotiations with the successful proposer(s). 1-5 DEVELOPMENT COSTS Neither the Board nor its representatives shall be liable for any expenses incurred in connection with preparation of a response to this RFP. Proposers should prepare their proposals simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of the proposer's ability to meet the RFP #06-116 4 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TOR) PROGRAM requirements of the RFP. 1-6 INQUIRIES -INTERPRETATIONS The County will not respond to oral inquiries. Proposers may mail or fax written inquiries for interpretation of this bid to: Maryann Collins, Purchasing Agent St. Lucie County Purchasing Department Administration Annex 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 228 Fort Pierce, Florida, 34982. (772) 462-1294 (Fax) The County will respond to written inquiries if received at least seven (7) working days prior to the date scheduled for receiving the bid/proposals. The County will record its responses to inquiries and any supplemental instructions in the form of a written addendum. No interpretation shall be considered binding unless provided in writing by St. Lucie County. 1-7 ADDENDA If revisions become necessary, the County will provide written addenda at least five working days prior to the opening date to all documented planholders. This will be adhered to even if the opening date must be postponed in order to observe the time requirements. Any changes to the RFP will be made available for all documented planholders to receive. Although we will make an attempt to notify you of the addendum, it is the sole responsibility of the proposer(s) to ensure it is received. 1-8 TIMETABLES The Board and the proposers shall adhere to the following schedule in all actions concerning this RFP. A. From opening time, the Board and County staff will review and evaluate the proposals on a timely basis. B. The Board may enter into a contract after conducting negotiations and obtaining appropriate approvals. The County may notify unsuccessful proposers at this time. 1-9 DELAYS The County may delay scheduled due dates if it is to the advantage of the County. The County will notify proposers of all changes in scheduled due dates by written addenda. RFP #06-116 5 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TOR) PROGRAM · 1-10 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AND WITHDRAWAL The County will receive proposals at the following address: St. Lucie County Purchasing Department Administration Annex 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 228 Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 To facilitate processing, please mark the outside of the envelope with "RFP #06- 116 - Consultant Services for the Creation of a Countywide Transferable Development Rights (TDR) Program". Proposers shall submit ten 1 0 copies of each report for each study, including one marked original on the outside with an original signature inside. All proposals shall be submitted in a sealed, opaque package marked as noted above. The proposer(s) may submit the proposal in person or by mail. Proposers may withdraw their proposals by notifying the County in writing at any time prior to the opening. Proposers may withdraw their proposals in person or through an authorized representative. Proposers and authorized representatives must disclose their identity and provide a signed receipt for the proposal. Proposals, once opened, become the property of the County and will not be returned to the Proposers. Upon opening, proposals become "public records" and shall be subject to public disclosure in accordance with Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. Telephone confirmation of timely receipt of the proposal may be made by calling (772) 462-1700 before proposal opening time. Proposals received after the established deadline will be returned unopened to the proposer. 1-11 IRREGULARITIES: REJECTION OF PROPOSALS Proposals not meeting stated minimum terms and qualifications may be rejected by the County as non-responsive or irregular. However, the County reserves the right to waive any irregularities, technicalities or informalities in any proposal. The County reserves the right to allow for the clarification of questionable entries and for the correction of typog raphical and mathematical errors, reject the proposal of any proposer in arrears or in default upon any debt or contract to the Board of County Commissioners of 51. Lucie County or who have failed to perform faithfully any previous contract with the County or with other governmental jurisdictions. The County reserves the right to reject any or all proposals without cause. 1-12 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY The County recognizes fair and open competition as a basic tenet of public procurement and encourages participation by minority and women business enterprises. The County requests minority and women business enterprises to submit evidence of such classification with their proposals. 1-13 ORAL PRESENTATION RFP#06-116 6 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM At their discretion, the County may require any proposer to make an oral presentation of the proposal. These presentations provide an opportunity for the proposer to clarify the proposal for the County. The County will schedule any such presentations. 1-14 INSURANCE The proposer, if awarded a contract, shall maintain insurance coverage reflecting the minimum amounts and conditions required by the County. 1-15 LOBBYIST DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT Pursuant to Article IV of Chapter 1-2 of the Code of Ordinances of 51. Lucie County, Florida, any professional consultant who utilizes the services of a lobbyist as defined in Section 1-2-62 is required to make full disclosure with the Clerk of the Board prior or concurrently with the submission of a proposal to the Board for the peñormance of any services for the Board. Such disclosure shall include the following: A. The name of any lobbyist employed directly or indirectly by the consultant for the purpose of influencing or attempting to influence the selection of the professional consultant by the Board. B. The name and address of the lobbyist. C. The length of such agreement, contract or understanding and the amount of any fee, gratuity, compensation or consideration paid or promised to be paid to the lobbyist either before or after hiring whether or not same is set out as compensation for the lobbying or is for other services. The disclosure shall be filed with the Clerk on forms provided by the Board and such records shall be open to the public. 1-16 FEASIBILITY STUDIES The County has established a policy that any professional consultant that contracts with the County as an advisor as to the feasibility of any County capital project, shall not be eligible to participate in any future design work on that project that might become necessary as a result of the consultant's advice. The Board of County Commissioners (the IIBoardll) may determine to waive this policy by majority vote if the Board determines that there is a compelling reason to waive the policy. RFP #06-116 7 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM · 1-17 PUBLIC ENTITY CRIME STATEMENT A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to the County, may not submit a bid on a contract to the County for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property to the County, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with the County. and may not transact business with the County in excess of $10,000.00 for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list. The County will not intentionally award publicly-funded contracts to any contractor who knowingly employs unauthorized alien workers, constituting a violation of the employment provisions contained in 8 U.S.C. Section 1324a(e} [Section 274A(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (nINA")]. The County shall consider the employment by any contractor of unauthorized aliens a violation of Section 274A(e) of the INA. Such violation by the Recipient of the employment provisions contained in Section 274A(e) of the INA shall be grounds for unilateral cancellation of this Agreement by the County. RFP #06-116 8 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM STATEMENT OF WORK PART II INTRODUCTION 2.1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES It is the intent of S1. Lucie County, Florida (hereafter referred to as "County") to acquire the services of a qualified consultant to provide consulting services for the Creation of a Countywide Transfer of Development Rights (TOR) program within unincorporated S1. Lucie County. The location of TOR sending areas and receiving areas shall be identified by the consultant as part of the project work scope. 2.2 SCOPE OF WORK The consultant selected from this Request for Proposal (RFP) shall be responsible for providing services for the creation of a Countywide Transferable Development Rights (TOR) Program Report. This Report will not include the land within the North County Special Area Plan (SAP). An adopted TOR Program already exists for property located within the SAP (see attached North County SAP map) . The Report shall be performed in three phases. Proposals should be prepared in a manner, which clearly identifies the three phases of this project in terms of price and technical needs. In order to be considered for award your response to this Request for Proposal must include requirements and costs for Phase I, II, and, III. The final product will be required to meet all statutory requirements for establishment of a TOR Program. 2.2.1 Phase I: Comprehensive Plan Direction · The report will identify available agricultural, open space, greenway connectors, environmentally sensitive, and habitat protection etc. land west of the urban service area boundary to be potentially designated as sending areas and available developable land east of the urban service area boundary applicable for potential designation as receiving areas. · Review current goals, objectives and policies together with land development regulations established by the Board of County Commissioners relating to rural and agricultural land west of the urban service area boundary. · Identify ecosystems on environmentally sensitive and agricultural lands. 2.2.2 Phase II: TDR Analysis and Valuation Conditions . Assign densities within the sending areas based upon preservation and development value to the community. Identify environmentally sensitive land desired for: ag use, preservation, conservation, greenway connectors , open space etc. Identify the types of development activities that are allowed within sending areas and those uses that are restrictive within the 9 RFP #06-116 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TOR) PROGRAM proposed sending area conservation easements. . Develop and assign transfer of development rights credit valuations for receiving area locations. . Identify the types of development allowed within receiving areas. 2.2.3 Phase III: Findings and Recommendations · Proposed sending area locations · Proposed receiving areas · Total amount of TORs available for transfer into receiving area locations · Establish administrative and legal requirements for the recordation of TORs, stewardship easements, conservation easements, agricultural easements, or deed restrictions in the public records. Prepare an applicable Easement and Deed Restriction Ordinance template. · Final Recommendations RFP #06-116 10 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING PROPOSALS PART 11\ 3-1 RULES FOR PROPOSALS The proposal must name all persons or entities interested in the proposal as principals. The proposal must declare that it is made without collusion with any other person or entity submitting a proposal pursuant to this RFP. 3-2 PROPOSAL FORMAT Proposers shall prepare their proposals using the following format: A. Letter of Transmittal: This letter will summarize in a brief and concise manner, the proposer's commitment to timely performance of the work. The letter must name all of the person(s) authorized to make representations for the proposer(s), including the titles, addresses, and telephone numbers. An official authorized to negotiate for the proposer must sign the Letter of Transmittal. B. Oraanization Profile and Qualifications: This section of the proposal must describe the proposer, including the consultant/firms size, range of activities, etc. Each proposer must be authorized to do business in the State of Florida and, if a corporation must be incorporated under the laws of one of the States of the United States, proof of same must be provided. The proposer(s) must emphasize its expertise in, and experience with similar programs. The proposal must identify the primary individual(s) responsible for supervising the work. The proposer shall provide the County with the resume(s) of the primary individual(s). The proposals must also include recent and pertinent references, including bank references, contact names, telephone numbers and addresses. C. Scope of Work: This section should include: · A description of the consultantlfirms thorough understanding of the scope of the project. · A description of how the consultant/firms proposes to deliver a top quality project on time and within budget. · An overall account of the philosophy and methods the consultantlfirms will utilize to successfully complete this project. · A detailed outline of the tasks associated with each element of the scope of services described above including any additional tasks that the consultant may choose to identify and describe. · A description on how innovation and imagination can be used to address the transportation needs. RFP#OO-116 11 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM D. Anticipated Project Schedule A detailed project schedule with an estimated start date should be provided. The schedule should identify key landmarks in the process and all key decision points necessary to complete the Report. The schedule should include County review time and decision points. E. Similar Project Experience Provide three specific examples of recently completed reports that are similar in nature to this project. Please include a description of the project including location, client, and scope of professional services delivered by you/your firm. F. Fee Summary A fee summary for this project must include requirements and costs for Phase I, II, and, III. G. Additional Data: Any additional information which the proposer considers pertinent for consideration should be included in a separate section of the proposal. RFP#06-116 12 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TOR) PROGRAM · EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS PART IV 4-1 EVALUATION METHOD AND CRITERIA A. General: The County shall be the sole judge of its own best interests, the proposal, and the resulting negotiated agreement. The County reserves the right to investigate the financial capability, reputation, integrity, skill, business experience and quality of performance under similar operations of each proposer, including stockholders and principals before making an award. Award(s), if any, will be based on both an objective and subjective comparison of Proposals and Proposers. The County's decisions will be final. The County's evaluation criteria will include, but shall not be limited to, consideration of the following: CRITERION MAXIMUM SCORE 1. 2. 3. 4. Experience with similar reports for government entities Timeframe for the delivery of the report Qualifications and experience of the project personnel Fee MAXIUM POINTS 25 25 25 25 B. Selection: The Board of County Commissioners may conduct the selection process or at the option of the Board, it may be referred to the Competitive Selection Committee (the "Committee") appointed by the County Administrator. RFP #06-116 13 CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM ~ 6. STRATEGY AND SPECIAL PROJECTIENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES Review and consideration of staff options pertaining to the implementation of a Countywide Transferable Development Rights program- Staff was seeking direction. Mr. Michael Brillhart, Special Projects and Strategy Director addressed the Board on this item. He advised the Board of the 3 options for their consideration as stated in Attachment A. The attachment reads as follows: Transfer of Development Rights Program Options for Developing a Planning Study and Adoption Ordinance Necessary for implementing a Countywide TDR Program. Option 1- Prepare an RFP for professional consulting services. The services will include: Planning services- land use inventory, identify criteria for land preservation/conservation requirements, designate appropriate sending areas, establish transferable credit values and multipliers. Legal services- prepare adoption Ordinance and related legal documents pertaining to administration, conservation easements and deed restrictions. Option 2- Modify the 'draft" proposed professional services contract with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council to include the development of a Countywide TDR program as part of their professional services. The TCRPC could serve as the project manager and use Tom Daniels (TDR planning) and Nancy Stroud (legal) as the consultants for this effort. The TCRPC provided the professional services pertaining to the implementation of the North County Special Area Plan (SAP) TDR program as adopted through Ordinance No. 06-018. Option 3- Expand the existing impact fee contract with Dr. Nicholas to incorporate a TDR planning analysis for this project. Dr. Nicholas consulted for Collier County on their 2003 adopted TDR program. He has experience in other TDR programs within Florida. Under this option, the County Attorney's office could use an attorney under their professional services contract to prepare County-wide TDR Ordinance and relevant legal documents. Com. Craft suggested before going forward and expending funds for a study for the TDR program, he believes it's important the county have some commitment from the cities as well as the county to no longer give away up-zoning. If this cannot be done and are not willing to take this step, and passing an ordinance that prohibits giving away density the point of going to the TDR program is mute. Com. Smith asked if this would mean the county should create a task force so that everyone can come to the table. Com. Craft stated he felt everyone should come to the table. Com. Coward stated the idea is positive in a perfect world, but the reality is otherwise. Prior to the City of Port St. Lucie annexing a large area, he had a conversation with the Mayor and wanted to do what Com. Craft suggested and this never happened. He would hate for the county not to address this need without the cities cooperation, he would love to have the cities work in cooperation but if they do not, he does not believe they should put the brakes on looking at this program. He is still interested in having continued dialogue with the cities and see if they are interested but does not wish this to be an all ending scenario. Com. Hutchinson stated she tended to agree with Com. Coward, but would like to open the door and is optimistic that they may want to participate. She concurs it should not be placed in the back burner if they do not. She would like to move forward with the possibility of an RFP to give them different options to review. Com. Craft stated he believes before they go forward and ask for an RFP they need to find out from each city if they are willing to participate and if they are, what are they looking to achieve. These suggestions would need to be included in the RFP. Staff is tentatively recommending option 1. Com. Coward stated he is leaning more towards option 2 which is to work with the Regional Planning Council since they have the expertise. Mr. Busha, Regional Planning Council Executive Director, advised the Board if the Council works for the County as a technical assistance agency through an interlocal agreement, if this goes out into the street as an RFP then the Regional Planning Council is out. He stated they would still be happy to assist in any case. He suggested the County try very hard to get the cities involved. Mr. Martin addressed the Board and stated in some way the TDR program does exist in a test area and there is an ordinance in existence. He believes the county should continue to move forward and everyone can jump on board. Com. Coward asked the question is do we stop the process and go back and talk to the cities again or do we continue to move forward and invite the cities to join us. Ms. Susie Caron, Indrio Road resident and Vice Chair of the TDR Committee addressed the Board and thanked everyone for supporting this and she believes it should move forward and felt what they have already done in north county is put infrastructure in place and believes once the cities hear what is happening they will call and want to join the county. Unidentified gentleman from the Visions ofFt. Pierce, addressed the Board in favor of the city of Ft. Pierce joining in on the TDR program. Mr. Dave Goreman property addressed the Board in favor of the cities being involved in order to take advantage of the receiving area and density. He would like to have the option of transferring his development rights. Com. Coward stated he would every attempt to have the cities join in however in the event that they cannot get them to aggressively join and embrace the county in this effort, he still believes they need to proceed. Com. Lewis stated she concurred with the fact if they cannot get the cities to agree, they need to move forward. She suggested having the opportunity to present this to the cities and maybe place a period of 30 days or 3 weeks something they can agree on and would like to them look at the bare bones before proceeding with a consultant and felt this was an important factor. She does not wish to make anyone feel that something that is already constructed is being shoved down their throats. Com. Coward stated there seems to be a consensus that her suggestion would be the best approach at this point. He also asked Com. Craft to play the leadership role and setup meetings with the individual Commissioners and have county staff meet with them and see if over the next 30 days they can get the cities to formally join the county in this effort. Com. Craft stated he would like to approach each Board at one of their meetings and speak before them in a public setting. Com. Lewis asked if Com. Craft would be opposed to carrying a letter from the Board as the official vehicle in the matter. Com. Smith stated he would like to see this fast tracked and be a two week issue rather than a 30 day and he would assist in making phone calls. Com. Craft concurred. Com. Coward thanked Com. Craft and Com. Smith for their willingness to assist in moving this forward and he looked forward to discussing this again within the next two weeks. 1 ~ ~ , Z "''11 ~~ B . 0 B.. . ...... -i c fJ' " fJ' ." 0 a- f" fJ' , " W , , (") C :::I c: C C » (J) fJ' (') fJ' fJ' fJ' (f ¡ii' (f (f (1) (') < (") < < :2 (I¡ 0 ~. ~. ë¡ 00 c (f :::I (1) - OJ ~ ~ ~ ~ CD 0 ~ (f í'!) c w w W :::I ... CI. "0 W 0 o<! ;::¡.