HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 03-06-01MARCH 6, 2001
7:00 PM
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS MEETING AGENDA
WELCOME
GENERAL RULES AND PROCEDURES
Attached is the agenda which will determine the order of business conducted at today's Board
meeting:
CONSENT AGENDA- These items are considered routine 'and are enacted by one motion. There
will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS- Proclamations, Presentations, Public Hearings, and Department
requests are items which the Commission will discuss individually usually in the order listed on
the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARINGS- These items are usually heard on the first and third Tuesdays at 7:00 P.M. or
as soon thereafter as possible. However, if a public hearing is scheduled for a meeting on a second
or fourth Tuesday, which begins at 9:00 A.M., then public hearings will be heard at 9:00 A.M. or
as soon thereafter as possible. These time designations are intended to indicate that an item will
not be addressed prior to the listed time. The Chairman will open each public hearing and asks
anyone wishing to speak to come forward, one at a time. Comments will be limited to five
minutes.
As a general rule, when issues are scheduled before the Commission under department request
or public hearing, the order of presentation is: (1) County staff presents the details of the Board
item (2) Commissioners comment (3) if a public hearing, the Chairman will ask for public
comment, (4) further discussion and action by the Board.
ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION- Please state your name and address, speaking clearly into the
microphone. If you have backup material, please have eight copies ready for distribution.
NON -AGENDA ITEMS- These items are presented by an individual Commissioner or staff as
necessary at the conclusion of the printed agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENT- Time is allotted at the beginning of each meeting for general public comment.
Please limit comments to five minutes.
DECORUM- Please be respectful of others opinion.
MEETINGS- All Board meetings are open to the public and are held on the first and third Tuesdays
of each month at 7:00 P.M. and on the second and fourth Tuesdays at 9:00 A.M., unless otherwise
advertised. Meetings are held in the County Commission Chambers in the Roger Poitras
Administration Annex at 2300 Virginia Ave., Ft. Pierce, FL 34982. The Board schedules additional
workshops throughout the year necessary to accomplish their goals and commitments. Notice is
provided of these workshops. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this
meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (561) 462-1777 or
TDD (561) 462-1428 at least forty-eight(48) hours prior to the meeting.
`..
'"d
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
www.stlucieco.gOV
N
• •
pR�pP
John D. Bruhn
Doug Coward
Paula A. Lewis
Frannie Hutchinson
Cliff Barnes
District 1
District 2
District
District 4
District 5
Comp Plan Public Hearing 4:00pm to 6:00pm
AGENDA
March 6, 2001
7:00 P.M.
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. MINUTES
Approve the minutes of the meeting held February 27, 2001. C e&
PROCLAMATION/PRESENTATION
Resolution No. 01-72- Congratulating the New York Mets on winning the 2000
National Baseball League Championship, Welcoming the New York Mets back to St.
Lucie County, and Proclaiming March 6, 2001 as "New York Mets 2000 National
Baseball League Champions Day" in St. Lucie County, Florida. APpOOM
3. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
PUBLIC HEARINGS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
5A. Resolution No. 01-71 / Abandonment / Private Drainage and Access Easement /
Eventide Unit Two Subdivision - Consider staff recommendation to approve the
resolution, instruct staff to publish the final Notice of Abandonment, and record
the resolution, Proof of Publication of the Notice of Intent to Abandon, Proof of
-- Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing, and Proof of Publication of the Notice
of Abandonment in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida.
pro A—
N 'cal1y y
c�tiDo to en by ted,he Boardsat these me tings will oeedta record of the pdroceed,ngps nd fo such Purpose may need
a ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Upon the request of any party to the proceedingQs,
individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworII m. Any party to the proceedings will be granted.tLe
nd t
opportunity tocross-examine an individual testifgying during a hearing upon request. Atynyone with a disability
MquAroeg9t 15611 462 1777tor TDeD (5h1) ra I at less t fo ly-eight(48) hours prior fo themmeetiIIg. Services
REGULAR AGENDA
MARCH 6, 2001
PAGE TWO
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUED
PUBLIC WORKS
5B. Engineering / Howard Baggett Mining Permit Renewal - Consider staff
recommendation to approve the request for a Class 1 miring permit for 6 years,
to be updated every 48 months subject to eleven (1V cited conditions.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT r�(p1n
5C. Resolution No. 01-010/Quasi-judicial / Westchester Development Company -
Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution, subject to the cited
conditions contained therein, granting preliminary PUD (Planned Unit
Development) approval for property located on the north side of Gatlin Boulevard
immediately west of the I-95 Interchange, approximately one mile west of the
intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescia Street, from the AG-1 (Agricultural -
1 du/acre) Zoning District to the PUD (P ed Unit Development) Zoning District.
5D. Resolution No. Ol 011/ uasl udicial / Westchester Development Company -
Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution, subject to the cited
conditions contained therein, granting preliminary PMUD (Planned Mixed Use
Development) approval for property located on the north side of Gatlin Boulevard
immediately west of the I-95 Interchange, approximately one mile west of the
intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescip Street.
AVPr
End of Public Hearings
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Selection of a Consultant for 2001 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Administration and Proposal Writing - Pursuant to state requirements outlined in
the Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program and St. Lucie
County Purchasing Manual, staff recommends the Board rank the three firms,
selecting the firm with the lowest score.
``W
v
REGULAR AGENDA
MARCH 6, 2001
PAGE THREE
7. PUBLIC SAFETY
Combining the Animal Control Efforts of St. Lucie County and the City of Fort
Pierce - Consider staff recommendation to grant permission for staff to discuss
consolidation of Animal Control between St. Lucie County and the City of Fort
Pierce. V rr,, ` � , I Vt*j
jib cow
.Ar k ryi d Contco L
rioojion w 11 he�ul�e,�l
CONSENT AGENDA
March 6. 2001
1. WARRANTS LIST
Approve warrants list No. 22
2. LEISURE SERVICES
A. Queen's Island Preserve / Application for Grant Funds from the US Fish &
Wildlife Service's South. Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program - Consider staff
recommendation to authorize staff to apply for grant funds.
B. Blind Creek Park / Application for Grant Funds from the US Fish & Wildlife
Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program - Consider staff
recommendation to authorize staff to apply for grant funds.
COUNTY ATTORNEY
A. Interlocal Agreement between St. Lucie County and St. Lucie West Services
District Providing for the Use of the County's Landfill - Consider staff
recommendation to approve the Interlocal Agreement and authorize the
Chairman to sign the Agreement.
B. Emergency Debris Removal Contract / Phillips & Jordan, Inc. - Consider staff
recommendation to approve the contract and authorize the Chairman to
sign the contract.
C. Permission to Advertise Notice of Intent / Right -of -Way Abandonment /
South 2S`h Street Phase II / St. James Drive / Florida Power and Light
Crossing - Consider staff recommendation to grant permission to advertise
the Notice of Intent to Abandon, authorize the Chairman to execute the
Abandonment Petition, and proceed with the Abandonment Petition.
D. Partial Release of Lien for St. Lucie County Code Enforcement Board Order
Imposing Fine/Lien in Case No. 90-1724 - Consider staff recommendation
to authorize the Chairman to sign the Partial Release of Lien.
4. UTILITIES
A. South Florida Water Management District Alternative Water Supply Funding
Program Grant Application - Consider staff recommendation to authorize
submission of the grant to construct a reuse water main on North
Hutchinson Island, and authorize the County Administrator to sign all
documents.
_-_B, _ -- _.Bid No. 01-007 / Holiday Pines Wastewater Treatment Plant Settling Tank
pp� Rehabilitation Consider staff recommendation to award the bid to
l n � Hutchinson Utilities Service Corp., the low bidder, in the amount of $63,362.
`.
..r
CONSENT AGENDA
MARCH 6, 2001
PAGE TWO
Bid No. 01-021 / Apron Construction Project - Consider staff recommendation to
reject all bids and authorize staff to rebid the project.
`w
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
,-MOO
ITEM NO. C 6-1
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR []
PUBLIC HEARING []
CONSENT [XX]
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Daniel 5. McIntyre
County Attorney
5UB CT: Children's Services Council -Special Designation Grant Contracts
BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum
FUNDS AVAILABLE:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the three (3) Special Designation
Grant Contracts and authorize the Chairman to sign the Contracts.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
County Attorney: /-
CONCURRENCE*
D glas Anderson
County Administrator
Review and Approvals
Management &
Purchasing:
Originating Dept. Public Works Dir: County Eng.:
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable) Eff. 5196
\r "'
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Daniel 5. McIntyre, County Attorney
C.A. NO. 01-313
DATE: March 1, 2001
SUBJECT: Children's Services Council - Special Designation Grant Contracts
BACKGROUND:
On February 6, 2001, the Board granted permission to apply for three (3) Children's
Services Council (C5C) grants. The Board also approved the use of $5,366.86 from Park"A"
Impact Fees as matching funds. Attached to this memorandum are the three (3) Special
Designation Grant Contracts:
(1) Soccer goals for Lakewood Park Elementary (C5C grant - $1,600);
(2) Batting cage with two (2) softball pitching machines for Lawnwood Stadium (CSC
grant - $7,300); and,
(3) Classroom furnishings for the Smithsonian Marine Ecosystems Exhibit (CSCgrant-
$7,900)
RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Board approve the three (3) Grant Contracts and authorize
the Chairman to sign the Contracts.
ly submitted
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
D5M/caf
Attachments
AGREEMENT FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES COUNCIL OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY
SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS GRANT
THIS AGREEMENT made as of this 8" day of February, 2001, by and between the
CHILDREN' S SERVICES COUNCIL OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, an independent special taxing
district for the State of Florida, whose address is 250 NW Country Club Drive, Suite 240, Port St.
Lucie, FL 34986, hereinafter referred to as COUNCIL, and BOARD OF COUNTY
CONMSSIONERS, hereinafter referred to as the PROVIDER, whose address is 2300
VIRGR4 A AVENUE, FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34982-5652.
WHEREAS, the PROVIDER is a qualified provider whose application for Special
Designations funds has been accepted by the COUNCIL; and
WHEREAS, the COUNCIL has determined that it is in the best interest of the children of
St. Lucie County to enter into this Agreement with the PROVIDER.
NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged, the parties, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:
1. PROVIDER agrees to provide for Capital Improvements (two batting cages with
pitching machines) as set forth in their proposal to the COUNCIL, a copy of which is on file with
the Council.
2. COUNCIL agrees to pay PROVIDER an amount not to exceed $7,300 for said Capital
Improvements as set forth in Provider's proposal. PROVIDER will submit receipts for the
expenditure of the $7,300.
3. PROVIDER agrees to comply with the provisions set forth below:
i. The project will be completed by August 1, 2001 and reimbursement request
submitted with documentation by September 15, 2001.
ii. The project and any
purchase of related goods or
services
is being
accomplished with use of tax -payer funds and
therefore
requires
..i
PROVIDER to document all expenditures to show reasonable and effective
use of these funds.
iii. A narrative description on the completion and success of the project
including demographics on usage by children and families where
appropriate.
iv. Any Capital Improvements projects must remain in active intended use for
five years per CSC guidelines or funding will be reimbursed to CSC.
V. Any equipment obtained under this Special Designation funding must
remain in active intended use for two years per CSC guidelines or returned
to CSC for use with other funded programs.
vi. Any acknowledgments or press releases regarding this project will include
mention of the support of the Children's Services Council of St. Lucie
County and use of CSC logo whenever possible.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their
duly authorized officials.
CHILDREN'S SERVICES COUNCIL BOARD OF COUNTY
OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Kathryn Basile, Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
I�
Glen J. Torcivia, Attorney
M
Douglas M. Anderson,
County Administrator
*.r
AGREEMENT FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES COUNCIL OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY
SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS GRANT
THIS AGREEMENT made as of this 8' day of February, 2001, by and between the
CHILDREN' S SERVICES COUNCIL OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, an independent special taxing
district for the State of Florida, whose address is 250 NW Country Club Drive, Suite 240, Port St.
Lucie, FL 34986, hereinafter referred to as COUNCIL, and BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, hereinafter referred to as the PROVIDER, whose address is 2300
VIRGINIA AVENUE, FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34982-5652.
WHEREAS, the PROVIDER is a qualified provider whose application for Special
Designations funds has been accepted by the COUNCIL; and
WHEREAS, the COUNCIL has determined that it is in the best interest of the children of
St. Lucie County to enter into this Agreement with the PROVIDER.
NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged, the parties, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:
1. PROVIDER agrees to provide for purchase of Special Equipment (set of soccer goals)
as set forth in their proposal to the COUNCIL, a copy of which is on file with the Council.
2. COUNCIL agrees to pay PROVIDER an amount not to exceed $1,600 for said
purchase of Special Equipment as set forth in Provider's proposal. PROVIDER will submit
receipts for the expenditure of the $1,600.
3. PROVIDER agrees to comply with the provisions set forth below:
i. The project will be completed by August 1, 2001 and reimbursement request
submitted with documentation by September 15, 2001.
The project and any purchase of related goods or services is being
accomplished with use of tax -payer funds and therefore requires
PROVIDER to document all expenditures to show reasonable and effective
use of these funds.
M
iii. A narrative description on the completion and success of the project
including demographics on usage by children and families where
appropriate.
iv. Any Capital Improvements projects must remain in active intended use for
five years per CSC guidelines or funding will be reimbursed to CSC.
V. Any equipment obtained under this Special Designation funding must
remain in active intended use for two years per CSC guidelines or returned
to CSC for use with other funded programs.
vi. Any acknowledgments or press releases regarding this project will include
mention of the support of the Children's Services Council of St. Lucie
County and use of CSC logo whenever possible.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their
duly authorized officials.
CHILDREN'S SERVICES COUNCIL
OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY
MM
Kathryn Basile, Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
MM
Glen J, Tucivia, Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
Douglas M. Anderson,
County Administrator
..W
AGREEMENT FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES COUNCIL OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY
SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS GRANT
THIS AGREEMENT made as of this 8' day of February, 2001, by and between the
CHILDREN' S SERVICES COUNCIL OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, an independent special taxing
district for the State of Florida, whose address is 250 NW Country Club Drive, Suite 240, Port St.
Lucie, FL 34986, hereinafter referred to as COUNCIL, and BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, hereinafter referred to as the PROVIDER, whose address is 2300
VIRGINIA AVENUE, FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34982-5652.
WHEREAS, the PROVIDER is a qualified provider whose application for Special
Designations funds has been accepted by the COUNCIL; and
WHEREAS, the COUNCIL has determined that it is in the best interest of the children of
St. Lucie County to enter into this Agreement with the PROVIDER.
NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged, the parties, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:
1. PROVIDER agrees to provide for purchase of Special Equipment ( furnish classroom
at Marine EcoSystems Exhibit) as set forth in their proposal to the COUNCIL, a copy of which
is on file with the Council.
2. COUNCIL agrees to pay PROVIDER an amount not to exceed $7,900 for said
purchase of Special.Equipment as set forth in Provider's proposal. PROVIDER will submit
receipts for the expenditure of the $7,900.
3. PROVIDER agrees to comply with the provisions set forth below:
The project will be completed by August 1, 2001 and reimbursement request
-- --- -- - submitted with documentation by September 15, 2001.
ii. The project and any purchase of related goods or services is being
accomplished with use of tax -payer funds and therefore requires
PROVIDER to document all expenditures to show reasonable and effective
Ikk..
use of these funds.
iii. A narrative description on the completion and success of the project
including demographics on usage by children and families where
appropriate.
iv. Any Capital Improvements projects must remain in active intended use for
five years per CSC guidelines or funding will be reimbursed to CSC.
V. Any equipment obtained under this Special Designation funding must
remain in active intended use for two years per CSC guidelines or returned
to CSC for use with other funded programs.
vi. Any acknowledgments or press releases regarding this project will include
mention of the support of the Children's Services Council of St. Lucie
County and use of CSC logo whenever possible.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their
duly authorized officials.
CHILDREN'S SERVICES COUNCIL
OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY
Kathryn Basile, Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
BY: -
Glen J. Torcivia, Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
Douglas M. Anderson,
County Administrator
..i
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
REGULAR MEETING
Date: February 27, 2001 Convened: 9:00 a.m.
Tape: 1-2 Adjourned: 10:35 a.m.
Commissioners Present: Chairman, Frannie Hutchinson, Doug Coward, Paula A. Lewis, John D.
Bruhn, Cliff Barnes
Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator, Robert Bradshaw, Asst. County
Administrator, Dan McIntyre, County Attorney, Julia Shewchuk, Community Development
Director, Paul Phillips, Airport Director, Ray Wazny, Public Works Director, Pete Keogh,
Leisure Services Director, Dennis Wetzel, IT Director, Bill Blazak, Utilities Director, Jack
Southard, Public Safety Director, Mike Bowers, Road and Bridge Manager, Marie Gouin, M & B
Manager, Ruth Totten, Interim Purchasing Manager, Joe Finnegan, Risk Manager, Don West,
County Engineer, Don Cole, Acquisitions Manager, Leo Cordeiro, Solid Waste Manager, Roger
Shinn, Central Services Manager, Sonya Smith, PIO, Deputy Nickel; A. Millie Delgado, Deputy
Clerk
1. MINUTES (1-023)
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve the minutes of the meeting
held February 20, 2001; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
2. PRESENTATIONS (1-0354)
a) The Board presented a letter of appreciation to Tony Barnes, Northside Ball and Bat Club
thanking them for their $5,000 donation towards the construction of two batting cages at
Horatio Grisby Park.
b) Budget Resolution No. 01-067
It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Lewis, to accept the Northside Ball and Bat
Club's donation and approve the budget resolution to appropriate and expend the funds; and,
upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS (1-092)
Mr. Bob Bangert, Holiday Pines resident, addressed the Board regarding the request for a
consultant for the airport item 7 on the agenda.
Ms. Dorothy Davis, Spanish Lakes Country Club resident, and active birder, addressed the Board
on a locked birding trail in the county.
The Leisure Services Director addressed Ms. Davis' comments and advised the Board of the
reason for that locked trail at this time. He advised the Board that as soon the OSHA standards
are met, they will be opening the area.
-1-
r..
Mr. Ed McKay, Hutchinson Island resident, addressed the Board regarding a news release and
FIGG construction of ojher bridges.
Mr. Charles Grande, Hutchinson Island resident, addressed the Board as the representative of the
Comp Plan Study Group and voiced their concerns with portions of the transportation element.
Ms. Jean Hearn, Tozier Road resident, addressed the Board regarding the Indrio Road trail and
some stumps sticking out in the trail which could be dangerous to residents.
4. CONSENT AGENDA (1-0636)
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Lewis, to approve the -Consent Agenda to
include Additions A-1 and A-2; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
WARRANT LIST
The Board approved Warrant List No. 21.
2. LEISURE SERVICES
A. RFP No. 01-019- Snack Vending for St. Lucie County Municipal Buildings- The Board
approved awarding the RFP to Lance, Inc., the No. 1 ranked proposer, and authorized
staff to negotiate a contract. In the event that negotiations are unsuccessful with Lance,
the Board approved staff negotiating a contact with Bob's Vending Services, the No. 2
ranked proposer.
B. Addendum to Interloal Agreement/Savannas Recreation Area- The Board approved the
addendum to the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Ft. Pierce, and authorized the
Chairman to sign the agreement.
C. Award of Addendum 2 Bid No. 01-012/Lawnwood Maintenance Storage Buildings- The
Board approved entering into a contract with Jim Wright Construction, and authorized the
Chairman to sign the contract as prepared by the County Attorney.
3. PURCHASING
A. Piggy Back City of Tallahassee's Bid for Whisper Chipper/ Equipment Request No.
EQ01-092- The Board approved piggy backing the bid for a Whisper Chipper in the
amount $22,995 from Vermeer SE Sales.
B. Bid No. 01-23/Sale of Overhead Hoist/Public Works Solid Waste- The Board approved
awarding the bid to Stanley Brown, Brad Regan, Inc. for the amount of $ 3,500.
C. Permission to advertise for bids- The Baord approved advertising for bids for publication
of the delinquent tax notices.
D. Piggy back Martin County bid for Roadway Striping- The Board approved piggy backing
the bid for Roadway Striping in the amount of $30,000 and authorized the Chairman to
sign the contract as prepared by the County Attorney.
4. CENTRAL SERVICES
Bid No. 01-01I/Moving Services- The Board approved rejecting all bids and granted permission
to submit a new bid for Moving Services.
-2-
PUBLIC WORKS
Solid WasteBalefill & Recycling Facility Project- The Board approved Change Order
Number 1 to Adams Robinson in the amount of $242,999.59 for 49 additional days to provide a
fire suppression sprinkler system and water main revisions, telephone; fiber optic cable additions,
and unsuitable soil removal.
6. COUNTY ATTORNEY
A. Region 20 WAGES Coalition/Community Service Work Experience Program
Agreement- The Board approved the proposed Community Services Work Experience
Program Agreement with the Region 20 WAGES Coalition and authorized the Chairman
to sign the agreement.
B. Dock Use Agreement/Downeast Sailing Adventures- The Board approved the agreement
and authorized the Chairman to sign the agreement upon receipt of the signed originals
from Downcast Sailing Adventures.
C. Educational Facilities Impact Fees- The Board approved the Amended and Restated
Interlocal Agreements with the City of Fort Pierce, Port St. Lucie and St. Lucie Village,
and authorized the Chairman to sign the agreements.
D. Software Maintenance Agreement/Graphic Computer Solutions- The Board approved the
agreement and authorized the Chairman to sign the agreement.
7. INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE
A. Bid No. 01-25- The Board approved awarding the bid for the 531s St. at Canal C-25
project for bridge repair and rehabilitation of existing bridge structure and roadway
improvements to Sheltra & Son construction Company, Inc., the lowest bidder in the
amount of $143,161.50 establish the project budget and authorize the Chairman to sign
the contract as prepared by the County Attorney.
B. Bid No. 01-026- The Board approved awarding the bid for the Taylor Dairy Road over
Canal C-25 project for bridge repair and rehabilitation of existing structure and roadway
improvements to M & J Construction Company of Pinellas County, Inc. the lowest and
complete bidder in the amount of $98,713.96 establish the project budget and authorize
the Chairman to sign the contract as prepared by the County Attorney.
C. Engineering/change order 1/Keen Road Bridge Replacement- the Board approved the
change order in the amount of $8,463.79 for the Keen Road Bridge Replacement.
8. PUBLIC SAFETY
Interlocal Agreement with St. Lucie County Fire District/E911 Dispatch- The Board
approved the interlocal agreement and authorized the Chairman to sign the agreement.
9. MANAGEMENT/BUDGET
A. Budget Resolution No. 01-46- The Board approved adopting the budget resolution to
appropriate and expend the anticipated FRDAP South County Regional Stadium Grant
passed through the City of Port St. Lucie, in the amount of $150,000.
B. Budget Resolution No. 01-68- The Board approved adopting the budget resolution to
appropriate and expend the anticipated $70,000 contribution from the City of Fort Pierce
for the Smithsonian Marine Ecosystem Exhibit.
-3-
v., %0001
10. ADMINISTRATION
Village Green Lease- The Board approved the third addendum to the shopping center
lease with Finova Capital Corporation for the period of February 1, 2002 to January 2003 for the
Village Green Property.
Com. Coward requested staff put this issue on the fast track.
The County Administrator advised the Board that they had located a site across from Fire Station
# 12 and are presently in the due -diligence process and will return to the Board with information
within 60 days.
ADDITIONS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
CA-1 RFP No. 01-020 (Janitorial Services) Bid Protest by R & R Corporate Systems, Inc., -
The Board approved rejecting all proposals submitted in response to RFP No. 01-020 and
authorized staff to re -advertise the RFP.
CA-2 Midway Industrial Park/Release of Letter of Credit- The Board approved the release of
the Letter of Credit in favor of the Developers of Midway Industrial Park.
REGULAR AGENDA
5. PUBLIC WORKS(1-1353)
A. Engineering/Resolution No. 01-044-Oleander Business Park MSBU- Consider staff
recommendation to approve the resolution stating the county's intent to use the uniform
method of collecting non -ad valorem special assessments for the Oleander Business Park
MSBU.
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve Resolution No. 01-44; and,
upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
6. COUNTY ATTORNEY (1-1432)
A. Indian River Estates Stormwater Retention Project/Contract for Sale and Purchase/Friedel
Parcel- Consider staff recommendation to approve the Contract for Sale and Purchase,
authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement and direct staff to close the transaction
and record the document in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida.
It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Lewis, to approve staff recommendation; and,
upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
B. Resolution No. 01-70- Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution
supporting the Florida Public Service Commission petition to the Federal
Communication Commission.,
It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve Resolution No. 01-70; and,
upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
AIRPORT (1-1622)
Interlocal Agreement/St. Lucie County and the City of Vero Beach- Consider staff
recommendation to approve the Interlocal Agreement to hire a consultant in Washington, D.C.
-4-
'r✓
for the purpose of persuading the Federal Government to install, operate, and maintain an ASR-
11 radar facility on the Treasure Coast which will serve at a minimum St. Lucie County
International Airport and Vero Beach Airport, for a total price of $4,000 per month plus
expenses, not to exceed $250. per month. The airport would be responsible for 50% of the
monthly cost with a maximum local share of $27,000 over 12 months.
sk
Com. Coward stated he felt we have plenty of staff who have the capability to meet with
legislators to find out their current position which he does not feel has been done and if there was
a change we had the support from our legislators and needed additional help he would feel more
comfortable. He felt he does not have enough information as to the position of our legislators
and he is not sure this is money well spent.
It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Lewis to approve staff recommendation; and,
upon roll call, the vote was as follows: Nay: Coward, Aye's: Bames, Lewis, Bruhn, Hutchinson,
motion carried by a vote of 4 to 1.
ADMIMSTRATION
Bi Weekly Committee Reports - The Board gave updates on the various committees and
advisory boards they serve on.
BOARD COMMENTS
Com. Barnes commented on the need for more parks in the county and suggested the possibility
of a voter referendum to tax themselves in order to provide the funds for regional
parks/recreation with maintenance included in the bond issue.
Com. Coward concurred, and commented on the needs assessment which was discussed at the
Strategic Planning Session and the needed staff. He also stated that if the Board could get more
detail about the needs assessment and what has come out of that. They could then have an
estimate of the dollars needed for both the construction of the facilities and on going costs. This
would assist the Board in closing in on what alternative funding source would be appropriate.
Com. Barnes concurred and stated he was aware that they could not increase the parks and
recreation without increasing staff and this is why the cost should be included in the bond issue.
An evening workshop was suggested to discuss the issue.
There being no further business to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned.
Clerk of Circuit Court
-5-
Chairman
%NW 1..r
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney
ITEM NO. ;Z
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR[X]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT[]
PRESENTED BY:
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
SUBJECT:
Resolution No. 01-72 - Congratulating the New York Mets on winning the 2000 National Baseball League
Championship; Welcoming the New York Mets back to St. Lucie County; and Proclaiming March 6, 2001, as NEW
YORK METS - 2000 NATIONAL BASEBALL LEAGUE CHAMPIONS DAY" in St. Lucie County, Florida.
BACKGROUND:
FUNDS AVAIL.:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution No. 01-72 as drafted.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[x] APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
County Attorney: '"
Review and Approvals
Management & Budget Purchasing
Originating Dept. Other: Other:
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)_
Eff. 5196
%W
M
RESOLUTION NO. 01-72
A RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE NEW
YORK METS ON WINNING THE 2000 NATIONAL
BASEBALL LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP;
WELCOMING THE NEW YORK METS BACK TO
ST. LUCIE COUNTY; AND PROCLAIMING
MARCH 6, 2001, AS "NEW YORK METS - 2000
NATIONAL BASEBALL LEAGUE CHAMPIONS
DAY" IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made
the following determinations:
1. On March 1, 2001, the New York Mets Qrganization brought the New York Mets back
to St. Lucie County for the commencement of Spring Training 2001.
2. This Board desires to congratulate the New York Mets on winning the 2000 National
Baseball League Championship, and further, desires to welcome them back to St. Lucie County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St.
Lucie County, Florida:
1. This Board does hereby congratulate the New York Mets on winning the 2000 National
Baseball League Championship; further welcomes the New York Mets back to St. Lucie County;
and proclaims March 6, 2001 as "NEW YORK METS - 2000 NATIONAL BASEBALL
LEAGUE CHAMPIONS DAY" in St. Lucie County, Florida.
2. The County Administrator is hereby directed to forward a copy of this resolution to the
New York Mets Organization in order to congratulate and welcome the New York Mets back to St.
Lucie County for Spring Training 2001.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 6" day of March, 2001.
rn
ATTEST:
DEPUTY CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
CHAIRMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
M„r
.pr
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ITEM NO. 5A
DATE: March 6. 2001
REGULAR[]
PUBLIC HEARING [XX]
CONSENT[]
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY (DEPT.): County Attorney Donald G. Cole
Property Acquisition Manager
SUBJECT: Public Hearing
Abandonment - Private Drainage and Access Easement
Eventide - Unit Two Subdivision
Resolution No. 01-71
BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum
FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A
PREVIOUS ACTION: February 6, 2001 - Request Permission to Advertise the Notice of Public
Hearing
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board approve Resolution No. 01-71, instruct staff to
publish the final Notice of Abandonment, and record Resolution No. 01-71,
Proof of Publication of the Notice of Intent to Abandon, Proof of Publication
of the Notice of Public Hearing, Proof of Publication of the Notice of
Abandonment in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[X] APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
„
[xx] County Attorney:
[xx] Originating Dept.:
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)
CONCURRENCE:
Administrator
Review and Approvals
[xx] Public Works: [xx] County Engineer.
[ ] Comm. Dev.: [ ] Road & Bridge:
Eff. 5/96
G:VACOIW RJoAnn\AbandonmentstEventide13601 Agenda.wpd
,*a
PROPERTY ACQUISITION DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Donald G. Cole, Property Acquisition Manager
DATE: March 6, 2001
SUBJECT: Public Hearing
Abandonment - Private Drainage and Access Easement
Eventide - Unit Two Subdivision
Resolution No. 01-71
The Property Acquisition Division received a request to abandon a private drainage and access
easement on a portion of Lot 8, Eventide - Unit Two from Beatrice Corace, President of Eventide
Place Property Owners Association, Inc.
Eventide - Unit One was platted in November of 1990 as a seven (7) lot subdivision with Tract "A"
set aside for future development. Eventide - Unit Two, a replat of Tract "A", was platted in May of
1994 as a ten (10) lot subdivision.
The purpose of this Abandonment is to allow the development of Lot 8, Eventide - Unit Two as a
home site. The drainage and access easement on Lot 8 is no longer required as the cul-de-sac
does not exist on the replat of Tract A.
A Notice of Intent to Abandon was advertised on January 17 and 24, 2001, and no objections were
filed.
All relevant public utilities have given written consent to the proposed abandonment.
County Department staff members have reviewed the petition and have filed no objections to the
proposed abandonment.
All abutting property owners have consented to the proposed abandonment.
On February 6, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners approved Permission to Advertise for
a Public Hearing on March 6, 2001.
On February 10, 2001, a Notice of Public Hearing was advertised in The News (copy attached).
1%r 1.4
Page 2
Abandonment - Private Drainage and Access Easement
Eventide - Unit Two Subdivision
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board approve Resolution No. 01-71, instruct staff to publish the final Notice
of Abandonment, and record Resolution No. 01-71, Proof of Publication of the Notice of Intent to
Abandon, Proof of Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing, Proof of Publication of the Notice
of Abandonment in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida.
Respectfully submitted,
Donald G. Cole
Property Acquisition Manager
G:\ACQ\WP\JoAnn\Abandonments\Eventide\3601 Memo.wpd
%%W v
/—/
a u ie a
o
/
—
— — —
l
/
IL
0�
--tVL
`\
\ _ _ _
Gf'/V
. Ch Sm.—Nb2*56'19"E
0.b3 -
t-9— —
— — 7,
— for-63-04—
arg- gZ249-56"W — .�
�`fxistin9_D
ain
SO-
/
/
/
!
/
/
/
/
I
!
r
r
/
/
r
I
PmpwWFw
Eventide Property Owners Association, Inc.
Idable Area
txwsung
15' D.E.
& L.A.E.
p 10, u
�A#
--- of
e p = 68"16'58
R = 58.88'
L = 51.75 '
w ate/' NR. Iyaadit
00NALzvm-PL4 r Am-&fiWT"
P a am Ima 4Wf, Fps
.Ad
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
MARCH 69 2001
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
You will take notice that in accordance with the
-
provisions of Sections 177.101, 336.09 and 335,10,
Florida Statutes, as amended, and the St. Lucie County
Land Development Code, Section 11.10.01 at. seq., a
public hearing will be held by the St. Lucie County Board
of County Commissioners, in the County Commission
Chambers, 3rd floor of the Roger Poitras Administration
An0ex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, on
March 6, 2001, at 7:00 P.M, or as soon thereafter as
practicable, on the petition of Beatrice Corace, to close,
vacate and abandon a private drainage and access
easement on a. portion of Lot 8, Eventide - Unit Two, St.
Lucie County, Florida, being more particularly described
as follows:
A PARCEL OF LAND, LYING IN LOT 8,
EVENTIDE - UNIT TWO, AS RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 34, PAGE 5A OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
ST. - LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER
OF SAID LOT 8, THENCE S 56" 34' 44" E FOR 57.75
FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE,
CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF
25.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC
OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
53" 07' 48" FOR 23.18 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUE ALONG THE ARC
OF SAID CURVE THROUGH CENTRAL ANGLE OF
14" 42' 17" FOR 6.42 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE
CURVATURE OF A CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE
SOUTHWEST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 103' 09'
47" FOR 90.03 FEET; THENCE S 39' 06' 30" W FOR
13.27 FEET; THENCE N 73' 20' OS" W FOR 49.56
FEET; THENCE N 56' 34' 44" W FOR 29.60 FEET TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING AN AREA
OF 1,918 SQUARE FEET OR 0.044 ACRES.
All interested parties may appear and be heard at the
time and place above specified. Written comments
received in advance of the public hearing will also be
considered. Anyone with a disability requiring
accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the
St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (561)
462-1777 or TDD (561) 462.1428 at least forty-eight (48)
hours prior to the meeting.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
191 FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, CHAIRMAN
PUBLISH DATE: February 10, 2001
%„r
*. o
This instrument prepared by:
JoAnn Riley
under the direction of
Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney
St. Lucie County
2300 Virginia Avenue
Ft. Pierce, FL 34982
RESOLUTIONNO. 01-71
DATE: March 6, 2001
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CLOSING, VACATINGAND ABANDONING ANYINTEREST
OF ST. LUCIE COUNTYAND THE GENERAL PUBLICINA PRIVATE DRAINAGE
AND ACCESS EASEMENT ONA PORTION OF LOT 8, EVENTIDE -UNIT TWO, AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 34, PAGE 5 AND 5A, LYING IN SECTION 24,
TOWNSHIP 37 SOUTH, RANGE 40 EAST, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the
following determinations:
That Sections 177.101, 336.09 and 336.10, Florida Statutes, as amended, and Section 11.10.01 et.
seq. of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, provide that the County may adopt resolutions
vacating rights -of -way in whole or in part, which are under the jurisdiction of the Board of County
Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida.
2. Pursuant to Plat Book 34, Page 5 and 5A, St. Lucie County and the general public have a dedicated
interest in the following described land:
A PARCEL OF LAND, LYING IN LOT 8, EVENTIDE - UNIT TWO, AS
RECORDED
IN
PLAT
BOOK
34, PAGE 5A
OF THE
PUBLIC
RECORDS
OF
ST.
LUCIE
COUNTY,
FLORIDA,
MORE
PARTICULARLYDESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
*#AW ..
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8,
THENCE S 560 34' 44" E FOR 57.75 FEET TO THE POINT OF
CURVATURE OFA CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVINGA
RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLYALONG THE ARC OF
SAID CURVE THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE OF 530 07' 48" FOR
23.18 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUE
ALONG THEARC OFSAID CURVE THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 140 42' 17" FOR 6.42 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE
CURVATURE OF A CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG
THEARC OFSAID CURVE THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1030
09' 47" FOR 90. 03 FEET; THENCE S 390 06' 30" W FOR 13.27 FEET;
THENCE N 730 20' 05" W FOR 49.56 FEET; THENCE N 560 34' 44" W
FOR 29.60 FEET TO THE POINT OFBEGINNING. CONTAININGAN
AREA OF 1,918 SQUARE FEET OR 0.044 ACRES.
3. The purpose of this abandonment is to allow the development of Lot 8, Eventide -Unit Two as a
home site. The drainage and access easement on Lot 8 is no longer required as the cul-de-sac does
not exist.
4. A Notice of Intent to Abandon was advertised on January 17 and January 24, 2001, and no
objections were filed.
5. All relevant public utilities have given written consent to the proposed abandonment.
6. County Department staff members have reviewed the petition and have fled no objections to the
proposed abandonment.
7. All abutting property owners have consented to the proposed abandonment.
2
8. On February 6, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners approved Permission to Advertise for
a Public Hearing on March 6, 2001.
9. On February 10, 2001, a Notice of Public Hearing was advertised in The News.
10. It is in the best interest of the public to vacate and abandon the private drainage and access
easement on a portion of Lot 8, Eventide - Unit Two more particularly described as follows:
A PARCEL OF LAND, LYING IN LOT 8, EVENTIDE - UNIT TWO, AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 34, PAGE 5A OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE
PARTICULARLYDESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8,
THENCE S 560 34' 44" E FOR 57.75 FEET TO THE POINT OF
CURVATURE OFA CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVINGA
RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLYALONG THE ARC OF
SAID CURVE THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE OF 530 07' 48" FOR
23.18 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUE
ALONG THE ARC OFSAID CURVE THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 140 42' 17" FOR 6.42 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE
CURVATURE OF A CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST,
HAVINGA RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG
THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1030
09' 47" FOR 90.03 FEET; THENCE S 390 06' 30" W FOR 13.27 FEET;
THENCE N 730 20' 05" W FOR 49.56 FEET; THENCE N 56° 34' 44" W
3
.0�
FOR 29.60 FEET TO THE POINT OFBEGINNING. CONTAININGAN
AREA OF 1,918 SQUARE FEET OR 0.044 ACRES.
and to renounce and disclaim any rights of St. Lucie County and the general public in and to the
private drainage and access easement on a portion of Lot 8, Eventide - Unit Two, St. Lucie County,
Florida.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie
County, Florida:
That private drainage and access easement on a portion of Lot 8, Eventide - Unit Two lying in
Section 24, Township 37 South, Range 40 East, more particularly described as follows:
A PARCEL OF LAND, L YING IN LOT 8, EVENTIDE - UNIT TWO, AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 34, PAGE 5A OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE
PARTICULARLYDESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8,
THENCE S 560 34' 44" E FOR 57.75 FEET TO THE POINT OF
CURVATURE OFA CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVINGA
RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET, THENCE EASTERLYALONG THE ARC OF
SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 530 07' 48" FOR
23.18 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUE
ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 140 42' 17" FOR 6.42 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE
CURVATURE OF A CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST,
12
�ft.
.✓
HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLYALONG
THEARC OFSAID CURVE THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1030
09' 47" FOR 90.03 FEET; THENCE S 390 06' 30" W FOR 13.27 FEET;
THENCE N 73020' 05" W FOR 49.56 FEET; THENCE N 56° 34' 44" W
FOR 29.60 FEET TO THEPOINT OFBEGINNING. CONTAININGAN
AREA OF 1,918 SQUARE FEET OR 0.044 ACRES.
is hereby closed, vacated and abandoned and the right, title and interest of St. Lucie County and the general
public in and to said lands hereby disclaimed and renounced.
Chairman Frannie Hutchinson XXX
Vice -Chairman Doug Coward
XXX
Commissioner Cliff Barnes
xxx
Commissioner John D. Bruhn
XXX
Commissioner Paula Lewis
XXX
PASSED AND DULYADOPTED this 6`" day of March, 2001.
ATTEST:
Deputy Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF ST. L UCIE
COUNTY, FLORIDA
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
By:
County Attorney
C
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PETITION FOR ABANDONMENT
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMSSIONERS, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
The undersigned PETITIONER hereby petitions the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
to vacate, abandon, discontinue and close, in whole or in part, specific public rights -of -way, easements, or
subdivision plats, as more particularly described in this petition, and to renounce and disclaim any right of the
County and the public in and to any land in connection therewith.
This petition is filed pursuant to law as more particularly set forth in Florida Statutes, Section 177.101, as
amended, Florida Statutes, Sections 336.09 and 336.10, as amended, and St. Lucie County Land Development Code,
Section 11.10.01 et. seq.
TYPE OF ABANDONMENT REQUESTED
(check one or more as applicable)
indicates requirement for public hearing)
_ A Plat (*) A Portion of a Plat (*) _ County Road Right-of-way (*)
Drainage Easement not Affecting Road Drainage _ Public Utility Easement
_ Drainage Easement Affecting Road Drainage (*) _ Other
Public Interest in a Private Right-of-way or Easement
Petitioner hereby certifies that the filing fee of 2$ 50.00 is enclosed or has been paid to St. Lucie County,
and that petitioner hereby further certifies that petitioner understands that the filing fee is nou-refundab le and that
there is no assurance that this petition will be granted, in whole or in part, and no such assurances have been made
by any County employee.
This Petition shall contain an affidavit of the Petitioner attesting to the validity of the representations herein
and it's completeness to the best of Petitioner's knowledge and belief.
The Legal Description of the petition site is attached as (EXHIBIT "A").
(Note: The petition site may lie upon property owned by Petitioner, i.e. an easement over Petitioner's
property, or adjacent to Petitioners property, i.e. a public road right-of-way.)
Title or interest of the County and the Public in and to the petition site was acquired and is evidenced by:
ID No. 4424-808-0003-000/5
(Plat # and identification, Deed, or other title evidence)
recordedin: Plat Book 34 Page 5A of the Public Records of St Lucie Ctv.F1.
(Plat Book and Page, Deed Book and Page, or Official Record Book and Page)
Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida.
3. Attached hereto as (EXHIBIT "B") is a sketch, accurately drawn, depicting the petition site as described
in (EXHIBIT "A"), showing boundaries of abutting properties, any encroachments, drainage and/or utility
easements, any structures within the petition site, and property benefiting from the abandonment. A copy
of a portion of the appropriate tax map (8 % x 11), obtainable from the Property Appraisers Office, may be
used for this purpose.
4. Attached hereto as (EXHIBIT "C") is a location map which clearly and legibly identifies the location of
the petition site in relation to the nearest public right-of-way and all affected properties (properties within
a minimum 300 foot radius of the petition site). A copy of a portion of the appropriate tax map (8 %= x 11),
obtainable from the Property Appraisers Office, may be used for this purpose.
5. Attached hereto as (EXHIBIT "D") is a list of property owners, including correct mailing addresses,
property tax Identification number and legal descriptions of surrounding affected properties. (Note: County
Staff may request additional information if it is determined that the proposed abandonment could have a
negative effect on properties located more than 300 feet from the petition site.) 'N, P,
6. Attached hereto as (EXHIBIT "E") is a list of abutting property owners, including correct mailing
addresses, property tax Identification number and legal descriptions of the adjacent properties. Such owners
of abutting properties have signed a notarized statement consenting to the abandonment of public right-of-
way and such signed statements are attached hereto as (EXHIBIT "E-1" "E-211, etc.
7. Attached hereto as (EXHIBIT "F") consecutively numbered "F-1" "F-2", etc., the signed consent of
any affected utility providing service to or within the petition site and/or drainage district having jurisdiction
over the petition site. v3 \ e,
8. The Petitioner hereb certifies that in the event this petition is granted, the abandonment of the public right-
of-way will not prevent other property owners from access to and from their property, and no other property
owner in the vicinity will be adversely affected. v C
9. The Petitioner hereby, certifies that the petition site is not a right-of-way which is part of or used for any
an
State of Federal highway purposes; and that such right-of-way is under the trodiction of the
St. Lucie County Board of County Comrmssioners.V5
10. The Petitioner hereby es that the petition site is not a public accessway to any publicly acce
certifissible
waters in the County, or that if the petition site proposed to be abandoned does provide such access,
Petitioner hereby offers to trade or give the County co arable land or lands necessary for public access
to the same body of water. L. �2_ —ram
11. The petitioner hereby certifies that petitioner is the owner of property underlying or adjacent to the
Co untypetition
site as evidenced by an instrument recorded in Official Record BookAW _, o
Florida, a copy of which is attached as (EXHIBIT
12. The petitioner hereby certifies that all property taxes upon the Petition site, or petitioner's property adjacent
to the petition site, are paid and current, or exempt from taxation, and a copy of a paid tax bill or statement
of the County Tax Collector is attached hereto as (EEXHIBIT "H").
13. The Petitioner hereby certifies: (CIRCLE "a" OR "b" BELOW)
a) that the petition site to be abandoned is NOT within the limits of any municipality, OR
b) that the petition site to be abandoned lies within the corporate limits of
and attached is their resolution of abandonment of the petition site as (EXHIBIT "I" ).
14. The Petitioner hereby submits a statement (EXHIBIT "J") in support of this petition which states
Petitioner's reasons for requesting the abandonment and the use to which the Petitioner intends for the land.
15. Petitioner hereby certifies that a NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE A PETITION FOR
ABANDONMENT has been published once weekly for two (2) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of
general circulation in the County. The name of the newspaper and dates of publication are as follows: (�
v . 1ca „ �
(Name of newspaper in which Notice of Intent was published`` J Wd.;A
(First date published) (Second date published)
A COPY OF THE PROOF OF PUBLICATION SHALL BE ATTACHED TO THIS PETITION AS
(EXHIBIT "K").
NOTICE TO PETITIONER: IF THE ABANDONMENT REQUESTED REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING
PURSUANT TO LAW, PETITIONER SHALL BE GIVEN NOTICE TO POST A SIGN (17" x 24" OR 17"
x 1711) UPON THE PETITION SITE IN A CONSPICUOUS AND EASILY VISIBLE LOCATION,
ABUTTING A PUBLIC THOROUGHFARE, WHEN POSSIBLE, AT LEAST TEN (10) DAYS PRIOR TO
THE PUBLIC HEARING GIVING NOTICE OF THE TIME AND DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE PETITION TO ABANDON OR VACATE.
'.Aw
.Mw
THIS PETITION MUST BE EXECUTEEDj BEFORE A NOT Y PUBLIC
DATE: /i -/>
Petitioner's signature
P
Type or print Petitioner's name
rfie
Petitioner's Address
5�a1— �� --z3S— c) L�
Petitioner's Phone Number
COUNTY OF ! u ✓G�
STATE OF
Before me this day personally appeared tl! Gz t �'.� who, being duly swam, deposes and
says:
Thatis(are) the Petitioner(s); and,
That all of the representations and information provided in the petition is true and accurate to the best of Petitioner's
knowledge, information and belief.
Subscribed and swom to (or affirmed) before me this day of C•C , 20cck by
who personally appeared before me and
_2who is personally known to me.
_ whose identity I proved on the basis of
_ whose identity I proved on the oathlaffirmation of
. a credible witness
KRVNE SOLLOCH
Notary Public - State of Florida
My Commission Expires Jul 5, 2003
Commission. # CCS51910
Notary Public
u
70;
of Commencement Lot 8
west Corner, Lot 8
R=25.00 Point of Beginning
L=23.18 o Z5 15 30 60
Tan=12.50 R=625.00'
42" Graphic Scale 1 Inch = 30 Ft.
L—
1=53'07'48" —
Chord-22.36 Tan=3.23' R=50.00'
Ch. Brg.=S83'08'38"E /G=14'42'17" L=90.03'
�� SS6 •r
\ \ 9 0rom
ge
�ZZ:: /P
�L
SO,
/ O ,V
O0*&<f-4 A
'9 q
r e
/ �♦. �7olbsP
Ch.=6.40 Tan=63.04
Ch. 8rg.=N62'56'19"E 6-103'09'47"
Ch.=78.35'
Ch. 8rg.=S72'49'56"E
laxisting
15' D.E.
& L.A.E.
Legal Description
A parcel of land, lying in Lot 8, Eventide - Unit Two, as recorded in Plat Book 34, Page 5A of the Public Records of St.
Lucie County, Florida, more particularly described as follows:
Commence at the Southwest comer of said Lot 8, thence S 56034'44" E for 57.75 feet to the point of curvature of a curve,
concave to the North, having a radius of 25.00 feet; thence Easterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
53`07'48" for 23.18 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence continue along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
1404217" for 6.42 feet to a point of reverse curvature of a curve, concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 50.00 feet;
thence Easterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 103009'47" for 90.03 feet; thence S 39006'30" W for
13.27 feet; thence N 7W20'05" W for 49.56 feet; thence N 56`34'44" W for 29.60 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing an area of 1,918 square feet or 0.044 acres.
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that this Legal Description Sketch meets the minimum technical standards set forttyby the Florida Board of
Professional Surveyors and Mappers, in Chapter 61 G1 7-6, Florida Administrative Code, pursu to Section 472.027,
Florida Statutes.
Amm, mc.
P.O. Box 1500. Stuart, FL 34995-1500
2440 S.E. Federal Highway, Suite 700, Stuart, Florida 34994
(561)288-4880
Registration No. LB 5715
This is Not a S
Signed:
Eric K. Holly
Professional Surveyor and Mapper
Florida Registration No. LS 3336
Date: September 8, 2000
aigcrec Far.
Eventide Property Owners Association, Inc.
Proposed Easement Abandonment
Sketch W Le l 0.P6
\.r
'.W
EXHIBIT "B"
Draw an accurate sketch of the petition site and abutting properties,
if applicable, or attach a Boundary Survey (preferred)
l
� I
LEGAL DESCRIPTION' LOT 8, EVENTIDE - UNIT TWO
ACCORDING TO THE PUT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOON 34 PAGE(S) 5A OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. SAID LANDS LYING IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
u s MEMEOI "IlW Mar AWT6ACTm ITT 91E 9WMrM TOI RaTo-v-ur A1O/OI EAmlan v REmm a on6Tms.
>. MIE JIM) OE9RWT101 AIa a Ts 9IOYEI N INI ARE N MSOI6 IT, THE p Ilm rRR 6Y nlE anrt.
1 RAMIIp METG TIT D[ PUT .. «. 0M 9 Noun.
A ALL 0lTNMY.6/AMiti NE m PUT NI = 0T 91p6W.
1 RMf 9AREY fM'ES MOT RETLER A Q(TETIIMIIE p6NIX
l IIIp[ WT f. MODTY MTSIKlIO1y M TAME MOi REfplpFy pI d15 q r I r Wr ME T6p W 1ME
n MEMaa s 1411 canrv.
>. E AT s 9MiM AAL .s9am "TIRI lRAE56 OnrMWSE surzTa
6 ltcp! m -AE- (ELEV. 7) 12111 C 0410 F 8-19-91
umn
e-mn
o-mnomE ra
(�}ra rur
rwralr v awet
r>.�voi nm
�m
�l-A<�ILaM
w vA+WMr
rgINM11f OIAC
{'t""r.a+m
At fYMAAD
nMr.nwe
FItlI PR
4-fMC AAddS
MMi
)i_iC IQ f®
lC IOYI V mft•!Y
6MYAilM
AY-IdYNldi ilOGdfi
MA616T M W
r611a(A W
Vly11YR fAtllOir
CL-61Y�4i Ntypll
TipII (I QWARY(
•/Fp�i O Ml
/(A[♦ ry(
r4Yd
�ap,a yi
MFOrd
WMYdt
rLLlAlr R M'ylRal6
IIOMti MO C•'L 4-41OI W
YIL-MM Ylr{II
NO YWf
NA �Id
a -aria. eot
(LIRA V[ O.tl�O
Gr r.-TNML nsswa
LOT 7
RD. P.R.L.
P.S.L. 133336
FIL R!O
LB #1675
0
1. � W.
N. R&C SET #5 RK
us/M75 n � P.SM. Al TRAM •A•
)p. C '^ 0 6.36
y� 01'SY m¢ v aria
LOT 17 4 FO. RK
b`> P.SL "a,o LOT e
LOT 9
yJsjy
u] a
VACANT
I s
o
-
o�
a-
/ AdO. pp
Ten�2T>00
Oal Lo�l l4-0J
�O
\I
MlM4 IIIt dE
�
r�wu 6RNMi4 A N� usodr
u
10' U.E.
—
R0. R`C
I__ 184AX S58'34'44'E (P)
1--- _ ¢ M axw• M PA1 _ �
n rcr, I6a>r M ul1Yp•)
n ru.
r wun a o
£VENTIOE PUCE
W6 Ul IT BEAR6 TK 94NANRE AIa
ME 6RIONAL RN= YH 6 A ANO M.YP(A
B
OAT - ✓�'IBG
ATLANTIC LAND DESIGN,
INC.
I01AR0 .
st A REGISTRATION NO. nee
Le NO. 5572
PROFESSIONAL LINO SUROEYING
SM140MY SURVEY 5-18-00
xe NUMB
M7 A1L.W1K METIIIE
PORT sr. u= R. PIGDE ft Ji65a
WA,, KE
PE -IN SURVEY Y
00-184
(W) 6T-116! (91) NYc=i
(W) 56M-1126
AC-dm T am V Y
*MW
M
EXHIBIT "C"
Sketch or attach a location map here
N
a ,
- v i
v a m I II'
m r
m
e cQAST \V Jack
SQUARE >& Wi{{i!
19
etia River Shores
o plantation
_ m=
0
17
20
29
yes a ine
PEvElaRCtS "^t^` "„ k' '-\�II�43 ucetail Ridge
?�?'-- / O er. a —
�
5
d v n u 25 Srata E o` h
`O
1POINT' �" ; P1, pp t art Dr.
1 - Hur,�,kPoq��no� Parll� F�tk
:.•`�Wide Waters � o s
q Ldtnabaut Ln. ? ( Ansel
Q "\ saes e
�� . at ear o 36
LIM
.✓
EXHIBIT "D"
(list of adjacent property owners)
and Address
Tax I. D. Number and Pro e Le al Description
4424-807-0003-00012
M!t
e143
Eventide Unit One Lot 1 (OR 750-332)
Leonard W. & Erin K. Poger
4424-807-0004-00019
8072 SE Peppercorn Court
Eventide Unit One Lot 2 (OR 1232-2482)
Hobe Sound, FL 33455
Derek J. & Diana L. Gallagher
4424-807-0005-000/6
6501 Spartina Circle
Jupiter, FL 33458-1811
Eventide Unit One Lot 3 (OR 1235-0123)
Allan J. &Lori A. Birnbaum
4424-807-0006-00013
3088 SW Wimbledon Terr.
Palm City, FL 34990-2309
Eventide Unit One Lot 4 (OR 1260-1463)
Ronald R. & Judith C. Brown
4424-807-0007-000/0
1302 Crown Court
Bloomington, IL 61704-8000
Eventide Unit One Lot 5 (OR 1086-2660)
Gail W. Schamback
4424-807-0008-000/7
821 East Ocean Boulevard
Eventide Unit One Lot 6 (OR 1048-233:1271-1403)
Stuart, FL 34994-2427
Patricia Derubertis
4424-807-0009-000/4
3300 Eventide Place
Stuart, FL 34994-9143
Eventide Unit One Lot 7 (OR 1035-1707)
Beatrice F. Corace
4424-808-0003-000/5
3301 Eventide Place
Stuart, FL 34994-9143
Eventide Unit Two Lot 8
Joseph F. & Lorraine E. Conrad
4424-808-0004-000/2
3304 Eventide Place
Stuart, FL 34994
Eventide Unit Two Lot 9 (OR 1285-2077)
Beatrice F. Corace
4424-808-0005-000/9, 4424-808-0006-000/6, 4424-808-0007-00013,
3301 Eventide Place
4424-808-0008-000/0
Stuart, FL 34994-9143
Eventide Unit Two Lots 10, 11, 12 and 13
l R. & Linda L. Ronk
4424-808-0009-000/7
E Eagle Drive
Eventide Unit Two Lot 14 (OR 1257-1625)
. Lucie, FL 34984
PEdwin
J. & Rose M. Wasielewski
4424-808-0010-000/7
107 S. Shore Road
Eventide Unit Two Lot 15 (OR 1166-764)
Stuart, FL 34994-9131
Beatrice F. Corace
4424-808-0011-000/4
3301 Eventide Place
Eventide Unit Two Lot 16
Stuart, FL 34994-9143
4424-808-0012-000/1
Lucille H. Weil
1059 N. Jamestown NE Apt. H
Eventide Unit Two Lot 17 (OR 901-101)
Decatur, GA 30083
Eventide Property Owners Assn.
4424-808-0002-000/8
3300 Eventide Place
Dedicated as per Plat
Eventide Unit Two Lake (1.49 AC) ( P )
Stuart, FL 34994-9143
NOTE: ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS AS NECESSARY.
IMPORTANT: IN ANY PROCEEDING WHICH REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING, PETITIONER SHALL PROVIDE PRE -
STAMPED, PRE -ADDRESSED ENVELOPEAND CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPTS TO ST. LUCIE COUNTY WHICH
WILL BE USED TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING TO EACH OF THE ABOVE PROPERTY
OWNERS.
5T. LUCiE CO. RTTORNEW 'x:561-46=-1440 Jan 10 18.11 P.04
EXHIBIT "D"
AFFIDAVIT OF CON .SF.NI
COUNTY OF rly 19
STATE OF 1
Beforc me this day personally appe
ared �e0�t,��1't'�� •f �/L/n/ vG�i2 w,ho
being duly sworn, deposes and says:
_ia(are) the owners) of:
"OIE, Vrv�-C o�F 33o3S'Ec JCAr�,
(legal description of propertvl
That �G have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the Plat, easement or right-of-way
to be abandoned and its relationship toOL& property.
That 6� e-hereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is adjacent to my
property. as described above, on the (check one) North— South —East 'west.
�i/L being duly sworn by rite, declares
that the aboveiforegoing statement is true and correct to the best of hisiber/their knowledge and
believe.
Si scribed and s% o to r affirmed) bef rem this�L day of January, 2001, by
who personally appeared before me and
who is persorally kno%vu to me
_ NN hose identity I proved on the basis of
_ whose identity 1 proved ort the oativaffinnation of
a credible witness
y�w��y�ppq'{{{4///f�, STEPHANIE E. MORGAN 'otary Public
MY COMMISSION N CC SM36
�Ol n 8 EXPIRES: On 13.'AW
140D3 TAR Fla. Navy Sanity S Bapfnp Co.
164W N"00
T. LU-JE CO. 'RTTOR�IE'{ :5h�1-- -1440 Jan 10 lg:il F.04
EXHIBIT "D"
AFFIDAVIT OF CONSF,NT
COUNTY OF SILJ � �
STATE OF
who,
Before me this day personally appeared
ere -.-n � a� �
bcin; duly sworn, deposes and says:
-*are) the owner(s) of. �{ i � Q f ^ N -
3 z � '�.1 e. nJ �, lJ
(legal description of property)
That W,-have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the Plat, easement orright-of-way
to be abandoned and its relationship to bn-_ ProPerty.
Thatk-,C�2 hereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is ak jacent to my
Property. as described above. on the (check one) >E North _ South _East _ West -
being dilly Sworn by me, declares
that the above: foregoing statement t is true and correct to the best of nisiheritheir knowledge and
believe.
J„o, Heather lanes
*p,�n�} *My Commission CC8323&1
o;ry , Expires May 3.2003
to
me this k d of January, 2001, by
who personally appearedjetore rile aud'
J who is personally k.1lo%y'tl to me
_ ,those identity t proved on the Basis of _
_ hose identity 1 proved on the oath/affinnation of
a credible witness
M!"'NAWIMM",
1% W :55 - --140 J,an Ili 1� :1 ! F. 04
J. UJCIE t=Li. ATT0PNE`f 1-i b_
EXHIBIT "D"
AFFIDAVIT OF CONSENT
C0UTNTY OF « vc E
STATE OF L� Q _
�� .� .,,, eared l�t'•1�0 i� �-t2LolJ'1'�u.41.'�C /�le.�r^�`h,,
Before me this ...y pe...o..�lly app
being duly sWom, deposes and says:
is(are) the owner(s) of: � Cr CUEj J�f ! U&rrr 1
(legal desc in'ian of property)
That have been furnished a drawing A hick clearly indicates the Plat, easement orright-of H ay
to be abandoned and its relationship to 6UP--Pr0perty.
That hereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is adjacent to my
property, as described above, on the (check one).Notth _South _ East _ West.
being duly scorn by me, declares
that the aboveiforeeoing statemertt is true and correct to the best of his'her;their knowledge and
believe..
and
r
affirmed) before me this _-( day of January, 2U01, by
who personally appeared h fore me and
Zhu is personally knoNN 11 to the
_ whose identity I proved on the basis of _
_ %chose identity 1 proved on the oath'afhnnation of
a credible ,vittiess
Notarv'bMUAL SEAL•
Dana R. Childress
Notary Public, State of Illinois
My Commission Expires 5114/03
`W
ST. LUCIE CO. ATTORNEY x:551-46"?-1[147 Jan P. ll:� 1311
EXHIBIT "D"
AFFIDAVIT OF CO\SENT
COT-NTY OF << — �ljc-t �
STATE OF r— `
Beforc me this day personally appeared �.%
being duly sworn, deposes and says:
IE
(2—_ is(are) the ow`npr(s)� 33 i � � v �.1'SC t a3 94 �
(leeal description of property)
That have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the PP L urt oy rig
t-o Uay`
to be abandoned and its relationship to ��roperty. F
That �ereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is adjacent to my
property, as described above, on the (check one) North _ South East _ West.
•\ 1 c �%_ _, being duly srvonr by me, declares
that the abovef oregoing statement is true and correct to the best of his:ber,their knowledge and
believe.
i
Subscribed and sworn to (oAaftirmed) before me this! 11day of January, ZOUI, by
who personally appeared before me and
_ , ho is personally lilown to me
_ whose identity I proved on the basis of
whose identity 1 proved on the oativaffinnation of
a credible witne's
Y'aP., tldrber n#J. 9. OSo
_Cg�es
;.oe Boud Co.. CIr
acaorc 5oaai2a rotary public
14W v -
�:.T. LUCIE CE1. WTOPNE"( t561-U6z-144u Jan lU 18 11 F. Cu
EXHIBIT "D"
AFFIDAViT OF CONSFNT
COUNTY OF S_� i vc
STATE OF _ � L ,
Beforc Ine this day personally ap
being duly sworn, deposes and says:
j S are) the owner(s) of:
�-�� �`�, l 0 UNIT ;� lOb t
C! 1
(legal descriP`ion oFPtoPerty)
That Jj_ have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the Plat, easement or right -of H ay
to be abandoned and its relationship to 2_�V-property.
That y hereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is adjacent to my
property, as described above, on the (check one) — North X, South _ East 4 West.
being dUh' Sworn by one, declares
that the above.%foregoin_v, statement is true and correct to the best of his•lherrtheir know ledge and
believe.
Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me thi d v of
who personally appeared before m'
o is personally known to me
_, hasz identity [ proved on the Basis of
_ whose identity 1 proved oil the oath affirmation of
a credible witness
p```r°°°y BARBARAAIIE CY Notary
MY COMMISSION CC 7172
o�r�p�P EXPIRES: y5, 2002
t E063NOTRRY Fls Nary SrNa 6 0ontirg Co.
* i
%M, ..s-
ST. LJCIE CO. aTTGRt Ei r ax :561-46'-144tJ Jan 10 ' u -
EXHIBIT "D"
AFFIDAVIT OF C0ISENT
COUNTY OF S--� I�vcv E
18:1, 0.04
STATE OF V 1=
`'/i �Glrf �. %�1� who,
Beforc me this day personally appeared
being duly sworn, deposes and says:
15 is(are) the owner(s) of:
EVEN-�IbE, UN11 '�')
(legal description of property)
1—OZ � 1�
` Sfi t✓ cv. �� r � �.�� �
That have been furnished a dralvine which clearly indicates the Plat, easetnent or right-of-way
to be abandoned and its relationship to 2�y— property.
That = hereby consent to the abamdonment ofthe described petition site w-hich is adjacent to my
property, as described above -on the (check one) _ North 7� South _ East JC West.
being duly swom by me, declares
that the aboveiforeeoing statement is true /fi `z and correct to the best of�his:her-their knowledge and
believe. /' 'eL
Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me this'd5 day of January, Zt}t)1 • bYYnIQe
IM
?may 16?, *. -.
� N
MCC 664646 ' o
y appeared before me and
h ersonally knOW11 to me
_« oup_
✓ whose identity I proved on the basis of r•Lc.
_ c hose identity 1 proved on the oath'affinnation of
a credible witness
Notary ublic
l~
T. LUCiE rp. ATTQRME'�W .x:561-46 -1440 Jan Yy� 18:11 P.04
EXHIBIT ' U'
AFFIDAVIT OF C'IKN `T
COUNTY OF �vC-15
STATE Or — 1 —.
BeCorc me this day personally appeared O S 2. was t� rho,
being duly scorn, deposes and says:
*are) the owner(s) of: ��-� � 'ZI \j
(legal description of nropertv)
ThafjL�have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the Plat, easement or right-of-way
to be abandoned and its relationship toC�)o 02 property.
ThatW& hereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is adjacent to my
property, as described above. on the (check one) — North _ South — East -Y\tiVest.
tieing duly sworn by me, declares
that the above foreeoing statement is true and correct to die best of itisPoerftheir knowledge and
believe.
Subscribed
who personally
sworn to (or affirmed) before me this, LrKdv of Janua , 2001, by
r-'z
appeared before me and
xwho is personally known to me
_ •x hose identity I proved on the Basis of
_ whose identity 1 proved on the oativaffinnation of
a credible witness
pf r�Q SHEFiI L INGALLS •
Mrcomm. tatarzooz Irotary Public
vueuc No. CC 758207
Yi eaamyN WwxI I ('W. I.O.
1�r
T. L!CIE CO. RTTURNEY :561-4h' 18-1440 Ja.n liT� 11 P.04
EXHIBIT "D"
AFFIDAVIT OF CONSENT
COLNTY OF V-
STATE OF t ll
Before me this day personally appearedc� cQT 21 C t2 R� —who,
d ses and says:
being duly SWOM, epo.
U tv "7 1 �' 01
Ev E �iDi
Sty. is(are) the owners) of:
G �-' � t � "-I- t n
D C- U ti'rt Z
5tu Pr>Z71-1
�—oAS ':j\O, \ \ t t--, , ik�
(legal description of property)
That have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the Plat, easement or right-of-way
to be abat:dened aad its relationship to property.
That � hereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is adjacent to my
property, as describeedt above, on the (check one) _�L North _ South _✓" East y, West.
being duly sworn by me, declares
that the aboveiforego;ng statement is true and correct to the best of hisrher/their knowledge and
believe.,
and sworn to (or affirmed) before me this Z day of January, 2001, by
,ems C a c -
who personally appeared before me and
_ who is personally ktiown to me
whose identity I proved on the Basis of t
_ whose identity 1 proved on the oath/affinnation of
a credible witness � � ,+
DEMELSMVIN
.= NotayAtbic-61 c1FMido Notary Public
�MyOormtlonICI
Ca MMOn f cCtert O
tee.
� T. LUCIE CO. RTTORNE'r x561-4b2-1140 Jsn 10� 1811 P.04
EXHIBIT "D"
AFFIDAVIT OF CONHNT
COUNTY OF —S Svc � tr
STATE OF
Before me this day personally appeared ^ 9 l ^^ �- L U C \l\2 W e ,1 who,
being duly sworn, deposes and says:
*zi* the owner(s) of: ` S .Shoro-� .
aVc�T�\,�c, Vtv�,C CI�o.S�vorrt 3y`
(legal description of pro erty
-25'
That have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the Plat, easement or right-of-way
to be abandoned and its relationship to property.
�n m
That whereby consent to the abandonm nt of the described p tition site which is adjacent to
property. as described above, on the (check one) _ North _ South — East -2�" West. `
being duly sworn by me, declares
that the above: foregoing statement is true and correct to the best of his,,her/their knowledge and
believe.
Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed)
1 „ci,1\.c A- —U30 1
;1.
me this I Ll day of Janua , 2001, by
who personally appeared before nie and
_ who is personally known to me
whose identity I proved on the basis of 1 �+k04 30 28
_.chose identity I proved on the oat
a credible witness
x NAOIRA M1 CXAMMEO
='' MY COM1.0-10.I'c6666950
c
ER91flE5: Jury 26. 2001
6ande0 Tin Notar/ Pudic Uncerwntem
EXHIBIT "E"
(list of abutting property owners)
EXHIBIT "E
(attach one for each abutting property owner)
AFFIDAVIT OF CONSENT FROM ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNER
COUNTY OF " r• L')Jle
STATE OF FLD)�-� tyA
Before me this day personally appeared '20�ri Ci a Ut41_ J)CfW6&-Mtho, being duly swom, deposes and
says:
is(are) the owner(s) of:
LOT rJ Of-- E06-P T7 D&
aA)1T 01.E67
(legal description of property)
That I have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the Plat, easement or right-of-way to be
abandoned and its relationship to 14q property.
That 1 hereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is adjacent to my property, as
described above, on the (check one) ,_ North X South _ East _ West.
being duly sworn by me, declares that the
above/foregoing statement is true and correct to the best of h(is/h /their knowledge and believe.
�J �,G�i IiC 'AL
Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me this day of , 2000 • by Pc'� i C i c-
L DE20 Eiz-n5 who personally appeared
before me and
_who is personally known to me.
-Zwhose identity I proved on the basis of
_ whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of
a credible witness /
CV
ra79�"ZM O Aw Notary PublicQ10"
2,.�vcp,cd
*Are
..+
EXHIBIT "E - _tf
(attach one for each abutting property owner)
COUNTY OF
STATE OF V
eared P e, I/ l o rrG r who, being duly sworn, deposes and
Before me this day personally appeared C�or7 ra(zJ
says:
is(are) the owner(s) of: �
q
(leg -al description o\fyr\oneDIII
That WQ- have been furnished a drawing which clearly indicates the Plat, easement or right-of-way to be
abandoned and its relationship to O� R- property.
That LU e- hereby consent to the abandonment of the described petition site which is adjacent to my property, as
described above, on the (check one) _ North _)�, South_ East _ West.
rrG eat2? �� being duly sworn by me, declares that the
abovelfor going statement is true and correct to the best of hisirer/thy edge and believe.
before me s�`� day ofOc I 2g0o,by
sworn to (or affirmed) , W who personally appeared
before me 9nd
_ who is personally known to me.
whose identity I proved on the basis of 6 rr LfL S �icEi/s
_ whose identity I proved on the oathlaffirmation of
a credible witness
•v _
P0l, RY ID 4t.r 404018
cv Do Q 7I'll M?
1%W
EXHIBIT 11F -
(Consent letter from affected utility company)
DATE 11-2s-60
UTILITY. COMPANY �)
ADDRESS
CITY, STATE]2IP
RE: Petition to Abandon/Vacate
(Description of Petition Site enclosed)
To Whom It May Concern:
Please consider this letter as our request for a LETTER OF NO OBJECTION to the abandonment of the above
referenced site.
Enclosed for your review is a copy of the sketch and description of the site proposed to be abandoned. A self-
addressed envelope is also enclosed for your reply.
If you have any questions or if I may be of further assistance, please contact me at
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
(Petitioner or agent)
Enc. Petition site sketch and description.
Consent as requested x_
Consent vAth the following
Consent Refused
Date:
Authorized presentafnv
09
BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.
3300 Okeechobee Road
Room 213
Fort Pierce, FL 34947-4552
Dec.1, 2000
Beatrice Corace
3301 Eventide Pl.
Stuart, Fl. 34994
RE: Petition to abandon/vacate easement
Lot 8 Eventide Place S/D
® BELLSOUTH
Billie C. Greenlief
General Manager -Network Operations
Indian River Division
561 468-9970
Fax 561 466-4705
Dear Ms. Corace,
BellSouth has no objection to the abandonment of the utility easement right-of-way as
described herein: that portion containing .04 acres located in the southeast comer of lot
8, Eventide Place S/D, Section 24, Twp. 37, Rng. 40, St. Lucie County
If we can be of further assistance, please call Gary TefB at (561) 468-5512
Sincerely,
�
S$kBillie C. Greenlief
General Manager — Network Operations
Indian River Division
Florida Power & Light Company, 1050 S.E. Brandon Cir., Port St. Lucie, FL 34952
0
FPL
November 30"', 2000
Beatrice Corace
Eventide Property Owners Association, Inc.
3301 Eventide Place
Stuart, Fl. 34994
RE: Abandonment of Easement at SE comer of lot 8, Eventide Place, St. Lucie County.
To Whom it may concern:
Florida Power & Light has no objection to the abandonment of the previous utility easement located
along the SE comer of lot 8 bordering the current 10' utility easement off Eventide Place. We have
no facilities within this portion of said previous utility easement.
If I can be of further assistance, please contact me at (561) 337-7011.
Sincerely, /J�
Rob Morris
FPL Construction Service Designer
an FPL Group company
1%w
EXHIBIT "G"
Proof of ownership of petition site or adjacent benefiting property
Attached Warranty Deed
1127260
SPDZIAL WIPAANry DFM
yLIS SPECIAL acrWA.RPAmN D® made this � day of �G� 3991,
by r:rc-rs«� UVELO gg2a' INC., a Florida corpora having its
principal place of business d 200 Albany Avenue, Start, Florida 34994
(trreinafter called the 'Grantor'), to BFAnUCE F. WRALE whose mailing
addresa is 119 South Shore ?cad, Stuart, Florida 34994 (hereinafter
called the 'Grantee').
(Whenever used herein the terms 'Grantor' and *Grantee' include all
the part a to this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives and
assigns of individuals, and the successors and assigns of corporations).
WITTIFSSERI: 12at the Granter, for and in oasideration o{ the sou of
•ren Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the
receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, by these
presents does hereby grant, bargain, sell, alien, remise, release,
convey and confirm wito the Grantee, all that certain land sib.ate in
St. Lucie County, Florida, Mre Particularly described in ''xhrbit 'A'
attached hereto and incorporated herein ('Property').
TO HAVE AND TO KILD, the same in fee single foremr.
TLX VER with all tenements, heredltamena and apprr-�-tAnces,
thereto belonging or in anywise appertalnlng.
This conveyance is subject to the matters set forth on Exhibit '3'
attached hereto and incorporated herein. The transfer effectuated by
this Special Warranty Deed is strictly subject to that certair. Mortgage
Deed dated May 25, 1990 by Grantor In favor of Beatrice F. Corace
I*Corace'1, recorded in Official Pewrds Book 692, Page 2307, Public
Peoords of St. Lucie County, Florida Ithe 'Curace Mortgage'), and the
per,
-�.es speoifically intend that the acceptance of this Special Warranty
Lead by the Grantee shall not constitute a merger of the fee si�le
title with the Corace Mortgage or any security or other docvoent
executed in connection herewith.
The Grantor does hereby covenant with the Grantee that, except_ as noted
above, at the time of delivery of this Special Warranty Deed the
Property was free front all enc brances made by the Grantor, and that
the Grantor does fully warrant title to the Property and will defend the
same against the Lawful claims and denu As of all persons claiming by,
through and under the Grantor, but against none other.
PnprW B2 Wdtzr Ta ,�y00.OV
Aryan@Hough. P.A. �Y 5o Id_i.t1'.k
Ste 211
Sr...r LL 1%W
O;JI; '13J2
V
EXHIBIT "H,o
Certification of taxes paid on petition site or adjacent benefiting property
Paid by Beatrice Corace 11/30/99
\r
EXHIBIT ?TV
Resolution of Abandonment by Municipality
(Only if petition site is within a municipality)
rn�w�C.��Q1���
%W EXHIBIT 11 P *104
Petitioner's statement in support of granting petition
0O rA 10,,,.E o� \ 1 rc y zl
�S No longer required — Lot to be used for Home
STUART NEWS
.� PORT ST. LUCIE NEWS
(an edition of the Stuart News)
Martin County and St. Lucie County, Florida
1939 S. Federal Highway, Stuart, FL 34994
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MARTIN; COUNTY OF ST. LUCIE
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared, Mary T. Byrne, who on oath says that she is Classified
Legal Advertising Representative of the Stuart News and the Port St. Lucie News, a daily newspaper published at
Stuart in Martin County, Florida: that the attached copy of advertisement was published in the StuarUPort St.
Lucie News in the following issues below. Affiant further says that the said Stuart/Port St. Lucie News is a
newspaper published in Stuart in said Martin County, Florida, with offices and paid circulation in Martin Ceunty
and St. Lucie County, Florida, and that said newspapers have heretofore been continuously published in
said Martin County, Florida, daily and distributed in Martin and St. Lucie County, Florida, for a period of one year
next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that she has
neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the
securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. The Stuart News has been entered as second
class matter at the Post Offices in Stuart, Martin County, Florida and Ft. Pierce, St. Lucie County,
Florida and has been for a period at one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement.
Ad # Date Copyline
2061554 01/17/2001 INTENT TO ABANDON
01/24/2001 INTENT TO ABANDON
Subscribed and sworn to me before this date:
01/24/2001
Notary P.up4MERINEHUDSON
Notary Public, State of Florida
My Comm. etip. Apr. 19. 2004
Comm. No. CC927458
PO Of
NOTICE OF INTENT
TO ABANDON
To whom it May Cancem:
You will take- moll" That In
accordance with the aravi-
slans of Secdono 177.101, as
amended 336.09 and
336.10, Florida Statutes, a
amended, and St. W.I.
County Land D.v.lopmnrt
Code, Section 11.10.01 eL
-seq., Be hrlt Ccrac. Intends
to file a peahen requesdng
that .thee. St. L.I. County
Board of County Cammb-
.lanen abaadoPa portion of
a -private dralnag. and
acns.. Bowmen✓ herelnalM
dewitied, and rertounn and
cilsslaim arty. right of St. Lucle,
Count' and the publlain ad
has Me lands lying wiMln Ihat
pdraan of sold private drain-
age and detest dwment in
St. Lucie County„ Florida,
described an Falowe,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
A Parcel at land, lying in Lot
8, Eventide, Unit 2, as
recorded in P.B. 34, Pg. 5A of
the Pub. Rec of St. Lucie Cy.,
FI. particularly described a
follows: Commences at the
S.W. corner of Lot 8; thence
S 56'34'44" E for 57.75' 1.
the Paint ofcurvalure of a
curve, concave to the North
having a radius of 25'; thence
Easterly along the arc of said
ctit'. through o central .,Is
of 53e07'48" far 23.1 a' to
the P.O.B.; thence continue
along the arc of said cu
through a cenhai angle of
14-42'I7' far 6.42' to a
Wirt of re a curvature of
a curve, concave to the S.W.
having a radius of 50" thence
.cored, along the arc of said
curve through a control angle
of 103°09'47" far 90.03';
thence 5 39e06'30" W far
13.27'; thence N 73'20'05"
W for 49.56'; thence N
S6e34'44" W For 29.60' to
the P.O.B. Containing an
area aF 1,918 q.ft. ar 0.044
Resentaces.
Conic. 3301 El -
Sh Eventid. e Place Pla
Shwrt, FL,34994
335-0314'
Pub.: Ian. 17\24, 2001
*4.
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): ENGINEERING DIVISION 4115
NOW
ITEM NO. 513
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [X]
CONSENT []
PRESENTED BY:
Donald B. We , P.E.
County Engineer
SUBJECT: Public hearing to review the application request of Howard Baggett for a Mining Permit
(Renewal).
BACKGROUND: The Howard Baggett mine is located in north -central St. Lucie County (S2/T35S/R39E)
just southwest of 1-95, north of Access Road, west of Rock Road and east of NSLRWCD C-41 Canal.
This 24.6 acre parcel has been mined since the original permit approval by the Board on December 7,
1976. Although the latest permit expired January 10, 2001, the permittee is requesting a renewal in his
mining operation which requires a public hearing. For additional background information see the
attached sheet. This request is to seek Board approval for a Class I mining permit for a period of six
years.
PREVIOUS ACTION:
December 7, 1976: Original mining permit approved by the Board for four years.
February 6, 1979: Permit issued for four years.
February 14, 1983: Permit issued for two years.
September 9, 1986: Permit issued for four years.
November 27, 1990: Permit issued for six years.
January 10, 1995: Permit issued for six years.
January 10, 2001: Permit expired.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Board approval of a Class I mining permit for six years to be
updated every 48 months subject to the following special conditions:
1. Hours of operation (including related activities such as loading, stockpiling, processing, etc...):
7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no operations on holidays (as observed
by St. Lucie County), or Sundays.
2. Dewatering is not approved as part of this permit.
3. A performance bond of $23,500 will be maintained.
4. Blasting is not approved as part of this permit.
5. The main stockpiling of materials shall be on the south side of the mining area but can be stored
on the west side or north side as mining proceeds to those areas.
6. All equipment, machinery and structures which are accessoryto mining shall be properly removed
from the site at the expiration of the permit.
7. Stockpiled material and haul roads shall be periodically watered down during dry and/or windy
conditions to minimize migration of sand, dust, or air contaminants to surrounding properties.
8, The permitte shall con6nbe to assist St. Lucie County with thl*r/aintenance of Access Road/Rock
Road.
9. As part of the reclamation phase, the permittee shall provide the County Engineer with an as -built
survey which includes, but is not limited to, water depths, setbacks, and cross -sections (200'
minimum). This survey shall be performed and certified by a Professional Land Surveyor. The
property lines shall be monumented.
10. Pursuant to Section 378.802, Florida Statutes, mine operator must notify the Executive Director
of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Mine Reclamation, Innovation
Park, 2051 East Dirac Dr., Tallahassee, Florida, 32310, (904) 488-8217 forany new surface area
disturbed.
11. Violations of the mining permit or mining plan are subject to permit revocation by the Board of
County Commissioners and/or subject to a fine of $250 per violation and an additional $100 per
day for each day that the violation is not brought into compliance.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[yj APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
[x]County Attorney
[x]Originating Dept. Public Works ��-
CoordlnatlonlSianatures
[ ]Community Dev.
[x]Co. Eng
> Anderson
Administrator
[ ]Property Acquisitions -
[]Finance Dept.
\rr No'
COMMISSION REVIEW: MARCH 6, 2001
Background:
On February 6, 2001, the Board authorized staff to schedule a public hearing on the above mining
application. Attached you will find a copy of the public notice advertised in the newspaper and the notice
mailed to the adjacent property owners.
The Howard Baggett mine is located in north -central St. Lucie County (S2/T35S/R39E) just southwest
of 1-95, north of Access Road, west of Rock Road and east of NSLRWCD C-41 Canal. This 24.6 acre
parcel has been mined since the original permit approval by the Board on December 7, 1976. Although
the latest permit expired January 10, 2001, the permittee is requesting a renewal of the mining operation
which requires a public hearing. Staff has reviewed this request and determined it to be complete.
Howard Baggett has requested the issuance of a Class I, six year permit, to continue mining within a 24.6
acre parcel containing sand type material. Hours of operation are proposed from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Saturday. Removal of the remaining overburden will be accomplished with pans and
loaders. Shallow excavation will continue to be accomplished with a dragline and loaders. A hydraulic
dredge will be used in deeper depths and material will be pumped into a settling basin on the south side
of the property where the material will settle out and overflow will be back to the mine. The main
stockpile will be on the south side of the mine, however, as mining progresses to the north some
stockpiling is proposed on the west and north side of the mine. A 150' setback will be maintained from
Access Road and the edge of water. Other setbacks include a 150' from I-95 on the northen property,
a 15' setback on the eastern property and a 65' setback on the western property near the NSLRWCD
C-41 canal. To minimize off -site impacts, a perimeter berm and swale system will be constructed.
Approximately450,000 cubic yards of material is available for mining while approximately 500,000 cubic
yards of material has been extracted from the mine to date. Over the next six years it is anticipated that
an annual sand output of approximately 75,000 cubic yards will be maintained. The existing haul road
will be utilized with access to Access Road, a dirt road, and east to Rock Road. The permittee has
previously been assisting the County with maintenance of this dirt road and has agreed to continue to
do so.
Reclamation has been ongoing and will be finished at the completion of mining or time of permit
expiration, whichever comes first. Disturbed areas, including the settling basin, will be graded and
seeded and mulched, side slopes will be graded (4:1) and final littoral zone planting will be accomplished.
All equipment, machinery and structures which are accessory to mining shall be properly removed from
the site.
A simple cost analysis was accomplished to estimate performance bonding requirements for this mining
operation. Typical construction tasks and associated unit costs were used in determining a bond amount
(see attached table). It is recommended that the bond amount be increased from $18,500 to $23,500;
to cover the additional expense of an "as -built" survey. To date, no complaints have been filed through
the Engineering Division regarding this mining operation. Mr. Baggett has recently fenced the site to limit
access and increase safety. Staff recently visited the site and found the existing operations to be in
conformance with the original permit issuance.
HOWARD BAGGETT.MINE
RECLAMATION COST ESTIMATE
Quantity
Unit
Unit Cost
Total Cost
1. Mobilization
1
LS
2,000
2,000
2. Regrade Slopes
2,500
LF
2.001LF
5,000
3. Seed & Mulch
40,000
SY
0.25/SY
10,000
4. Littoral Planting
1
LS
1,500
1,500
5. As -Built Survey
1
LS
5,000
5,000
$23, 500
`'••
NOW
.N
•1--r
E
i,
E
� C
(`�`�`�vJr(
LL
i L
Y
f l r
tl-
`
0
W
P
OV`tlYYtYpY 1, ,
1147
✓�t'yT`'�^
tii
y
�
19
y'
oaii'
�
ss
5
a
py-yB1YG-ypTly
`�
� � :�, � U�19'VWAWS
f
P
Q
. .OYOY NSC$NYY�
tl'` Otl YfJ
Jy'C� �J
l
~
Z
.EYtlV"ONYll130Y"
%Otl
tlVJa� \
O���OYOtiMLYisYJOXB
orou Pxs
—
r
P/Otl 3'JOIflY0tl1
a...—...._.__.._.,,_ aaY �i 3avru
`
U
j�
Cc
Y U
S
matl"jj'mMJ
!
tl3or3x
��- \
\\\\
r
/�
dYW U33M
' pVpy M11tlVJ
c
�
¢
re.J
MRJ
Z
W
SfF
Y
C
S tf
1
S SE 1
S 9f 1
AINf100
3300HO33NO
%,W
v
ry
m
N
m m
O O
O' 0I N
N N N N'Mm
N O
O
O
Om.O
N O
m O
Ol
O
O
M
mm.-�mq
V
V V
V N N V
q7.-9��n
N
m
rlr
m m mrn r
e r
r
�m
m
rn
p-a
o
m
a a
m rn
o r elr a
M m rnlm m
m a
m rn
v
m
m'o
rn m
M
c�
N M.m
M
v v
m M
m v alv
m MMm cyi
v a
m m
a
m
a m
m M
M
m J
J
J J
J J J J J
J'J
J
J J
J
NLL
LL
LL LLILL
LL LL LL�LL
LL LL
LL
LLLL
LL
N
N
N
N
a
m
vl
I
W
a
0
U LL
0
LL
0 0
LL LL
0 0 0 OiO
LL LL LL LL'.LL
O o
LL LL
o
LL
O10
LL LL
U
m
m
m
p
O
a
UI
'V
N
S2
Em
d
E'w
m y
JL
E pl
O)
E N
U
N T
m
s
E
V1
LL b
C
O
Z
o o
o
¢' a
m�
W
v
o m
m
o.m
o
m o
m
o o-
o
N
N
E
N
Z I
N
LL
N N
�
N p
C
O Y Y F Z
In
0
m �
Z ; �
N
N
J
I
O C
� I
Z.
LL
m❑ iof
c
W
2
T T N N ry C
E m c
Ow'
p
c
=
W W -tOiK mpH
E
E
m
c,
Z
o o O 10
a
Ia
O C
O
m m
O z t%1 m m_v1 fn � N''Y � F
VJ
Z m
in rnmo �nNv�r r as
Io 0 0 0 0 0 0 0',0 0 0
0
m
0 0
0
o,a o 0 0 0 0 00 0 0
0
0 0
0
n m'm o �n n o o m m o
OIL N'N N 0. N
E a 0 0
N
N in
O N
o
0
o o oo 0 00 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
0
0 0
0 0
0
Z N.NN MN mIN N m 0 0 0
0
❑^ N m m m m m m m
m
N N N N NIN N N N N N
M O O.O O OO O O O O O
N
O
m m
O O'.O
N N N
F N N N N N N N N N
N
N N
N
N m
V
N m
A
m
A10
^
Y i0
�
I
I
O
I
.3f -
Imo: $ • $ , x _j
a
m m MS7
r 1
z3oear
(2224bI0W0/6) m :'.-_ccc ucc -� --�a aro�jl
28.77 A a -, wn ra —
I
1113
I iY m mm (213-0W.
I I $ _ w �1fiLy •B• � o-a
jll m t�ahre
i atn wm
m w
I -
TRACT 'A' � —
.:
LAKE
0024 0023-
y$Sn..D.Wvt.E
2-09 & ' 000 ;
1 ' .iH. _.
iu I
T vn R.
1 a�� w
(312-0020000/7)
_--� 14.02 k
(342- ,COO/0
t9-61 A
rzrxmzcno/s(
67.39 A
-ROM
:✓
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners
of St. Lucie County, will at 7:00 P.M. (or as soon thereafter as
possible), on Tuesday, March 6, 2001, in the St. Lucie County
Administration Building, 3rd Floor Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue,
Fort Pierce, Florida, hold a public hearing on the petition of
Howard Baggett, to grant a mining permit on the following described
land in St. Lucie County, Florida, to wit:
MINING AREA
That part of the southwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 of section 2,
Township 35 South, Range 39 East, lying westerly and southerly of
Interstate 95 right-of-way;
AND that part of the northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 2,
Township 35 South, Range 39 East, more particularly described as
follows: From the southeast corner of the northwest 1/4 of the
southwest 1/4, run south 890-53'-47" west along the south line of the
northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4, 516.17 feet; thence north 000-111-
29" west 60 feet for the Point of Beginning. From said Point of
Beginning continue north 000-1l'-29" west to the southwesterly right-
of-way of Interstate 95; thence northwesterly on said right-of-way to
the north line of the northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4; thence west
on said north line to the easterly right-of-way of Canal No. 41 (by
occupation); thence southerly on Canal No. 41 right-of-way to a point
60 feet north of the south line of the northwest 1/4 of the southwest
1/4; thence north 89°-53'-47" east 822.18 feet to the Point of
Beginning, containing 24.64 acres more or less, and all being within
Section 2, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida.
The required mining plan is on file in the County Engineering
Division, Room 229, 2nd Floor Annex, St. Lucie County
Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce,
Florida.
All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be
heard at said hearing. Written comments received in advance of the
public hearing will also be considered.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUG'IE COUNTY
Frannie `Hutch 'nson, Chair
PUBLISH: February 17, 2001
PROOF AND BILL: Board of County Commissioners, St. Lucie County
%W
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
*no
February 15, 2001
PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
In compliance with the provisions of the St. Lucie County
Land Development Code, you are hereby advised that Howard Baggett,
has petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to review and
approve a mining permit for the following described property:
MINING AREA
That part of the southwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 2,
Township 35 South, Range 39 East, lying westerly and southerly of
Interstate 95 right-of-way;
AND that part of the northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 2,
Township 35 South, Range 39 East, more particularly described as
follows: From the southeast corner of the northwest 1/4 of the
southwest 1/4, run south 890-53'-47" west along the south line of the
northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4, 516.17 feet; thence north 000-111-
29" west 60 feet for the Point of Beginning. From said Point of
Beginning continue north 000-11'-29" west to the southwesterly right-
of-way of Interstate 95; thence northwesterly on said right-of-way to
the north line of the northwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4; thence west
on said north line to the easterly right-of-way of Canal No. 41 (by
occupation); thence southerly on Canal No. 41 right-of-way to a point
60 feet north of the south line of the northwest 1/4 of the southwest
1/4; thence north 890-53'-47" east 822.18 feet to the Point of
Beginning, containing 24.64 acres more or less, and all being within
section 2, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida.
A public hearing on the petition will be held at 7:00 P.M. (or
as soon thereafter as possible), on Tuesday, March 6, 2001, in the
St. Lucie County Administration Building, 3rd Floor Annex, 2300
Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida.
All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be
heard at said hearing. Written comments received in advance of the
public hearing will also be considered. If you have any questions,
please contact Donald B. West, P.E., County Engineer, at (561) 462-
1707.
Sincerely,
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
E�dhald B. West, County Engineer
JOHN D. BRUHN. District No. 1 . C000 COWARD, District No. 2 . PAULA A. LEWIS, Distdcr No. 3 • FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, Dlsrricr No. 4 • CLIFF BARNES Dlsrricr No. 5
Counry Admini5trotor - Douglos M. Anderson
2300 Virginia Avenue - -Fr. Pierce, FL 34982
Public Works: (561) 462-1485 • FAX (561) 462-2362
Division of Engineering: (561) 462-1707 Fox 462-2362 • Division of Rood G Bridge: (561) 462-2511 FAX 462-2363
Division of Solid Waste: (561) 462-1768 FAX 462-6987
Division of Building G Inspections: (561) 462-1553 Fox 462-1735 • TDD (561) 462-1428
Zoning
Evelyn Bagget
Minin Permit
Subject Parcel
o Community Development
Geographic Information Systems
Map prepared February 14, 2001
N
Land Use
w
Evelyn Baggt'tt
Tit
L N.S.LAZZ. Conot No. {} r
RS
Minin Permit
rA
—WA4d7PA
Subject Parcel
o�
A RS
-----------------------
�e Community Development
j Geographic Information Systems
• Map prepared February 14. 2001
Ri iryV Im Lwn miYivJ b Wti'Yphntip rA nYxeu P•M•� mM.
rMXY •qY Mbl lw Ewn nwY b Pa'W M ncq p•mlvtl mYe
XAmaML Y4.XY MXIwS4 busv•YWM XYWq mamy��
N
%W -A/
MARCH 6,200
7:00 PM
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS MEETING AGENDA
WELCOME
GENERAL RULES AND PROCEDURES
Attached is the agenda which will determine the order of business conducted at today's Board
meeting:
CONSENT AGENDA- These items are considered routine'and are enacted by one motion. There
will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS- Proclamations, Presentations, Public Hearings, and Department
requests are items which the Commission will discuss individually usually in the order listed on
the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARINGS- These items are usually heard on the first and third Tuesdays at 7:00 P.M. or
as soon thereafter as possible. However, if a public hearing is scheduled for a meeting on a second
or fourth Tuesday, which begins at 9:00 A.M., then public hearings will be heard at 9:00 A.M. or
as soon thereafter as possible. These time designations are intended to indicate that an item will
not be addressed prior to the listed time. The Chairman will open each public hearing and asks
anyone wishing to speak to come forward, one at a time. Comments will be limited to five
minutes.
As a general rule, when issues are scheduled before the Commission under department request
or public hearing, the order of presentation is: (1) County staff presents the details of the Board
item (2) Commissioners comment (3) if a public hearing, the Chairman will ask for public
comment, (4) further discussion and action by the Board.
ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION- Please state your name and address, speaking clearly into the
microphone. If you have backup material, please have eight copies ready for distribution.
NON -AGENDA ITEMS- These items are presented by an individual Commissioner or staff as
necessary at the conclusion of the printed agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENT- Time is allotted at the beginning of each meeting for general public comment.
Please limit comments to five minutes.
DECORUM- Please be respectful of others opinion.
MEETINGS- All Board meetings are open to the public and are held on the first and third Tuesdays
of each month at 7:00 P.M. and on the second and fourth Tuesdays at 9:00 A.M., unless otherwise
advertised. Meetings are held in the County Commission Chambers in the Roger Poitras
Administration Annex at 2300 Virginia Ave., Ft. Pierce, FL 34982. The Board schedules additional
workshops throughout the year necessary to accomplish their goals and commitments. Notice is
provided of these workshops. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this
meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (561) 462-1777 or
TDD (561) 462-1428 at least forty-eight(48) hours prior to the meeting.
n
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
www.stlucieco.gOV
h � '
• •
COR1
John D.0 Bruhn
Doug Coward
Paula A. Lewis
Frannie Hutchinson
Cliff Barnes
District
District 2
District
District 4
District
Comp Plan Public Hearing 4:00pm to 6:OOpm
AGENDA
March 6, 2001
7:00 P.M. /� 1
INVOCATION ^ C
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. MINUTES
Approve the minutes of the meeting held February 27, 2001.
2. PROCLAMATION/PRESENTATION
Resolution No. 01-72- Congratulating the New York Mets on winning the 2000
National Baseball League Championship, Welcoming the New York Mets back to St.
Lucie County, and Proclaiming March 6, 2001 as "New York Mets 2000 National
Baseball League Champions Day" in St. Lucie County, Florida.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
4. CONSENT AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
5A. Resolution No. 01-71 / Abandonment / Private Drainage and Access Easement /
Eventide Unit Two Subdivision - Consider staff recommendation to approve the
resolution, instruct staff to publish the final Notice of Abandonment, and record
the resolution, Proof of Publication of the Notice of Intent to Abandon, Proof of
--- -Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing, and Proof of Publication of the Notice
of Abandonment in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida.
NOTICE: All Proceedin s before this Board are electronically ues
recorded. Any person who decides to
action taken by the Boar at these meetings will need a record of the pproceedings af annd fopr such o lePo
P
on!
to ensure that a vercrossbatim record of the proceedings is made. Upon the to thet oroceedinrsywill bej
individuals testifying during a hyearing will be sworn m. Any Pam P est g
requiring accommod ton to attend thIn sumeetinfRRyshould contactathe StpLucie County C m ee
._ e. e� �a�tl a62-1777 or TDD (561) 462-14Z8 at least forty-eight(48) hours prior o the meeti
%W .r+
REGULAR AGENDA
MARCH 6, 2001
PAGE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUED
5B. Engineering / Howard Baggett Mining Permit Renewal - Consider staff
recommendation to approve the request for a Class 1 miring permit for 6 years,
to be updated every 48 months subject to eleven (11) cited conditions.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
5C. Resolution No. 01-010/Quasi-ludicial / Westchester Development Company
Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution, subject to the cited
conditions contained therein, granting preliminary PUD (Planned Unit
Development) approval for property located on the north side of Gatlin Boulevard
immediately west of the 1-95 Interchange, approximately one mile west of the
intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescia Street, from the AG-1 (Agricultural -
1 du/acre) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned Unit Development) Zoning District.
5D. Resolution No. 01-011/Quasi-Tudicial / Westchester Development Company -
Consider staff recommendation to approve the resolution, subject to the cited
conditions contained therein, granting preliminary PMUD (Planned Mixed Use
Development) approval for property located on the north side of Gatlin Boulevard
immediately west of the I-95 Interchange, approximately one mile west of the
intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescia Street.
End of Public Hearings
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Selection of a Consultant for 2001 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Administration and Proposal Writing - Pursuant to state requirements outlined in
the Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program and St. Lucie
County Purchasing Manual, staff recommends the Board rank the three firms,
selecting the firm with the lowest score.
�Ir
..r
/Vl� P�z
REGULAR AGENDA
MARCH 6, 2001
PAGE THREE
7. PUBLIC SAFETY
Combining the Animal Control Efforts of St. Lucie County and the City of Fort
Pierce - Consider staff recommendation to grant permission for staff to discuss
consolidation of Animal Control between St. Lucie County and the City of Fort
Pierce. j
G '?
//Z� � 1-1
v I%d
CONSENT AGENDA
March 6, 2001
WARRANTS LIST
Approve warrants list No. 22
2. LEISURE SERVICES
A. Queen's Island Preserve / Application for Grant Funds from the US Fish &
Wildlife Service's South. Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program - Consider staff
recommendation to authorize staff to apply for grant funds.
B. Blind Creek Park / Application for Grant Funds from the US Fish & Wildlife
Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program - Consider staff
recommendation to authorize staff to apply for grant funds.
COUNTY ATTORNEY
A. Interlocal Agreement between St. Lucie County and St. Lucie West Services
District Providing for the Use of the County's Landfill - Consider staff
recommendation to approve the Interlocal Agreement and authorize the
Chairman to sign the Agreement.
B. Emergency Debris Removal Contract / Phillips & Jordan, Inc. - Consider staff
recommendation to approve the contract and authorize the Chairman to
sign the contract.
C. Permission to Advertise Notice of Intent / Right -of -Way Abandonment /
South 251' Street Phase II / St. James Drive / Florida Power and Light
Crossing - Consider staff recommendation to grant permission to advertise
the Notice of Intent to Abandon, authorize the Chairman to execute the
Abandonment Petition, and proceed with the Abandonment Petition.
D. Partial Release of Lien for St. Lucie County Code Enforcement Board Order
Imposing Fine/Lien in Case No. 90-1724 - Consider staff recommendation
to authorize the Chairman to sign the Partial Release of Lien.
4. UTILITIES
A. South Florida Water Management District Alternative Water Supply Funding
Program Grant Application - Consider staff recommendation to authorize
submission of the grant to construct a reuse water main on North
Hutchinson Island, and authorize the County Administrator to sign all
documents.
Bid No, 01-007 / Holiday Pines Wastewater Treatment Plant Settling Tank
Rehabilitation Consider staff recommendation to award the bid to
Hutchinson Utilities Service Corp., the lowbidder, in the amount of $63,362.
%W
..r
CONSENT AGENDA
MARCH 6, 2001
PAGE TWO
Bid No. 01-021 / Apron Construction Project - Consider staff recommendation to
reject all bids and authorize staff to rebid the project.
.r%
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ADDITIONS AGENDA
March 6. 2001
CONSENT AGENDA
COUNTY ATTORNEY
C-A.1 Children's Services Council - Special Designation Grant Contracts: Consider
staff recommendation that the Board approve the three (3) Special Designation
Grant Contracts and authorize the Chairriian to sign the Contracts.
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 partyto the proceedings, individuals testifying during a hearing will be mom in. Anyparty
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
(561) 462-1777 or TDD (561) 462-1428 at least forty-eight(48) hours prior to the meeting.
Agenda Request
*Yi/
Item Number �5-G
r/ Date: March 6, 2001
Consent [ ]
Regular [ ]
Public Hearing [ X ]
Leg. [ ] Quasi -JD [ X ]
To: Board of County Commissioners Prese d y
Submitted By: Community Development Director
mmunity Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider Draft Resolution 01-010 approving the request of Westchester Development
Company, for a Preliminary PUD (Planned Unit Development) approval for property
located on north side of Gatlin Boulevard immediately west of the 1-95 Interchange,
approximately one -mile west of the intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescia
Street, from the AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned
Unit Development) Zoning District (File No. — PUD-00-011, MJSP-DO-009 and Rz-00-015)
BACKGROUND: Westchester Development Company has applied for a Rezoning and Planned Unit
Development/Major Site Plan approval for a new 600-lot single-family subdivision, to
be known as Westchester (PUD). The subject property is located on a 352.98 acre
tract of land situated on the north side of Gatlin Boulevard west of the 1-95
Interchange, approximately one -mile west of the intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and
Brescia Street and zoned AGA (Agricultural - 1 du/acre).
The properties located to the north, south, and west are designated with AGA
(Agricultural - 1 du/acre) zoning. The property to the east, while still zoned AGA is
the subject of a concurrent request for PMUD zoning.
FUNDS AVAILABLE: NIA
PREVIOUS ACTION: The Planning and Zoning Commission, by a vote of 5 to 0, with two members recusing
themselves from the proceedings (Mr. Merritt and Mr. Mathes) and two members absent
(Mr. Trias and Mr. Grande), recommended approval of the Rezoning and PUD/Major
Site Plan at its February 15, 2001 meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Draft Resolution 01-010, subject to the cited
conditions contained therein.
OMMISSION ACTION:
0 APPROVED
OTHER
NCURRENCE:
Douglas M. Anderson
County Administrator
Coordination/ Signatures
County Attorney Mgt. & Budget:
Originating Dept.: Other:
Finance:
DENIED
Purchasing:
Other:
NOO
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
COMMISSION REVIEW: March 6, 2001
Resolution No.: 01-010
File No.: RZ-00-015
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Board of County Commissioners
Community Development Director
February 28, 2001
SUBJECT: Petition of Westchester Development Company, for
Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the construction of 600 unit
residential subdivision to be known as the Westchester PUD.
(File No.: RZ-00-015)
LOCATION: Northwest quadrant of 1-95 and Gatlin Blvd. Approximately 1
mile west of the intersection of Gatlin Blvd and Brescia
Street.
EXISTING ZONING: AG-1 (Agriculture -1 dwelling unit / acre).
PROPOSED ZONING: PUD (Planned Unit Development).
LAND USE DESIGNATION: RU - Residential Urban - Residential uses up to 5 dwelling
units per acre. The entire parcel is within the Urban Service
Area.
PARCEL SIZE: 352.98 acres
PROPOSED USE: 600 unit residential subdivision with associated recreation,
open space, and infrastructure.
SURROUNDING ZONING: AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) to the north, south and west.
The property to the east is also zoned AG-1 but is the
subject of a concurrent request by the same developer for
PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) zoning
SURROUNDING LAND USE: All surrounding properties are vacant or are being used for
agricultural purposes.
FIRE/EMS PROTECTION: Station #10 (777 SW Dalton Road) is approximately 5 miles
to the east of the proposed development site.
`W
140
UTILITY SERVICE:
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS:
Right of Way
Adequacy:
Scheduled Area
Improvements:
TYPE W CONCURRENCE
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
Water and Sewer Services to be provided by the either St.
Lucie West or Port St. Lucie Utilities.
The existing right-of-way for Gatlin Blvd is 200 feet.
The developer plans to construct a four lane entrance road
to the site within the 200 foot right-of-way provided by this
developer and the adjacent developer to the south.
A Certificate of Capacity will be required with final Planned
Unit Development approvals.
ttt****tit RRttttttlRR*R**t4ttR**
STANDARDS OF REVIEW
AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03
ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
In reviewing this application for proposed amendment to the official Zoning Atlas, the Planning and Zoning
Commission shall consider and make the following determinations:
1. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of the
St. Lucie County Land Development Code;
The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the St. Lucie County Land Development
Code. The current application for Preliminary Planned Unit Development approval has been
reviewed for consistency with the provisions of the St. Lucie County Land Development
Code and particularly Section 7.02.01 of the Code and has been determined to meet all
applicable standards of review for Preliminary Planned Unit Development approvals.
2. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan;
The amendment has been determined to be consistent with all applicable elements of the
County's Comprehensive Plan. The project's density is well below that allowed by the Plan.
If the project were proposed or developed at its maximum density, more than 1,700 units
would be allowed. The proposed project in conjunction with the associated Planned Mixed
Use Development (PMUD) is providing various services to its anticipated residents
including employment and shopping opportunities, schools, and recreation. The project lies
entirely within the Urban Service Area.
3. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment Is inconsistent with the
existing and proposed land uses;
`11111104mo
The proposed Preliminary Planned Unit Development Plan and the accompanying request
for change in zoning have been determined to be not inconsistent with the general land
uses in the surrounding area. The Future Land Use Maps of the County's Comprehensive
Plan indicate that the petitioned property is suitable for development at a density of up to
5 du's/acre. The proposed development plans call for a gross density of 1.7 units to the
acre.
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 development site is proposed to be served with water and sewer services by the either
St. Lucie West or Port St. Lucie Utilities. Port St. Lucie has provided letter indicating that
these services are available. The developer will be responsible for the extension of these
services to the project site.
The subject property is located west of the existing terminus of Gatlin Blvd. According to the
applicant's traffic impact report, the following roadway facilities which are located in the
project study area are scheduled for improvements within the Port St. Lucie Capital
Improvements Program.
Airoso Blvd 4-lane divided from Port SL Lucie Blvd to Prima Vista Blvd fY 2000-2001
Gatlin Blvd 4-lane divided from 1-96 to Port St. Lucie Blvd FY 2001-2002
Bayshore Blvd 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Blvd to Prima Vista Blvd FY 2001-2003
The applicant's Traffic Impact Report (TIR) indicates that the project will not negatively
affect arty surrounding roadway links. The applicant has committed to construction of a four
lane divided extension of Gatlin Blvd. From its current terminus to the project entrance
(approximately one mile).
The applicant has also agreed to construct a section of a possible north/south arterial
roadway which could ultimately connect to Glades Cutoff Road.
Open space requirements of the Planned Development are met.
The proposed development will address its impact on the School District through payment
of the School Impact Fee or credits toward the fee as may be allowed based on the
provision of an on site school.
All other required public facilities appear to be adequate to handle to proposed
development.
6. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant
adverse impacts on the natural environment;
The proposed amendment is not expected to create adverse impacts on the natural
environment. The proposed development site has been used for agricultural activities in the
past and is nearly all cleared. The applicant, through the Planned Development process,
has proposed a development plan that provides for the protection of the majority of the
remaining environmentally sensitive areas. The applicant will need to obtain permits relating
"^r ..d
to environmental impacts on the site prior to any construction. These agency's include but
are not limited to the Army Corp of Engineers, South Florida Water Management District,
and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
The environmental Impact report indicates that there are a number of wetlands located
throughout the subject parcel. In this phase of development, the applicant is proposing to
preserve nearly all of the wetlands on site through incorporation into the project design.
The applicants submission of this project as a Planned Unit Development affords the
maximum amount of existing resource protection while still providing the property owner
with the maximum use potential of the project site.
7. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would adversely effect the
property values in the area.
The proposed development of this property as a 600 unit residential project is not
anticipated to have any significant negative effects on the property values of the
surrounding area.
8. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in orderly
and logical development pattern specifically identifying any negative affects of such
patterns;
While this proposed change in zoning is the first project proposed in the area, it is
consistent with the uses anticipated by the County's Comprehensive Plan. Approval of this
project will provide for an orderly development pattern for this area.
9. 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 has been determined not to conflict with the public interest and
the St. Lucie County Land Development Code.
COMMENTS:
The developers of the Westchester PUD have submitted a petition for Preliminary Planned Unit
Development site plan approval for the construction of a 600 unit subdivision on a 352.98 acre parcel of
land, located west of 1-95 and North of Gatlin Blvd. The subject property is currently vacant and/or used
for agricultural uses. The surrounding property is also vacant or being used for agricultural purposes.
The developers of this project have submitted the required Environmental and Traffic Impact Reports.
The Environmental Reports did not identify serious environmental constraints to development of this
property. The project site plan cites the areas classified as wetlands as being 34.89 acres. Of these, 33.05
acres are being preserved. The wetlands which are not preserved fall within the extension of Gatlin Blvd.
The majority of the existing vegetation on this property is cabbage palms, several scattered oak hammocks
are also found in future phases. The developer intends to preserve the oak hammocks and preserve or
move the cabbage palms as necessary.
The subject property is located west of the existing terminus of Gatlin Blvd. According to the applicant's
traffic impact report, the following roadway facilities which are located in the project study area are
scheduled for improvements within the Port St. Lucie Capital Improvements Program.
%✓
v
Airoso Blvd 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Blvd to Prima Vista Blvd FY 2000-2001
Gatlin Blvd 4-lane divided from 1-95 to Port St. Lucie Blvd FY 2001-2002
Bayshore Blvd 4-lane derided from Port St. Lucie Blvd to Prima Vista Blvd FY 2001.2003
The applicant's Traffic Impact Report (TIR) indicates that the project will not negatively affect any
surrounding roadway links. The applicant has committed to construction of a four lane divided extension of
Gatlin Blvd. From its current terminus to the project entrance (approximately one mile).
The applicant has also agreed to construct a section of a possible north/south arterial roadway which could
ultimately connect to Glades Cutoff Road.
On January 18, 2001, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this
petition. Following that hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 to 0 with 2 members absent,
and 2 members recusing themselves to recommend approval of this petition.
On February 15, 2001 the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held an additional public
hearing on this petition. Following that hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 to 0 with 2
members absent, and 2 members recusing themselves to recommend a minor change in the projects
boundaries and to reaffirm their approval of this petition.
If approved, this Resolution would grant Preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for this project.
If approved the developers of this project will have 24 months to receive Final Planned Unit Development
approval for any phase of this project, or the entire project, if the developer so chooses.
Staff recommends approval of Draft Resolution 01-010 subject to the conditions attached as Exhibit'N.
SUBMITTED
�
lia Shewch*
ommunity Development Director
cc: County Administrator
County Attomey
County Engineer
Planning Manager
Greg Boggs
Jim Zboril
r✓
RESOLUTION NO. 01-010
FILE NO: RZ-00-015
A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A
PROJECT KNOWN AS WESTCHESTER
A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following
determinations:
-QHANQE IN ZONING
1. Westchester Development Company presented a petition, for a change in zoning from AG-1
(Agriculture - 1 dwelling unit / acre) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) for certain property
in St. Lucie County, Florida.
2. On January 16, 2001, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public
hearing, of which due public notice was published in the Port St. Lucie News and the Ft.
Pierce Tribune and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet at least 10 days prior to
the hearing, and recommended to this Board that the requested change in zoning from AG-
1 (Agriculture - 1 dwelling unit / acre) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) be granted.
3. On February 15, 2001, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public
hearing, of which due public notice was published in the Port St. Lucie News and the Ft.
Pierce Tribune and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet at least 10 days prior to
the hearing, and recommended to this Board that a minor change to the previously
recommended change in zoning from AG-1 (Agriculture - 1 dwelling unit / acre) to PUD
(Planned Unit Development) be approved and reaffirmed it's recommendation.
SITE PLAN
4. The petitioner is proposing to construct a 600 unit subdivision with recreation and preserve
areas and infrastructure in the northwest quadrant of 1-95 and Gatlin, on the property
described in Part B below.
5. The Development Review Committee has reviewed the preliminary site plan for the
proposed project and found it to meet all technical requirements and to be consistent with
the future land use maps of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, subject to the
conditions set forth in Part A of this Resolution.
6. On February 15, 2001, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public
hearing, of which due public notice was published in the Port St. Lucie News and the Ft.
Pierce Tribune and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet at least 10 days prior to the
hearing, and recommended to this Board that Preliminary Development Plan approval for
the project known as Westchester - a Planned Unit Development, be granted.
File No.: RZ-00-015
March 6, 2001
Resolution 01.010
Page 1
7. On March 6, 2001, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing a notice
of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie News and the Ft. Pierce Tribune and notifying by mail
all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property.
8. The proposed project is consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and
standards of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan, and the Code of Ordinances of St. Lucie County.
9. The proposed project will not have an undue adverse effect on adjacent property, the
character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, utility facilities, or other matters
affecting the public health, safety and general welfare.
10. All reasonable steps have been taken to minimize any adverse effect of the proposed
project on the immediate vicinity through building design, site design, landscaping, and
screening.
11. The proposed project will be constructed, arranged and operated so as not to interfere with
the development and use of neighboring property, in accordance with applicable district
regulations.
12. The proposed project will be served by adequate public facilities and services.
13. The applicant has demonstrated that water supply, evacuation facilities, and emergency
access are satisfactory to provide adequate fire protection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of the St. Lucie County,
Florida:
A. Pursuant to Section 11.02.05 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, the
Preliminary Site Plan for the project known as Westchester - A Planned Unit Development
is hereby, approved as shown on the site plan drawings for the project prepared by Thomas
Lucido & Associates, P.A. dated September 15, 2000 and subsequently revised through
February 23, 2001, and date stamped received by the St. Lucie County Community
Development Director on February 23, 2001, subject to the conditions as outlined in
attached Exhibit'N.
B. The property on which this preliminary approval is being granted is described as follows:
See attached legal description - Exhbit'B'
(Location: Northwest quadrant of 1-95 and Gatlin Blvd.
C. The aproval of this Preliminary Site Plan is contingent upon the developer obtaining final
Planned Unit Development approval within 24 months of the date of approval of this
resolution. If Final Planned Unit Development approval has not been obtained within this
period, this site plan shall expire on March 6, 2003, unless a Preliminary Site Plan approval
extension is granted in accordance .with Section 11.02.06(B), St. Lucie County Land
Development Code.
File No.: RZ-00-015 Resolution 01-010
March 6, 2001 Page 2
,%me
..r
D. The conditions set forth in Section A are an integral nonseverable part of the site plan
approval granted by this resolution. If any condition set forth in Section A is determined to
be invalid or unenforceable for any reason and the developer declines to comply voluntarily
with that condition, the site plan approval granted by this resolution shall become null and
void.
E. A copy of this resolution shall be attached to the site plan drawings described in Section A,
which plan shall be placed on file with the St. Lucie County Community Development
Director.
After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows:
Chairman Frannie Hutchinson
xxx
Vice -Chairman Doug Coward
XXX
Commissioner Cliff Barnes
xxx
Commissioner John Bruhn
xxx
Commissioner Paula Lewis
xxx
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 6th day of March, 2001.
ATTEST:
DEPUTY CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
m
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
File No.: RZ-00-016 Resolution 01-010
March 6, 2001
Page 3
`w
r5l
EXHIBIT `A'
WESTCHESTER PUD/PMUD CONDITIONS
PRELIMINARY
DRAINAGE
The developer shall design and construct the stormwater management system in
accordance with applicable South Florida Water Management District regulatory
criteria.
2. The surface water management system and any required littoral planting zones
shall be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with South Florida
Water Management District ERP requirements.
EDUCATION
3. All residential development within this project shall be subject to the terms and
requirements of St. Lucie County Ordinance 88-16, Educational facility Impact
Fees, and as may subsequently be amended. Any contribution toward, or
development or dedication of school land or facilities shall be eligible for
Educational Impact Fee credit to the extent permitted under the County's
Educational Facility Impact Fee ordinance.
FIRE/EMS PROTECTION
4. All development within this project shall be subject to the terms and requirements
of St. Lucie County Ordinance , Fire/EMS Impact Fees, and as may
subsequently be amended. To the extent permitted under the County's Fire/EMS
Impact Fee regulations, any contribution toward or development or dedication of
land for Fire/EMS facilities may be considered for all or part of a Fire/EMS Impact
Fee Credit.
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS
5. General building setbacks shall be as follows;
PSL:2941:1
a. Single-family home sites west of the North/South corridor:
Minimum lot size: 42'w x 100'd
Maximum lot size: 100'w x 125'd
Maximum lot coverage: 80%
Front setback: 20 feet (15 feet for those homes with a
front, side loading garage layout)
Side setback: 6 feet (0 feet and 12 feet for zero lot line
homes)
Side setback (Corner): 15 feet
Rear setback: 15 feet (screen rooms/ pool decks and
other ancillary structures may be a
minimum of five feet from a rear
Page 1 of 6 Westchester Condi Ions - Preliminary
March 1. 2001
PSL:2941:1
Iftw
%aw
property line provided that no such
ancillary facility interferes with any
drainage or maintenance easement)
Single family home sites east of the North/South corridor:
Minimum lot size:
30'w x75'd
Maximum lot size:
100'w x 130'd
Maximum lot coverage:
90%
Maximum building height:
35 feet
Front setback:
10 feet (15 feet for those homes on a
perimeter block lot that use a front
loading driveway)
Side setback
(Lots <50' width):
0 feet one side/no openings
3 feet on other side (minimum
separation between adjacent structures
is 12 feet or structures with less than 12
feet separation shall have automatic fire
sprinkler systems)
(Lots >50' width):
3 feet (minimum separation between
adjacent structures is 12 feet or
structures with less than 12 feet
separation shall have automatic fire
sprinkler systems)
Side setback (Corner):
15 feet
Rear setback:
Lots with rear garage access:
15 feet (screen rooms/ pool decks and
other ancillary structures, excluding
garages, may be a minimum of zero feet
from the property line provided that no
such ancillary facility interferes with any
drainage or maintenance easement)
Lots with front garage access:
15 feet (screen rooms/ pool decks and
other ancillary structures, including
garages, may be a minimum of zero feet
from the property line provided that no
such ancillary facility interferes with any
drainage or maintenance easement)
Minimum alley easement width:
20 feet (One-way alleys)
Minimum alley pavement width:
10 feet (One-way alleys)
Minimum alley radius:
25 feet in direction of travel
C. Multi-Family/Townhome sites east of the North/South Arterial Road
Minimum lot size: Variable width/average depth 85 feet
Maximum lot size: Variable width/average depth 110 feet
Maximum building lot coverage: Variable
Maximum building height: 50 feet
Front setback: 10 feet
Page 2 of 5 Westchester Conditions - Preliminary
March 1, 2001
In
..d
Side setback between bldgs:
Side setback (Corner):
Rear setback:
Lots with rear garage access:
Minimum alley easement width
Minimum alley pavement width
Minimum alley radius:
20 feet
15 feet
15 feet (screen rooms/ pool decks and
other ancillary structures, excluding
garages, may be a minimum of zero feet
from the property line provided that no
such ancillary facility interferes with any
drainage or maintenance easement)
20 feet (One-way alleys)
10 feet (One-way alleys)
25 feet in direction of travel
6. Any obligation of Westchester Development Company hereunder shall be
assignable to a community development district created by Westchester
Development Company for such purpose.
HABITATAT, VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE
7. Wetlands identified to be preserved on the Master Plan referenced in Part
or as may be delineated in subsequent permitting documentation, shall be
retained and/or restored if necessary, and maintained in accordance with South
Florida Water Management District permit conditions. Such wetlands shall be
protected by conservation easement, deed restriction, or other appropriate legal
mechanism, and future maintenance responsibilities shall be assigned to a
community development district or other entity approved by the South Florida
Water Management District. In the event that threatened or endangered species
are found, Developer shall comply with applicable regulations. As part of Final
Development Plan Approval, wetlands that are identified to be preserved on the
Master Plan referenced in Part or as may be delineated in subsequent
permitting documentation, shall be identified by specific numeration.
8. Wetlands identified to be altered, as depicted on the Master Plan referenced in
Part _, may be altered to the extent shown with the remaining areas of such
wetlands being retained and/or restored if necessary, and maintained in
accordance with South Florida Water Management District permit conditions.
Such wetlands shall be protected by conservation easement, deed restriction, or
other appropriate legal mechanism, and future maintenance responsibilities shall
be assigned to a community development district or other entity approved by the
South Florida Water Management District. In the event that threatened or
endangered species are found, Developer shall comply with applicable
regulations. As part of Final Development Plan Approval, wetlands that are
identified to be altered on the Master Plan referenced in Part or as may be
delineated in subsequent permitting documentation, shall be identified by specific
numeration.
9. Wetlands identified to be impacted on the Master Plan referenced in Part _ or
on subsequent permits, may be altered to the extent shown thereon. If
Page 3 of 6 Westchester Conditions - Preliminary
PSL2941:1 March 1, 2001
:r 1.40
necessary, the Developer shall obtain permit approvals to alter/eliminate these
wetlands from the South Florida Water Management District and the US Army
Corp of Engineers and shall meet all applicable mitigation requirements and
standards. In the event off -site mitigation is required, the applicant shall first
seek to perform all such mitigation in St. Lucie County. As part of Final
Development Plan Approval, wetlands that are identified to be
impacted/eliminated on the Master Plan referenced in Part _ or as may be
delineated in subsequent permitting documentation, shall be identified by specific
numeration.
10. Lakes or canals shall not be excavated within 200 feet of those wetlands, which
are to be preserved or restored on the project site, unless otherwise approved by
South Florida Water Management District. Any wells in the shallow aquifer shall
not be located within 300 feet of those wetlands, which are to be preserved or
restored on the project site. South Florida Water Management District must
approve any exceptions to this condition.
A copy of any South Florida Water Management District permit or other consent
addressing this condition shall be provided to St. Lucie County prior to final plat
approval.
11. In order to promote maintenance or implementation of predevelopment
hydroperiods within the enhanced and/or restored wetlands and within any
wetland mitigation areas, final drainage plans shall provide for routing of
sufficient volumes of runoff from acceptable sources to the preserved or restored
wetlands prior to routing of any excess runoff through the project off -site
discharge outfall, in accordance with South Florida Water Management District
standards. Control elevations shall be established consistent with the intent to
maintain or improve predevelopment hydroperiods within all wetland areas. The
South Florida Water Management District must approve the routing of runoff and
control elevations as shown on the final drainage plans to achieve the intent
indicated above.
Copies of the South Florida Water Management District construction permits
shall be provided to St. Lucie County prior to final plat approval.
12. The Developer shall plant and maintain a buffer zone of native vegetation around
all enhanced, restored, or created wetlands on site in accordance with the
requirements of the South Florida Water Management District.
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
13. All residential development within this project shall be subject to the terms and
requirements of St. Lucie County Ordinance , Parks Impact Fees, and
as may subsequently be amended. To the extent permitted under the County's
Parks Impact Fee regulations, any contribution toward or development or
dedication of land for recreational facilities may be considered for all or part of a
Parks Impact Fee Credit.
Page 4 of 5 Westchester Conditions - Preliminary
PSL:2941:1 March 1, 2001
�%. 1VAW
ROADS IMPACT FEES
14. All development within this project shall be subject to the terms and requirements
of St Lucie County Ordinance , Roads Impact Fees, and as may
subsequently be amended. Any contribution toward, dedication or development
of road right of way or facilities, including but not limited to all dedications or
improvements in roadway capacity that exceed the need to provide safe and
adequate access for the project shall be eligible for Roads Impact Fee credit to
the extent permitted under the County's Roads Impact Fee Ordinances.
15. Westchester Development Company may apply any credits from transportation
impacts mitigated by Westchester Development Company for the Phase I
PUD/PMUD in excess of the needs of the Phase I PUD/PMUD toward
transportation impacts generated by development of adjacent properties owned
by Westchester Development Company.
TRANSPORTATION
16. Gatlin Boulevard west of 1-95 shall be designed as a primary public access route
extending from its current terminus to the proposed traffic circle at the
intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and the unnamed north/south corridor. Design
and construction of the roadway shall meet all requirements of St. Lucie County
and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT).
17. The proposed traffic circle and unnamed north/south corridor, as shown on the
site plans referenced in Part _, shall be designed as a primary public access
route. Design and construction of the roadway shall meet all requirements of St.
Lucie County and FDOT.
18. An emergency/temporary access shall be provided to the Westside Residential
prior to the issuance of the 250th Certificate of Occupancy for a residential unit in
the Westside Residential area.
19. To the extent practical, and based upon the transportation development and
service plans of the local transit providers, the final development plans for the
area referred to as the Westchester PMUD/PUD shall consider the inclusion of
dedicated transit stop and areas in its final project designs.
WASTEWATER
20. All wastewater within the Westchester PMUD/PUD shall be connected to a
central wastewater treatment service, except that temporary buildings shall not
be required to connect to a central wastewater treatment system until such time
as one is made available to the temporary building site or otherwise required by
the St. Lucie County Public Health Unit. For the purpose of this development
order, temporary buildings shall be those used in connection with construction
activities, models, buildings used in connection with agricultural uses, and any
Pogo 5 of 6 Westchester Conditions - Preliminary
PSL:2941:1 March 1. 2001
\.+
n
other buildings that may be so excepted by the St. Lucie County Code.
WATER SUPPLY: POTABLE AND NONPOTABLE WATER
21. All potable water within the Westchester PMUD/PUD shall be provided by a
central potable water system, except that temporary buildings shall not be
required to connect to a central water system until such time as one is made
available to the temporary building site or otherwise required by the St. Lucie
County Public Health Unit. For the purpose of this development order, temporary
buildings shall be those used in connection with construction activities, models,
buildings used in connection with agricultural uses, and any other buildings that
may be so excepted by the St. Lucie County Code.
22. The primary source of irrigation water shall be water derived from the surface
water management system of lakes supplemented by wells as permitted by the
South Florida Water Management District. No withdrawals from lakes shall be
permitted which would adversely affect wetlands required by this development
order to be preserved on site, or wetlands and littoral zones created on site as
mitigation for wetland functions and values lost as a result of this development.
At the time of water use permit issuance or renewal, the developer shall comply
with applicable South Florida Water Management District rules and criteria for
permit issuance, which criteria may in the future require the use of reclaimed
water.
23. To the maximum extent consistent with wetland protection, surficial aquifer
wellfields serving the Westchester PMUD/PUD shall be located such that
principal land uses within the cone of influence of such wells are open space,
preserve, or residential area. In no case shall development, which would use,
handle, store, or produce hazardous or toxic materials, occur within the cone of
influence (i.e., one foot drawdown area) of a surficial aquifer potable water supply
well, unless such use, handling, storage, or production is consistent with binding
wellfield protection regulations.
Page 6 of 6 Westchester Conditions - Preliminary
PSL:2941:1 March 1, 2001
'09-M
."w
Exhibit B / PUD
Being a parcel of land located in Sections 8, 9, 16, & 17, Township 37 South,
Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida.
Said parcel being more particularly described as follows:
Begin at the intersection of the centerline of Gatlin Boulevard, (also being the North line
of Section 15) and the Westerly limits of Gatlin Boulevard Right -of -Way and the Westerly
limits of those lands described in an Order of Taking, dated July 24, 1979 and recorded
in Official Record Book 311 at Pages 2946 through, 2952, inclusive, Public Records of
St. Lucie County, Florida, and as shown on the Florida Department of Transportation
Right -of -Way maps for State Road #9 (1-95), Section 94001-2412, dated 6/2/77, with last
revision of 9/11/79;thence S 89°57'05" W along said centerline a distance of 2815.40
feet to the Point of Beginning; thence continue S 89057'05" W, a distance of 4508.78 feet;
thence N 00°00'00" E, a distance of 2482.51 feet; thence N 87016'17" E, a distance of
196.14 feet; thence S 76°31'44" E, a distance of 48.81 feet, thence N 14012'12" E, a
distance of 40.00 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Southwest,
having a radius of 1950.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 68058'33" E; thence along the
arc of said curve through a central angle of 13°38'31 ", a distance of 464.29 feet; thence N
27011'31" E, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence S 58°08'06" E, a distance of 492.35 feet to
the beginning of a tangent curve concave to the North, having a radius of 950.00 feet;
thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 42°28'21", a distance of
704.22 feet; thence N 32046'15" E, non -tangent to last described curve, a distance of
33.95 feet; thence N 12°20'57" W, a distance of 315.54; thence N 78°49'36" E, a distance
of 214.11 feet; thence N 84°52'28" E, a distance of 300.55 feet; thence N 14009,53" W, a
distance of 242.58 feet; thence N 52°27'35" E, a distance of 39.61 feet; thence N
29°13'49" W, a distance of 280.04 feet; thence N 07013'39" W, a distance of 222.22 feet;
thence N 03°00'l2" E, a distance of 59.95 feet; thence N 04054'56" W, a distance of
221.93 feet; thence N 17051'33" W, a distance of 60.24 feet; thence N 35024,06" E, a
distance of 74.68 feet; thence S 70038'31" E, a distance of 91.16 feet; thence S 78'08'31"
E, a distance of 187.63 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the
Southeast, having a radius of 161.90 feet; the chord of which bears N 63040'43" E; thence
along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 65049'09", a distance of 185.99 feet
to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Southeast, having a radius of
650.00 feet; the chord of which bears N 31'39'20" E; thence along the arc of said curve
through a central angle of 26°41'20", a distance of 302.78 feet; thence N 45°00'00" E,
tangent to last described curve, a distance of 1134.06 feet; thence S 45000,00" E, a
distance of 636.49 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Southwest, having a
radius of 2900.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 35041'31" E; thence along the arc of
said curve through a central angle of 45014'09", a distance of 2368.53 feet; thence
S 00°14'09" W, a distance of 2059.65 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 352.98 acres, more or less.
11#A.. '"W
Mr. Kelly stated that he would like to explain the process of a Planned Unit Development, so that
everyone would understand what it is before the item is presented. He explained that there are
three types of planned developments in St. Lucie County, A PUD (Planned Unit Development),
which is a purely residential development. A PNRD (planned Non -Residential Development)
and a PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development), which are the first three sections el Chapter 7
of the Land Development Code. He stated that the Westchester Development Company would be
presenting two of the three types, which area PUD on roughly half of the property and a PMUD
on the other half. The purposes of the three types are all the same, except for the substitution of
the words residential, mixed use, and non residential, which are to achieve land development of a
superior quality through encouragement of flexibility and creativity in design. A planned
development of any type consists of a rezoning and a site plan. It allows the developer to present
and seek approval for new or creative concepts and allows for design options that are outside the
four comers of St. Lucie County Land Development Code. He explained that an example that he
often uses, but is not like the one presented at this meeting, but a zero lot line development. The
Land Development Code requires a side setback in every case for a straight rezoning. If a
developer should wish to bring up something completely different it may be presented through
this means. If it is approved it becomes that property's zoning with it's own set of standards for
that zoning. The process is actually three -fold. There is a preliminary PUD approval and a final
approval. The preliminary is considered the Planning and Zoning Commission, which is the
purpose of these two petitions this evening. The preliminary will then go before the Board of
County Commission and then will go back again to the Board of County. Commissioners for final .
approval. If the final approval is substantially like the preliminary, then the County Commission
has some obligation to approve the petition.
January 18, 2001
page 3
%aw
The responsibility of the Planning and Zoning Commission is to look at the zoning side of this.
He explained that this board does not really spend much time looking at site plans. The site plans
are left up to the County Commission. He explained that this board would need to know enough
about the site plan in order to decide of the appropriateness of the zoning. He stated that this
board will see a few site plans and some issues, but the ultimate job is to make sure this is an
appropriate place for the number of residential units and amount of non-residential type zonings
that will be seen. It is not the job of this board to decide on the overall details, even though they
will be brought up to decide the impacts of the zonings. He asked if there needed to be more
detail explained on these definitions and duties.
Mr. Kelly stated that this evening there would be two separate petitions for Westchester. There is
a Planned Unit Development, which is the residential component and a Planned Mixed -Use
Development, which is the eastern portion of the project that includes residential, civic site,
commercial, office sites, and some concepts that are not often seen in St. Lucie County. As a
general description the entire project is located at the Northwest quadrant of Interstate 95 and the
Gatlin Boulevard extension. He explained it is primarily proposed to be on converted farmland.
He stated that there is not a great deal of environmental impact part of a much larger parcel and
staff believes that the developer will ultimately come back for additional approval. If that should
occur it would at that time trip thresholds and become a Development of Regional Impact and
there will be more review of the development.
The proposal is to extend Gatlin Boulevard from its current terminus to a traffic circlet then turn
to the north on a North south roadway, which would be primary access in to the project. That
roadway in the future could possibly connect to the Glades -cutoff Road in the future. The PUD
portion is to the west of that road and the PMUD is to the east. Staff is still working with the
developer on a number of issues. Even as late as yesterday there was a meeting. He explained
that the school site that is seen in the documents. He stated that particular area will be a called a
civic site. The developer is working with several entities to try to figure out how to provide a
school site. They have not been able to provide any details to staff. He stated that changing the
title to a Civic Site is probably a more accurate term, due to the fact that it was intended to be a
building with multiple uses. He explained there are still on going negotiations with the City on
the capacity of the roadway and other developers involved in that area.
Mr. Kelly explained that in the proposed conditions that were provided separately there were
setbacks and staff is still working out the setbacks with the developer. He stated three major
concerns and there are many concerns in the fifty proposed conditions that are being negotiated.
Mr. Kelly stated that there are a few he will go over in this evening's meeting. He does not feel
the entire list should be part of any motion this evening. He will only go over the conditions he
feels are important. He would like to mention that it is staffs belief that this will ultimately be a
DRI and the fact that staff wishes to begin working with the developer to make sure all of the
DRI issues are ultimately answered and that is why there are fifty proposed conditions. He doe$,
not feel that at a preliminary PUD and PMUD hearing they are necessary to be imposed in this
board's recommendation to the County Commission.
January 18, 2001 page 4
*W
Mr. Kelly stated that the parcel is fairly irregularly shaped and as the plans are reviewed later the
shapes will be more understood. He stated that there would be two petitions reviewed this
evening and will require separate motions and public hearings. It is his experience and to most of
the seasoned board members that it is not possible to separate the comments. He recommends a
general discussion and before it is done open two different public hearings and make two
different motions.
Mr. Kelly stated the PUD (Planned Unit Development) is on the North side of Gatlin and West
of Interstate 95 with a current zoning of AG (Agriculture). The proposed new zoning is PUD.
The parcel is approximately a little over 373 acres. The proposed use is 600 single-family lots
with the associated infrastructure, recreational uses and open space requirements. Staff has
reviewed the project and finds that it meets the applicable standards and before the meeting is
over if nothing changes staff will make a recommendation for approval. In Item #6 of the report
states that the applicant is proposing to preserve all wetlands on this site. This is a little bit
inconsistent with the comment, which indicates the development is preserving 33.05 of 34.89
acres. He would like the developer to come forward and give his presentation so that the board
can become familiar to the feel of the development.
Mr. Grande asked if the correction of the wording about the inconsistency in the preservation of
the wetlands would be corrected.
Mr. Kelly replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Grande asked the reasoning for the density comparisons to the Future Land Use as opposed
to current zoning.
Mr. Kelly stated that it could be done either way, but the applicant could easily be requesting an
RS zoning or something like that. The purpose of reviewing rezoning is to make sure that there is
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. This is an increase in the existing zoning but
completely consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Grande asked if the conditions were worked out through negotiation with staff and the
developer.
Mr. Kelly replied that ultimately they will be, but the conditions distributed to this board were
written by staff and given to the developer at the same time the board received them. There has
been some discussion on some of them at a meeting yesterday. They have some problems with
some of them and are others that are not problems. At some point in the evening he will point out
the ones that should be imposed in the motion at this preliminary meeting, such as infrastructure
and impact fees.
44
Mr. Hearn asked where the urban service boundary currently located.
Mr. Kelly replied on the western edge of the property.
January 18, 2001 page 5
:'�.; �T't�'dn���iij<�stuYrx, � -.:: i ,-. ..< - .. ....: '.-fiF � .•Y--': ...:
'%w
`we
Mr. Hegener introduced himself as the President of St. Lucie West Development Company and
the President of Westchester Development Company. He stated his purpose of his presentation is
to give a quick introduction to the Concepts for Westchester. He would like to take a brief
moment to give a little bit of background to the planning of this major master plan community.
In early 1999 his company convened a planning charrette where members of the County and City
Planning Staff, Engineering Firms, Architects, Environmental Consultants, and the St. Lucie
West planning staff. The purpose of this was to define issues that could be dealt with in the
overall design of a new community. The first problem that came up in St. Lucie County was a
need for a corporate park. In St. Lucie West there is a small industrial park, small office park,
and a distribution business. As the discussions come up of generating Economic Development
and higher paying jobs there needs to be discussion of a corporate park in this county. In order to
have a location with high tech telecommunications in a campus setting on enough land. This type
of location will attract the type of employer that produce high wages. Two things generate this
need: 1.) There is no such facility in this county. 2.) There is a social issue, large unemployment
rate and a relative rate of low household income. This is to provide a place that is one portion of
an economic development for that employer to be located. He explained that out of this meeting
came the need for a corporate park. As a compliment to the corporate park came the need for a
civic site that would provide pedestrian access to everything and be attractive to a corporate
employer. This is what became the idea of a civic site that could contain a school, some
recreational uses for the community, and medical uses. He explained that such civic site to
house multiple uses such as explained has become extremely complex. There have been
discussions with the School Board and others on how to make this operational. The housing
components presented at this meeting are devised in to two types. One is for the families that are
anticipated to be employed by this corporate park and allow pedestrian access to the community
facility and employment area, as well as a more traditional component of housing. Each housing
type will be linked by pedestrian pathways, this making it easy to go to a small retail area to walk
to the community facility and employment area That is the overall concept of Westchester.
Mr. Hegener stated he would like to say that his company is extremely proud to be involved with
St. Lucie County. He believes St. Lucie West sets a very good example of the types of things that
can be done. He believes Westchester is an opportunity to design something brand new. He
introduced the Vice -President of Westchester to walk the board through the initial phase of
Westchester.
LL
January 18, 2001 page 6
Mr. Zboril stated that the reason for the two different zonings being requested was something
that came up while working with staff. The western area of the property was more appropriate
for strictly residential uses and the eastern portion would have mixed uses. He would also like to
state that this will be a DR] and they will come back for subsequent approvals. The reason is this
development is being allowed pursuant to State Statute 380.032 which allows for development
agreements with Community Affairs. This development agreement allows them to commence a
certain amount of development underneath a threshold. They are seeking the amount that is
permitted underneath the multiple use threshold of the DRI process. As a result of the agreement
with Community Affairs they will be agreeing with them that they will be performing a pre -
application conference with the TCRPC and other interested parties with the permitting office
with in 45 days. Additionally, there will be an agreement to submit an application for a
Development approval within 6 months of the execution of that agreement. He stated they are
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there are no adverse transportation
impacts associated with this amount of development being reviewed at this level. Staff has
reviewed the transportation analysis that has been prepared. As indicated by staff there will be
some infrastructure provided to the site at the intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and the creation
of a North/South Road. There is a letter of agreement executed to the City of Port St. Lucie
regarding Gatlin Boulevard East of Interstate 95 and has been approved by the City staff and his
scheduled to go before the City Council for approval. That agreement allows for the developer to
reserve a certain amount of capacity of Gatlin Blvd, which means about 9,500 trips. It allows the
city to receive some transportation impact fees from the developer and allow the City to
complete a six -lane improvement on Gatlin Blvd from I-95 to Port St Lucie Blvd. He stated that
with regard to the environment and that specifically there are about 5 to 6 acres of wetland
impacts of the 40 acres of wetlands in the first phase of the development He explained that the
majority of that impact is 50% with the expansion of Gatlin Boulevard. The site was used as a
sod and cattle farm for over 50 years. Thereare no on site uplands with native vegetation in the
first phase, nor are there any endangered or threatened plants. The wetlands there have been
impacted by the years of agricultural and open canal draining system.
Mr. Zboril explained the phase one pattern of development is the more conventional cul-de-sac
type of development. They feel this is an appropriate development to minimize the impact of the
system. The wetlands in this area will be made a part of a 90-acre recreation and reserve area.
That recreation and reserve are will have trails that will go through it to link over to the next side
and in to more pedestrian paths. The other side will have more grid like housing. This type of
housing was felt to be more- conducive to the area for the mixed use. They are also seeking the
approval for about 75,000 square feet of offices and another 75,000 square feet of commercial
and retail. The office is the initial part of the corporate park that was previously mentioned. The
retail and commercial is thought of to be as a village center to support the residential units that
are there. That would include such uses as Westchester's sales and marketing offices, a coffee
shop, and restaurants. There is a request for density that is significantly less than what could be
there with the underlying land use. He explained that this is for phase one only and it is currently
standing alone.
Mr. Trias asked to define the corporate park and how the future development works.
January 18, 2001 page 7
*ftvl .,IO
Mr. Zboril replied that the future plan is that all along I-95 will be a corporate park. Due to
threshold issues they can only seek approval for 75,000 square feet located on 7 to 8 acres at this
time. He stated that through the Dept of Community Affairs there is a density and intensity type
threshold and an acreage threshold.
Mr. Trias asked why that would be done before DRI approval and what is the advantage.
Mr. Zboril replied the main reason is because they are low in the land inventory at development
in St. Lucie West for residential projects. He explained that they need some more residential
projects to keep the buyers happy.
Mr. Jones asked if the streets in the PUD portion going to be private or public.
Mr. Zboril replied they would both be private.
Mr. Jones asked how that would work with the pedestrian access through that area.
Mr. Zboril stated that they envision submitting to the County applications for a Community
Development District.
Mr. Grande asked if there was annexation anticipated in to the City at the earliest point possible.
Mr. Hegener replied that the property is located in St. Lucie County. The St. Lucie County Land
Development Code and Comprehensive Plan provides for the uses that will be there. They wish
to continue the working relationship with the County, even though St. Lucie West is in the City
of Port St. Lucie.
Mr. Grande stated the utilities would be provided by the City of Port St. Lucie and quite
frequently those agreements need annexations.
Mr. Heam stated he has a concern about the assurances of the building of the multiple use
building and the completion of that before a certain phases are completed. He asked if that would
be part of conditions from staff.
Mr. Kelly replied that it is aconcem of staff. He stated it is also a concern of the developers,
because without those things the community described does not fully exist. He explained that
this evening is more for a general review and consider the appropriateness of having it there
without putting a hard time line on it. The negotiations are still going on and it would be very
difficult to tie a time line to it.
Mr. Hearn stated his concern is that issues like this have come up in the past.
January 18, 2001
page 8
!,.'..r Xa'+4r.Yit i .y. vy. e^f :::ti -iRv �Jq�„t`Rvu?h.+144a"'.tc''.'�.'.+°`j4'.'��Fl y.
R
Mr. Kelly stated what this board can do is recommend to the County Commission to try and put
a time -line on it. He explained that by that time the developer would have had the opportunity to
work out a lot of the issues.
Mr. Hearn stated he is not sure how to maintain the building zero lot line. If there is painting or
repair work that needs to be done.
Chairman Matthes asked the applicant to come forward and express different communities that
exist with the same approach.
Mr. Zboril stated that the minimum lot size for anything proposed residential is 30 x 85 in a
range of 85 to 135 on the depth and 90 on width. There are not provisions for zero set backs on
two units. If there is zero on one side then there is a setback on the other side.
Mr. Hearn asked if the resident would have to trespass on the neighboring property to do repairs.
He would like to know what the plans are to take of that type of situation.
Mr. Hegener replied that zero lot line projects would apply for an easement or get access by
neighbors. They will provide in the final documentation a Home Owner Association documents,
design criteria, and an outline to show how that will work.
Mr. Grande stated that for Mr. Heam's benefit there are a number of communities that have that
type of partial zero- lot line on one side. Currently on island it works extremely well. There have
never been any problems maintaining the face on the zero lot line side. It is well cared -for is the
association documents.
Mr. Grande asked why on condition #45 is staff reserving the right to move 100 units from one
side to the other.
Mr. Hegener replied that there were some market flexibility. They needed the ability to .
determine exactly where the market is going to go during the phasing of the project.
Mr. Grande stated going from East to West from the less dense residential to the more dense
residential area indicates that the residential would have to be expanded at the cost of retail or
commercial on the east side.
Mr. Zboril stated that they are seeking approval for a variable lot size configuration based upon
builder and buyer preference. He stated that there are land areas that are allocated a certain
number of units. Those units may be reached before the land area is exhausted before a certain
set of assumptions. Those land areas may be exhatged based on all the units are used up based
upon the maximum lot sizes, thus meaning they will run out of land before they run out of lots..,
January 18, 2001 page 9
Mr. Kelly interjected and stated that staff wished to speak with board about condition #45. Staff
is going to recommend the transfer can go either way. The total project is still capped at 800
total. If on either side the market demand was for the very smallest of the lots then there would
be additional land available on whichever side. The impacts of this phase are the 800 units and
the intent of condition #45 and the modification to go either way is to cap the number of units at
the total of 800. It started with the transfer to the east, but as discussions went on it became
apparent it could work the other way as long as the total number of units stayed constant.
Mr. Lounds asked if the commercial area was not as absorbed as quickly as hoped, he would like
to know if it is possible to take the commercial area that has been set aside and change it in to
residential.
Mr. Kelly replied that the intent was not to change any of the boundaries between the residential
and non-residential uses. The street pattern is proposed with variable lot widths. If something in
the market dictates the average lot width, it probably uses the land up with the 200 units.
Therefore the uses will not change from residential to non-residential or vice versa.
Mr. Trias asked why they would build with this idea other than what they have previously track
record.
Mr. Hegener replied that nationally and regionally are observing younger families with the
offices in the home. There is a need being seen for this type of neighborhood, because it is .
attractive to those types of families. These types of communities on the east side will be seen
with mini -vans and sport utility vehicles as opposed to what may be seen in other areas. They
feel this is an attractive package. -
Mr. Grande asked if one side could lay dormant if the transfer of density took place.
Mr. Kelly stated that it could happen even without the transfer of the density either way. He
explained that when he comes back in front of the board in the future is when that will be dealt
with as far as the transfer.
Mr. Merritt would like to hear the rest of the presentation.
Mr. Kelly stated that he onlyspoke of the PUD only.and Mr. Zboril spoke in general of the
whole project. The PMUD is generally located immediately East of the PUD and the North
South road and the zoning is AG-1 and the proposed PMUD Zoning District and the Land Use
designation is RU. There are 185 %: acres in that parcel with the proposal of 200 units with
associated infrastructure. The infrastructure includes 153,500 feet of commercial retail and
offices. There is a recreational facility in that there still needs some work. In the PMUD side
there will be the civic site and a smaller civic site, de're are areas for retail and commercial and a
rather large lake that is part of the retention area. There is a grid pattern for the residential area.
There will be a need for 2 different public hearings for each side.
January 18, 2001 page 10
.. "vW u' �'4�`�. } r e =;4a�' '�'�-zi 44�'wy. �'� • F` khs�Nkh.;+.�a�
Mr. Heam asked why they are separate and not combined.
Mr. Kelly replied because of open space requirements for maximum amount of residential and
non-residential within the PMUD. In order to make it all fit it worked out this way. The PUD
western portion is much more of traditional PUD project in itself.
Chairman Matthes opened the public hearing for the zoning change to the PUD. There
being no one the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Matthes opened the public hearing for the zoning change to the PMUD. There
being no on the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Matthes asked if there were any other questions for staff.
Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Zboril if they were trying to get this like the Heathrow Development in
Northern Florida.
Mr. Zboril stated that that market would probably dictate that.
Mr. Kelly stated that he is going to point out the conditions that staff really feels that needs to be
addressed. He stated that #4, 5, and 6 talk about wetlands and there is a lot of verbage in those.
Staff wants to assure that the appropriate agencies look at the wetlands and that they are treated
in a lawful manner. He stated that #18 is the condition that authorizes the developer enter into
agreements for their potable water sources and authorizes. City of Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie West
District, or through a Community Development District create an onsite system. He would
propose #18-a that would say nothing will happen if they do not have potable water. This is a
kind of concurrency condition that will be similar to #24, which is the wastewater. He explained
that #25 has changed in to a civic site instead, but it indicates the developer. will be subject to
educational facility impact fees. Then #27 gives the developer an out stating that if he would
construct a school or dedicate a school site then he would be eligible for credit to impact fees. He
explained that there was the same situation with recreation and open space the developer will be
subject to impact fees. Then #29 should stay there with at least the 40% on the west side which is
part of the code. He stated that #31 which obligates the developers to pay the environmental
impact fees as they may be amended All impact fees have the clause for amendment. There are
conditions # 43 and #44 obligate them to pay transportation impact fees or a credit can be
worked out with the City. Then #48 requires final development plans and architectural
guidelines. These are the conditions that staff recommends as conditions. The ones that were not
mentioned are not recommended at this time.
Chairman Matthes asked the developers if this was {$ the realm of their plans or will their be
something to be discussed.
January 18, 2001 page 11
Mr. Zboril stated they are fine with conditions pointed out by Mr. Kelly. He would like to ensure
that the conditions regarding the habitat, wildlife, and vegetation track with the conditions
imposed by South Florida Water Management and the Army Corps of Engineers. That there are
no additional burdens created in seeking those approvals.
Mr. Kelly stated that was the intent in conditions #4,5, and 6.
Ms. Dreyer, attorney representing the applicant, stated the intent of the conditions and the
concerns that staff has for these conditions. She stated that the conditions may be subject to some
further refinement and language clarification prior to the Board of County Commission meeting
with that understanding the conditions are acceptable.
Mr. Grande asked if there are any of the fifty conditions that could be a problem at this point.
Ms. Dreyer replied that there has not been enough time to thoroughly review these conditions
and a number of them will need to be considered during the DRI process, whether they are
appropriate for the first phase of this project is something staff recognizes.
Ms. Lounds asked if it is Ms. Dreyer and staffs understanding that local concerns do not
supercede the Army Corps of Engineers or Drainage district rulings on wetlands.
Ms. Dreyer stated that they understand that wetlands are determined by the water management
district and the federal government.
Mr. Aiken asked staff if changing the language to say "civic" site, instead of school site change
any of the condition.
Mr. Kelly replied that it will change #26 since there are still education facilities imposed on all
new structures in St. Lucie County.
Mr. Hearn asked if on condition #8 what does the word sufficient mean in that language.
Mr. Murphy replied that the conditions that are being seen are structured from existing
development orders in the county of DRI nature. The terminology used refers to other permitting
agencies. The terms sufficient routing would imply that it has to satisfy South Florida Water
Management criteria. The language is more to the point of putting people on notice that there are
things that need to by complied with and need to be identified at the preliminary phase. These
will be furthered refined at some point in a year from now.
Mr. Hearn asked about condition #9 and how wide does the buffer zone required to be.
January 19, 2001 page 12
arR) TIiS^1e+�f'. .21,.0 .La-�i'�m,P
4a
ONA
Mr. Murphy replied that the plans show currently 25 feet but the ultimate determination of that
will be that buffer zone requirements of the county and through the Environmental Resource
Permitting criteria. Then the criteria will be 15 feet in the minimum. There will probably be
some different variations before it said and done.
After discussion of the various conditions and a motion to include all the conditions, which was
discussed and withdrawn, Mr. Grande indicated that he believed the conditions to be
inappropriate at this time.
Mr. Grande moved for approval of the Planned Unit Development Mr. Lounds seconded the
motions. Upon a roll call vote the motion was passed unanimously.
Mr. McCurdy moved for approval of the Planned Mixed Use Development to known as
Westchester. Mr. Lounds seconded the motion. Upon a roll call vote the motion was passed
unanimously.
44
January 18, 2001 page 13
,%W ,"W
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW: 1/18/01
File Number PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
MEMORANDUM
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Planning Manager
DATE: January11, 2001
SUBJECT: Application of Westchester Development Company, for Preliminary
Planned Unit Development approval for the Project Known as Westchester -
PUD, and for a Change in Zoning from the AG-1 (Agricultural — 1 du/acre)
Zoning District to the PUD (Planned Unit Development - Westchester)
Zoning District.
LOCATION: North side of Gatlin Boulevard immediately west of the 1-95
Interchange, approximately one mile west of the intersection
of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescia Street.
ZONING DESIGNATION: AG-1 (Agricultural Residential 1 — du/acre)
PROPOSED ZONING: PUD (Planned Unit Development — Westchester)
LAND USE DESIGNATION: RU (Residential Urban)
PARCEL SIZE: 373.06 acres
PROPOSED USE: 600 Single -Family lots with associated infrastructure,
recreational uses and required open space.
SURROUNDING ZONING: AG-1 (Agricultural —1 du/acre) to the north, south, east, and
west.
SURROUNDING LAND USES: RU (Residential Urban) to the north, south and west; and
MXD Gatlin Boulevard to the east.
FIREIEMS PROTECTION: Station #10 (777 SW Dalton Road), is located approximately
5 miles to the east.
UTILITY SERVICE: Port St. Lucie Utilities or St. Lucie West will provide water
and sewer services.
1�kw
'./
January 9, 2001
Page 2
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
RIGHT-OF-WAY
ADEQUACY:
SCHEDULED
IMPROVEMENTS:
TYPE OF CONCURRENCY
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
Petition: Westchester PUD
File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
See Comments
See Comments
Certificate of Capacity.
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 the following determinations:
Whether the proposed rezoning is In conflict with any applicable portions of the
St. Lucie County Land Development Code;
The proposed rezoning has been determined to not be in conflict with any applicable
provision of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. The application for
Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval has been reviewed for
consistency with the provisions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and
has been determined to meet all applicable standards of review.
2. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan;
The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed amendment would be consistent with
all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. This change in zoning will,
for example, allow the applicant to develop the subject property in a manner that
encourages innovative use of land. This Planned Unit Development (PUD) will result in
a lesser density than that which would be allowed under the current future land use
designation. There are 600 single-family lots proposed for construction within the
Westchester PUD. If the subject property were developed at its maximum residential
density, 1865 dwelling units would be possible.
3. Whether and the extent to which the proposed zoning is inconsistent with the
existing and proposed land uses;
4%w .d
January 9, 2001 Petition: Westchester PUD
Page 3 File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
This proposed change in zoning and the accompanying Preliminary Planned Unit
Development site plan have been determined to be consistent with the general land
uses in the surrounding area. The Future Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan indicate that the petitioned property is suitable for development at
a density of 5 dwelling units per gross acre. The proposed development indicates a
gross density of 1.61 dwelling units per acre.
4. Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment;
There are no changes that would 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 proposed site plan, which is tied to this rezoning, is expected to create additional
demands on all public facilities in this area. As the proposed development is located within
the service area of the Port St. Lucie Utility Department, the applicant was required to
provide sufficient documentation stating capacity was available to meet the needs of the
proposed project. The Port St. Lucie Utility Department has provided a letter stating that
sufficient water and sewer service is available to support the proposed development. The
developer is currently working with the city to secure this service. Water and sewer service
are also available from St. Lucie West.
The subject property is located west of the existing terminus of Gatlin Boulevard.
According to the applicant's traffic impact report the following three roadway facilities,
which are located within the project study area, are scheduled for improvements within
the Port St. Lucie Capital Improvement Program (CIP):
Airoso Boulevard 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Boulevard to FY 2000-2001
Prima Vista Boulevard
Gatlin Boulevard 4-lane divided from 1-95 to Port St. Lucie FY 2001-2002
Boulevard
B a y s h o r e 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Boulevard to FY 2001-2003
Boulevard Prima Vista Boulevard
The applicant's Traffic Impact Report (TIR) indicates that the proposed project will not
negatively affect any of the surrounding roadway links. The applicant has stated within
the Traffic Impact Report (TIR) that they will commit to constructing that portion of Gatlin
Boulevard as a four lane divided roadway from 1-95 to the projects entrance, a distance
of approximately one -mile.
v
. .i
January 9, 2001 Petition: Westchester PUD
Page 4 File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
In addition, the applicant will construct a section of a new north/south arterial roadway
which will ultimately connect to Glades Cutoff Road. This additional arterial will be a 4-
lane facility and intersect the southern property line at Gatlin Boulevard, approximately
one mile west of 1-95. Further, the applicant is proposing to construct a new north/south
collector road as part of the proposed development. This collector roadway is proposed
to be located approximately �/2 mile west of 1-95. This collector roadway facility will
provide direct access to a proposed school, a portion of the proposed residential
development and all proposed commercial uses.
The proposed development will provide approximately 185.5 acres (49.72% of the site)
as open space. This open space includes the 13.73-acre recreational facility and 79.45
acres of common area. In addition 33.05 acres of wetlands will be incorporated into the
site design and 59.27 acres of lakes will be constructed within the design.
The proposed development will address its impact on the school district through the
provision of a 12.38 acre school site and /or the construction and operation of a school
on a 54 acre site within the Planned Mixed Use (PMUD) Development area which is
located to the east of this PUD.
6. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment;
The proposed amendment is not anticipated to create adverse impacts on the natural
environment. The applicant through the PUD (Planned Unit Development) approval
process, has proposed a development plan that provides for the protection of
environmentally sensitive areas. The applicant will need to obtain all permits relating to
environmental impacts on the site prior to any construction. These agencies include but
are not limited to the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), South Florida Water Manageme w
District (SFWMD) and the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission.
The environmental impact report (EIR) indicates that there are a number of wetlands
located throughout the subject land parcel. In this phase of development, the applicant
is proposing to preserve all of the wetlands located on the land parcel. This will result in
no net loss of wetlands for this development.
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;
The proposed zoning designation would result in an orderly and logical development
pattern. The development is within the urban service boundary west of the 1-95
Interchange along Gatlin Boulevard west of Port St. Lucie. The logical growth pattern
within this area will allow for the development of this project as an integrated
January 9, 2001 Petition: Westchester PUD
Page 5 File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
development with residential and required service components. In this manner, the
applicant is proposing to incorporate a portion of the smart growth ideas into the design
of the overall project. There will be two sections developed within Phase I of the overall
development. The first section is the 600 unit PUD considered in this petition. The
second section is a Planned Mixed Use development (PMUD) which incorporates 200
residential units along with commercial and civic uses.
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, Westchester Development Company,.is proposing the development of the
phase one of an integrated project which will include residential, commercial and civic uses.
This petition covers the Westchester PUD, a 600 unit single-family residential subdivision
identified as "Westside" in the attached plans. The total phase one project is 581.63 acres
divided into this 208.57 acre Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) and a 373.06 acre PUD
which is the subject of this petition. The PMUD will be considered as a separate but related
project. As a PUD (Planned Unit Development), the project proposes to develop the subject
property with some flexibility, such as establishing area and yard standards which are different
from those required in the standard zoning districts, and the ability to cluster dwelling units to
protect environmentally sensitive areas on site. The developer is thus able to reduce the
environmental impacts on the property to a greater degree than with more conventional
development. The proposed development will preserve 33.05 acres of the 34.89 acres of
existing wetlands found on the site.
Section 7.01.03(1) of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code requires that 35%(130.57
acres) of the site must consist of open space, a minimum or 15% (19.58 acres) of which must
be native upland habitat preserved in its natural condition. The planned development maintains
49.72% of the project area in open space. Wetlands account for 33.05 acres (8.9%), the
recreation tract is 13.73 acres (15.8%), common open space is 79.45 acres (21.3%), and lake
features are 59.27 acres (15.8%). The remainder of the project consists of those areas
designated for residential development. The open space calculations do not include any front,
side or back yards.
Staff has determined that the proposed zoning designation and the Preliminary Planned Unit
Development site plan is compatible with the existing and proposed uses in the area. This petition
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. This development will be at a density below what is permitted by the
0
January 9, 2001 Petition: Westchester PUD
Page 6 File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
Future Land Use Designation of this property. In considering any approval actions, staff
recommends that you forward Resolution attached with this petition to the Board of
County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to the conditions found in said
resolution.
Please contact this office if you have any questions on this matter.
Attachment
cs
cc: Westchester Development Company
Greg Boggs, Thomas Lucido & Associates
File
Section 3.01.03
Zoning District Use Regulations
3.01.03 ZONING DISTRICTS
A. AG-1 AGRICULTURAL - 1
Purpose
The purpose of this district is to provide and protect an environment suitable for productive
commercial agriculture, together with such other uses as may be necessary to and compatible with
productive agricultural surroundings. Residential densities are restricted to a maximum of one (1)
dwelling unit per gross acre. The number in "()" following each identified use corresponds to the SIC
code reference described in Section 3.01.02(B). The number 999 applies to a use not defined under
the SIC code but may be further defined in Section 2.00.00 of this Code.
2. Permitted Uses
a. Agricultural production - crops (o+)
b. Agricultural production - livestock & animal specialties (0e)
C. Agricultural services (or) —
d. Family day care homes. (9s)
e. Family residential homes provided that such homes shall not be located within a radius of
one thousand (1,000) feet of another existing such family residential home and provided that
the sponsoring agency or Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) notifies
the Board of County Commissioners at the time of home occupancy that the home is licensed
by HRS. (see)
f. Fishing, hunting & trapping (os)
g. Forestry (oe)
h. Kennels. (02e2)
I. Research Facilities, Noncommercial (e733)
j. Riding stables. (rase)
k. Single -'family detached dwellings. (ees)
3. Lot Size Requirements
Lot size requirements shall be in accordance with Table 1 in Section 7.04.00.
4. Dimensional Regulations
Dimensional requirements shall be in accordance with Table 1 in Section 7.04.00.
5. Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements
Off-street parking and loading requirements are subject to Section 7.06.00.
6. Landscaping Requirements
Landscaping requirements are subject to Section 7.09.00.
7. Conditional Uses
a. Agricultural labor housing. (see)
Adopted August 1, 1990 94 Revised Through 0a101100
Om
Section 3.01.03
Zoning District Use Regulations
b. Aircraft storage and equipment maintenance. (4MI)
C. Airports and Flying, landing, and takeoff fields. (4901)
d. Family residential homes located within a radius of one thousand (1,000) feet of another such
family residential home. (999)
e. Farm products warehousing and storage. (422114222)
f. Gasoline service stations. (55 11
g. Industrial wastewater disposal. (999)
h. Manufacturing:
(1) Agricultural chemicals (292)
(2) Food & kindred products (20)
(3) Lumber & wood products, except furniture (24)
Mining and quarrying of nonmetalic minerals, except fuels. (14)
Retail trade:
(1) Farm equipment and related accessories. (999)
(2) Apparel & accessory stores. (56)
k. Sewage disposal subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.13. (999)
1. Telecommunication Towers - subject to the standards of Section 7.10.23 (999)
M. Camps - sporting and recreational. (7o32) —
8. Accessory Uses
Accessory uses are subject to the requirements of Section 8.00.00, and include the following:
a. Mobile homes subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.05.
b. Retail trade and wholesale trade - subordinate to the primary authorized use or activity
C. Guest house subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.04. (9s9)
Adopted August 1, 1990 95 Revised Through 08/01/00
CHAPTER VII
DEVELOPMENT DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT
STANDARDS
7.00.00 GENERAL PROVISIONS
7.00.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Chapter is to provide development design and improvement standards applicable to
development activity in the unincorporated area of the County.
7.01.00 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
7.01.01 PURPOSE
The Planned Unit Development (PUD) District is intended to achieve residential land development of superior
quality through the encouragement of flexibility and creativity in design options that:
A. permit creative approaches to the development of residential land reflecting changes in the
technology of land development;
B. allow for the efficient use of land, which can result in smaller networks of utilities and streets and
thereby lower development costs;
C. allow design options that encourage an environment of stable character, compatible with surrounding
land uses; and
D. permit the enhancement of neighborhoods through the preservation of natural features, the provision
of underground utilities, and the provision of recreation areas and open space.
7.01.02 AUTHORIZED USES
A. PERMITTED USES
Any permitted, conditional or accessory use in the Agricultural-1 (AG-1); Agricultural-2.5 (AG-2.5);
Agricultural-5 (AG-5); Residential/Conservation in the Agricultural-1 (AG-1); Agricultural-2.5 (AG-2.5);
Agricultural-5 (AG-5); Residential/Conservation (RC); Residential, Estate-1 (RE-1); Residential,
Estate-2 (RE-2); Residential, Single-Family-2 (RS-2); Residential, Single-Family-3 (IRS-3);
Residential, Single-Family-4 (RS-4); Residential, Multiple-Family-5 (RM-5); Residential, Mobile Home-
5 (RMH-5); Residential, Multiple-Family-7 (RM-7); Residential, Multiple-Family-9 (RM-9); Residential,
Multiple-Family-11 (RM-11); and Residential, Multiple-Family-15 (RM-15) zoning districts of this Code
may be permitted in a Planned Unit Development District subject to complying with the residential
densities described in Section 7.01.03(B).
Adopted August 1, 1990 375 Revised Through 08/01/00
Now ..+
Section 7.01.00
Planned Unit Development
NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT USES
Uses of the types permitted in the Commercial, Neighborhood (CN) District are also permitted up to
an amount not to exceed three (3) percent of the gross area of the Planned Unit Development or ten
(10) acres, whichever is less. In addition, playgrounds, public and non-public parks, golf courses,
country clubs, bicycle paths, racquet sports facilities, riding stables, marinas, clubhouses, and lodges
may be permitted in a Planned Unit Development District.
7.01.03 STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS
Standards and requirements for a Planned Unit Development shall be as follows:
A. MINIMUM SIZE
A Planned Unit Development shall be a minimum of five (5) contiguous acres of land under common
ownership or control. -
B. DENSITY
The maximum possible permitted density of a Planned Unit Development shall not exceed the density
reflected in the Future Land Use Maps of the Comprehensive Plan. On North and South Hutchinson
Island, the provisions of Section 3.01.03(AA)(8) shall govern.
C. AREA, YARD, AND HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS
Area, yard, and height requirements shall be determined at the time of Preliminary and Final
Development Plan approval, except that for any structure on North or South Hutchinson Island that
has not been occupied, constructed, or has not received a building permit, site plan or other County
development approval as a permitted use prior to January 10, 1995 the requirements of Section
4.01.00, Hutchinson Island - Building Height Overlay Zone shall apply.
D. PUBLIC FACILITIES
The Planned Unit Development shall be designed and located so there will be no net public
cost for the provision of water lines, sewage lines, storm and surface drainage systems, and
other utility systems.
2. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities is
six (6") inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County -
Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau.
3. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities,
that are located on a dead-end water main is eight (8") inches. Actual water main
requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County -Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau.
Adopted August 1, 1990 376 Revised Through 08/01/00
09
Section 7.01.00
Planned Unit Development
The maximum number of fire hydrants that may be located on any dead end water main is
one (1).
4. Fire hydrants shall be provided at a minimum spacing of one every six hundred (600) feet
unless otherwise approved by the St. Lucie County -Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau.
E. TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
1. Every dwelling unit, or other use permitted in the Planned Unit Development shall have
access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian
way, or other area dedicated to public or private use.
2. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with
controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor
streets within the Planned Unit Development shall not be connected to streets outside the
development so as to encourage their use by through traffic.
3. The proposed Planned Unit Development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic
congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the project, or such surrounding
collector or arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected.
4. All non-residential land uses within the Planned Unit Development shall have direct access
to a collector or arterial street without creafing traffic hazards or congestion on any street.
5. Streets in a Planned Unit Development may be dedicated to public use or retained under
private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent
County regulations and ordinances, however, variations to the standard minimum right-of-
way widths may be considered as part of the Planned Unit Development if it is shown to the
satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners, that the requested variation is consistent
with the intent of the County's roadway construction standards and necessary for the design
of the Planned Unit Development.
6. All roads and streets shall intersect at an approximate ±50 angle of ninety degrees (900)
unless circumstances acceptable to St. Lucie County indicate a need for a lesser angle of
intersection.
7. Street jogs or centerline offsets between any local street or road with another local street or
road, shall be no less than one hundred fifty feet (150).
8. The intersection of any two local roads or streets with a Major Collector or Arterial Roadway
shall be separated by a minimum distance of six hundred sixty feet (660), as measured from
centerline to centerline.
9. Permanent dead-end streets shall not exceed one thousand feet (1000) in length.
Cul-de-sacs shall be provided at the end of all dead end roads or streets greater than five
Adopted August 1. 1990 377 Revised Through 08/01/00
1%W
NWW
Section 7.01.00
Planned Unit Development
hundred and one (501) feet in length. The length of a dead-end street shall be measured
along the centerline of the street from the its point of perpendicular intersection with the
centerline of intersecting street to the end of the dead-end street or roadway. All cul-de-sacs
shall have a minimum right-of-way diameter of one hundred (100) feet.
If the dead end roadway is five hundred (500) feet or less in length, a' Y' or —P' type of turn
around may be approved.
If a dead end street is temporary in nature then a temporary cul-de-sac shall be required until
the roadway is connected to another street or road.
In the center of the cul-de-sac an unpaved island, surrounded by a curb, improved with grass
and landscaping that will not interfere with sight distance, may be provided. Center islands
shall have a diameter of not less than seventeen (17) feet, unless otherwise approved
through the review of the Planned Unit Development.
10. All roadways, exclusive of interior parking and access aisles areas, regardless of ownership,
shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any exterior building walls, except for
security gate houses or similar security structures located in a private street or road right-of-
way.
11. Any pedestrian circulation system and its related walkways shall be insulated from the
vehicular street system. This shall include, when deemed to be necessary by the Board of
County Commissioners, pedestrian underpasses or overpasses in the vicinity of playgrounds
and other recreation areas, local shopping areas, and other neighborhood uses which
generate a considerable amount of pedestrian traffic.
12. Access points on all collector or arterial streets serving a Planned Unit Development shall be
located and spaced so that traffic moving into and out of the arterial streets do not cause
traffic congestion.
F. PARKING AND LOADING
General Provisions
a. The number, type, and location of parking spaces shall be -determined at the time of
final Planned Unit Development plan approval. The determination of the number of
spaces required shall be based on Section 7.06.01(F) of this Code. The number of
parking spaces required by this section may be reduced based on substantial
competent evidence that the reduced number of spaces is adequate for the
proposed use or that parking may be shared by proximate uses that operate at
different times or on different days.
b. Reserved parking spaces may be provided, in lieu of paved spaces, subject to
Section 7.06.02(C) of this Code.
Adopted August 1, 1990 378
Revised Through 08/01/00
1%M'
1%W
I
C
H
Section 7.01.00
Planned Unit Development
2. Off Street Parking and Loading
Off-street parking and loading requirements are governed by Sections 7.06.02 and 7.06.03
of this Code, and the following standards:
a. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be designed to provide travelways
between adjacent uses while discouraging through traffic.
b. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be screened from adjacent roads and
pedestrian walkways with hedges, dense planting, or changes in grades or walls.
3. On Street Parking
In Planned Unit Developments, on street parking may be used so long as the road on which
the on -street parking is proposed lies entirely within the limits of the defined Planned Unit
Development and such parking would not contravene any other provision of this Code or the
St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances. Where such on street parking and loading is used, it
shall be consistent with the following design standards:
a. The minimum size of a parking stall shall be as follows:
parallel 8 feet X 23 feet
angled 10 feet X 18 feet
handicapped(parallel) 12 feet X 23 feet
handicapped(angled) 12 feet X 18 feet
b. Handicapped parking spaces shall be appropriately marked.
C. Access for emergency fire vehicles shall be in accordance with NFPA standards.
d. No more than fifteen (15) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row
without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of 360 square feet.
LIGHTING
All lighting facilities shall be arranged in such a manner so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous
interference of any kind to adjoining streets or properties.
LANDSCAPING AND NATURAL FEATURES
1. Native trees and vegetation and other natural features shall be preserved to the extent
practicable.
2. All sensitive environmental vegetation, trees and areas shall be preserved to the extent
practicable.
Adopted August 1, 1990 379 Revised Through 08/01/00
MLM
..d
Section 7.01.00
Planned Unit Development
3. Landscaping for off-street parking and loading areas shall meet the minimum requirements
of Section 7.09.00.
OPEN SPACE STANDARDS
A minimum of thirty-five (35) percent of the gross area of land to be committed to a Planned
Unit Development must be for use as common open space, which may include, parks,
recreation areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, marinas, swimming beaches,
common open space, common landscaping and planting areas, or other areas of public
purposes or use other than street, road or drainage rights -of -way, above ground utilities,
excluding stormwater treatment facilities, and parking areas.
A minimum of 15 percent of any existing native upland habitat on the property, must be
preserved in its natural condition as part of the required 35 percent common open space,
For each acre of preserved native habitat above the required minimum 15 percent that is
preserved in its original state, credit shall be given at a rate of 150 percent ptsr acre towards
the remaining common open space requirement.
All areas to be dedicated for common open space shall be identified as part of the
Preliminary Development Plan for the Planned Unit Development. Areas that are floodways,
lakes, wetlands, and stormwater retention areas may be applied to satisfy the total common
open space requirement, subject to the requirement that 15% of any existing native habitat
on the property must be included as part of the required 35% common open space. As part
of the Final Planned Unit Development submission process, the developer or petitioner for
the Planned Unit Development shall provide for one of the following:
a. The advance dedication of all common open space to a public, or acceptable private,
agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and
any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it. All such
dedications or conveyances shall be completed prior to the issuance of any building
permits, including land clearing, for any portion of the Planned Unit Development ;or,
b. A phased conveyance of the land to a public or acceptable private agency that will,
upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any buildings,
structures or improvements that have been placed on it. The schedule for the
phased conveyance of any such lands to be used for common open space shall be
a specific condition of approval for the Planned Unit Development.
2. No parcel of land identified for use as a park or common open space shall be less than one
(1) contiguous acre, and all such areas shall be physically part of the Planned Unit Devel-
opment.
3. Areas provided or reserved to meet any other environmental preservation or protection
requirements of this code or other lawful regulatory authority may be counted towards the
overall common open space requirement, provided that the common open space meets the
Adopted August 1, 1990 380 Revised Through 08/01/00
`bo *MW
Section 7.01.00
Planned Unit Development
requirements of this Code.
SETBACKS FROM AGRICULTURAL LAND
Planned Unit Developments adjacent to land used for agricultural purposes, or designated for
agricultural use on the Future Land Use Map of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, shall
provide setbacks from the agricultural land sufficient to protect the function and operation of those
uses from the encroachment of Urban activities or uses.
K. PHASING
1. A Planned Unit Development may be developed in more than one stage or phase
2. If a Final Development Site Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners is to be
developed in stages or phases, each successive phase shall be constructed and developed
in a reasonably continuous fashion. No more than two (2) years shall elapse between the
completion of any stage or phase, and the final stage or phase shall be completed within ten
(10) years of the date of Final Development Site Plan approval. Extensions of the above
requirements are subject to approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Unless
otherwise amended by the Board of County Commissioners through the Final Development
Site Plan review process, the following sequence of development must be adhered to:
a. One or more major recreation facilities and other major amenities, planned to serve
the entire development, shall be completed or adequate security posted prior to the
issuance of building or mobile home permits of more than forty (40) percent, or other
percentage as determined by the Board to be appropriate based on circumstances
that include the size of the project and the proposed phasing schedule, of the total
number of authorized dwelling units. Recreation facilities or facilities and other
amenities planned to serve one (1) phase of a multi -phased development shall be
completed or appropriate security posted prior to issuance of building or mobile
home permits or the recording of any final plat within that phase.
b. No commercial facility shall be permitted prior to the completion of at least forty (40)
percent of the total number of authorized dwelling units; and,
C. " For Planned Unit Developments to be constructed in stages or phases, the net
density of an individual stage or phase may vary from the approved Final Site Plan
subject to the requirements in Section 11.02.05.
Adopted August 1, 1990 381 Revised Through 08/01/00
OKEECHOBEE
7 36 S
COUNW
7 35 5
7 ]r S
/J
a
,l
A
r
T
v
<uw ca.
Z
yO
Z
a
c
siren ww
a
�r
r-F
�rwa n.0 row
T
a
(7
.uwc sK ww
s ww
O
uer..
a
u
R. M
O
a
u
u
R
a us
6
a
f•
V
4
C
N-
loo
y
r
F
n a
f
t
7tA
T7
N
O
-n
o�
O
F
3 e ��
O
e`
o
cn
�3
o y
.✓
A Petition of St. Lucie Farms Inc. for a Rezoning from AG-1 (Agricultural, 1 uniVacre) to PUD
(Planned Unit Development) and PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) for the project known
as Westchester, an 800 unit mixed use residential development.
RZ 00-015
Community Development
This pattern indicates Ge�o Map preparedDoam�1.2=ems
subject parcel
N
N
0
0
cn3 O
C
Cn
D_0
�• w
CD
�C
0D
CD
�.
Q
CD - C�
r+
n
C
3
cn
CD
o
¢t a v
aE m 0:c
i
[[[°� O
r m p �s
P $ w m
cn CD a
f7 b fR 7 - '•� ''�
)i }pCD':
m
*. e
L
IJ�J 0+ U UP
0,I biW IVOi�A�i�C it
N;O N N: O 0100 jl
N:O10'O'OId-
OO"O OO O OO O O;
O OO O O OO.O OO
�-Io0
pro o d o rrrrrl,�
G iN N.O
�..o o n'o-_o 0 0 oro
G IG w IC
010 .RIO ,
ly t�i:;niN I �
i aaoa �
Ni0 0'0 0
j
i0C X JCf X I m o K.
N H
S.N N W
N N J N
aJJ' �Jaaaaa�
m I I m w oo V3 ao
OI I IO O CIO
O
w w til!w�
I i
t hf � t r t hf t. II
r rirrr rir
I
W WIW W IN IN w WIw'w
W INN'N NIW �W 1W Ww�N .
A JJ�p J AIA A A�Ayd
OIN.N A�N.OIO�OIOIOj
O:O�.O OIO IOO O OIO '�
ONN O N,O OO O:'O� N
O
O
c
1
1
FEB-22-2001 12:16 THE STUART NEWS 561 221 4126 P.02iO4
® 2090606 -Black 2/22/r21 0:44 0:002090606 Mary Byrne Black ti7
`.+"
ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COU TY COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING AG
March 6, 2001
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given In accordance with Section 11.00.03 of tho St. Lucie County Land
Development Code and in accordance with the provisions of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive
Plan, that the following applicant has requested that the St. Lucie County Board of County
Commissioners consider their request as follows:
1. Westchester Development Company, for o change in zoning from AG-1 (Agricultural - 1
du/ocre) Zoning District to the PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) Zoning District to be
known as Westchester for the following described property:
Being aparcel of land located in Sections9, and 10, Township 37 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie
County, Florida. Sold parcel being more particularly described as follows! Commence at the
intersection of the centerline of Gatlin Boulevard, (also being the North line of Section 15) and the
Westerly limits of Gatlin Boulevard Right-of-Woy and the Westerly limits of those lands
described In an Order of Taking, dated July 24, 1979 and recorded in Official Record Book 311
at Pages 2946 through, 2952, inclusive, Public Records of St Lucie Count.X, Florida, and as shown
on the Florida Deportment of Transportation Right -of -Way maps for State Road #9 (1-95),
Section 94001.2412, doted 6/2/77, with lost. revision of 9/11 /79; thence N 00"02'55" W, a
distance of 100.00 feel; thence S 89S57'05" W, a distance of 588.36 to the Point of Beginning;
thence. S 89"57'05" W, a distance of 1839.74 feet to the beginning of o tangent curve concave
concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 175,00 feet, thence along the arc of said curve
through a central angle of 54"37'25", a distance of 166.84 feet to a point of reverse curvature
with a curve concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 300.00 feet; lhence along the are of
said curve through a central angle of 18"57'46", a distance of 99.29 feet to a point of reverse
curvature with a curve concave to The Northeast, having a radius of 175,00 feet; thence along the
arc of said curve through a central angle of 54"3725", a distance of 166.84 feet, thence N
W14'09" E, tangent to the lost described curve, a distance of 1672.37 feet to the beginning of a
tangent curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 3100.00 feet; thence along the arc of
sold curve through a central angle of 25"48'20", a distance of 1396.22 feet; thence N 26002'03"
W, non -tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 50.00-feet; thence N 63*43'13" E, a
distance of 196.38 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the ScOith, having a radius of
525.00 feet; the chord -of which bears N 78°27'42 E; thence along the c�rc of said curve through
a control angle of 29"26'59", a distance of 269.69 feet; thence S 86"48'48" E, a distance of
62.97 feet to the beginning of or curve. concave to the Northwest, having a radius of 275.34 feet;
the chord of which bears N 47"34'02" E. thence along the arc of sold curve through a central
angle of 91°11'51", a distance of 438.26 feet to a point of reverse curvature with a curve
concave to the East, having a radius of 527.97 feet; the chord of whiclIff bears N 20"16'30" E;
thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 40910,57', a distance of 370.26
feet to o point ofreversecurvature with a curve concave to tire Northwest, having a radius of
1956.76 feet; the chord of which bears N 26"56'51" E; thence along the arc of said curve
through o central angle of 26"57'03",a distance of 920.42.feet lo-a-paint of reverse curvature
with a curve concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 525.00 feet; the chord of which bears
N 28°D0214" E,-thence along. the arc of said curve through a central angle of 21'09'50", a
distance of 193.92 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Northeast, having
a radius of1550,00 feet; the chord of which bears 5 49007*13" E; thence along the arc of said
curve through a central angle of 17"59'05", a distance of 486.53 feet; t ence S 58"06'45" E,o
distance of 389.95 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Southwest, having o radius of
450.00 feet; the chord of which bean 3 29°00'27" E; thence along the arc of said curve through
a central angle of 58"12'36", a distance of 457.18 feet to a point of reverse curvature with a
curve concave tothe .East, having a radtusof 105G.00 feet; the chord of which bears 5 09904'45"
E; thence along the ore of said curve through a central angle of 1 B"21'13",a distance of 336.35
feet; thence S 18*15-21" E, a distance of $55.11 feet to the beginning of a non-longent curve
concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 100.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 31"48'09"
W; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 32"43'41", a distance of 57.12
feet; thence N 9VOWOD" W, a distance of 696.16 feet thence 5 00400'00" W, a distance of
320.00 feet; thence S 90"00'00" E,o distance of 25.00 feet, thence S 00000'00" W, a distance of
290.00 feet; thence N 90900W W, a distance of.25.00,feet; thence.& Q0"00'00" W, a distance
of 270.00 feet; thence 5 90000'00" €, a distance of 25.00 feet1 thence S 00"00'00" W, a distance
of 2-90.00 feet thence N 90600'00" W, a distance of 15.00 feet; thence S 00"00'00" E,o distance
FEB-22-2001 12:16 THE STUART NEWS 561 221 4126 P.03iO4
'`/
of 275.00 feet; thence S 90'00'00" E, o distance of 945.64 feet; thence 5 13'02'47" E, a distance
of 115.63 feat to the beginning of a tangent curve concove to the West, having o radius of
a10.00 fed; the chord of which bears S 07047'10" W; thence along the an: of sold curve through
a central angleof41039'54", a -distance of 589.03 Feet to the beginning of o non -tangent curve
concave to the Northwest, having a radius of 100.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 28'21'25"
W; thence- along- theareofsaid curve through a control ongle of 131 "05'52", a distance of
228.81 feet; thence S 33'05'26" W, a distance of 397,79 feet to thg beginning of o curve
concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 500.00 feet;the chord of which bears S 16'32'43"
W; thence along the arc of sold curve through a central angle of 33'05'26",o distance of 288.77
feet; thence S 00000'00" W, a distance of 87.07 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing
208.59 acres, more or less.
Tax Id No. 4310-212-0001-000/2 4309.000-0000-000/0
Location: North of Gatlin-elyd West of Interstate 95
2- Westchester Development Company, for a change in zoning from AG-1 (Agricultural - 1
du/acre) -Zoning District to the-PUD (Planned Unit Development) Zoning District to be known as
Westchester for the following described property.
Being a parcel of land located in Sections 8, 9, 16, & 17, Township37 South, Range 39 East, St.
Lucie County, Florida
Said -parcel being more porticulorly described as follows,
Begin at the intersection of the centerline of Gollin Boulevard, (also being the North line of
Section. 15) andthe.Wesletly limits of.. Gallen Boulevard Right-of-way and the Westerly limits of
those lands described in on Order of Taking, doted July 24, 1979 and recorded in Official
Record Book 311 at Pages 2946 through, 2952, inclusive, Public Records of St. Lucie County,
Florida, and as shown on the Florida Department of Transportation Right -of -Way mops for State
Road #9 (1-95), Section 94001-2412, dated 6/2/77, with lost revision of 9/11/79; thence S
00'02'55" E o distance of 100r.00 feet; thence S 89'57'05" W a dfstonc4 of 2428.10 fed to the
beginning of a tangent curve concave to the Southeast, having a radlus'of 175,00 feet; thence
o4ong the-orc of said curve through a centrol angle of 54037'27", a -distance of 166.84 feel to a
point of reverse curvature with a curve concave to the North, having a radius of 300.00 feet;
thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 144'37'40", a distance of 757.26
feet to a point, thence 5 89657'05" W. a distance of 4508.78 feet; thence N 00'00'00" E. o
distance of 2482.51 feet; thence N 87016'17" E, a distance of 196.14 feet; thence S 76931'44" E.
a distance of 48.81 feet, thence N t 4912'12" E, a distance of 40.00 feet to the beginning of a
non -tangent curve concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 1950.00'feet; the chord of which
bears S 68958'33" E; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 13'38'31 ",a
distance of 464.29 fed; thence N 27'11'31" E, a distance of 100.00 feel'; thence S 58'08'06" E,
a t istancerof 492.35 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concova� to the North, having a
radius of 950.00 feet; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 42928'21 ", a
distanceof 704.22 fee¢fhence-N-32'46'15" E, non -tangent to lost described curve, a distance of
33.95 feet; thence N 12'20'57" W, a distance of 315.54'; thence N 78"49'36" E, a distance of
214.11 feet; thence N 84'52r28" E, o-distanceof 300.55 feet;1henceN-1.4'09'S3" W, a distance
of 242.58 feet, thence N 52927'35" E, a distance of 39.61 feet; thence N 29013'49" W, a
distance of 280:04 feet, thence N WI T39" W, a distance of 222.22 Feet; thence N 03000' 12"
E, a distance of 59.95 feet, thence N 04'54'56" W,o distance of 221.93 feet, thence N
17'51'33" W; a distance of 60.24 feet; thence K MR24'06" E, a dlstanpe of 74.68 Feet; thence S
70'38'31" E, o distance of 91.16 feet; thence S 78'08'31" E. a distance of 187.63 feet to the
beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Southeast, having- a radius of 161.90 feet; the
chord of which bean N 63040'43" E; thence along thearc of said curve through a central angle
of 65'49'09", a distance of 185.99 feet to the beginning of a non-tongSM curve concave to the
Southeast, having a radius of 650.00 feet; the chord of which bears N 31 39'20" E; thence along
the arm of said curve through or central angle of 26941'20", o d stone -cif 302.78 feet; thence N
45'00'00" E, tangent to last described curve, a distance of 1034.06 feet; thence S 45'00'00" E. o
distance of 636:49led to the -beginning of a curve-concaveta the Southwest, having a radius of
2900.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 35'41'31" E; thence along the arc of said curve Through
a central ongle of 18036'57", a distance of 94224 feet; thence N 61044'45' E, non-tongent to
last described curve, a distance of 200.08 feet; thence 5 26916'50" E, a distance of 45.00 feet to
the beginningofa non-tongenf curve concave to the Southwest, hoving.p radius of 3102.47 feet;
the chord of which beors S 12038'54" E; thence along the arc of sold curve through a central
\%
NEh16 561 221 4126 P.04iO4
1111100 .*0111' G
angle of 25946'06", o distance of 1395.31 feet; thence S 00014*09" W, tangent to lost described
curve; adistance of 1672.35-feet to The beginning of o tangent curveconcave to the Northeast,
having a radius of 175.00 feet; thence along the arc of sold curve through a central angle of
54°37'21", a distance_of. 166.83 feet to a point of reverse curvature concave to the Southwest,
having a radius of 300.00 feet; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
18*57'39", a distance of 99.28 feet to o point of reverse curvature Concave to the Northeast,
having a radius of of 175.00 feet, thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
54°37'22", a distance of 166.84 feet thence N 89°57'05" E, tangent to the lost described curve o
distance of 2428.11 feet,, thence S 00"02'55" E, a distance of 100,00 feet to the Point of
Beginning. Containing 373.19 acres, more or less.
Tax Id No. 4308•000-0000-000/7 4309-000.0000-000/0
Location: North of Gatlin Blvd West of Interstate 95
A PUBLIC HEARING will be held in the. County Commission Chambers, 3rd floor of the Roger
Poitras Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida on March 6.
2001, beginning O 7-00 P:M. or as soon Ihereoffe-as possibie.
PURSUANT TO Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes, If a person decides to appeal any decision
mode by a. board agency, or commission with respect to any matter considered of a meeting or
hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he may need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings Is mode, which record Includes the testimony
and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCI€ COUNTY, FLORIDA
/S/ Frannie Hutchinson, CHAIRMAN
PUBLISHLDATE; February 24, 2001
II
1
TOTAL P.04
12:15 THE STUPPNEWS 561 221 4126 P. 01704
U
WE SCRIPPS Treasure Coast Newspapers
P.Q. Box 1796
1939 S. Federal Highway
Stuart, Florida 34995-1796
FAX COVER SHEET
TO: Dawnelie
St. Lucie County
Fax Number: 561-462-1581
Phone Number:
FROM: Mary T. Byrne
Classified Legal Advertising Representative
E-Mail: ciassiagals@stuartnews.com (legal ads only)
E-Mail: byrne@stuarinews.eom
Fax Number: (561) 221-4126
Phone Number: (561) 221-4282
MESSAGE: Proof of, legal ad for 2/24.
Thanks! Mary
The Stuart News
The Port St. Lucie News
Fort Plerce Tribune
Port St. Lucie Tribune
The Jupiter Courier
Vero Beach Press Journal
Date: 2/22/01
Time: 12 Noon
Pages (including Cover): 4
,ow Agenda Request
v
Item Number 'S—C.
Date: March 6, 2001
Consent [ ]
Regular [ ]
Public Hearing [ X ]
Leg. [ ] Quasi -JD [ X ]
To: Board of County Commissioners Prese d y
Submitted By: Community Development Director
'ffrnmunity Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider Draft Resolution 01-010 approving the request of Westchester Development
Company, for a Preliminary PUD (Planned Unit Development) approval for property
located on north side of Gatlin Boulevard immediately west of the 1-95 Interchange,
approximately one -mile west of the intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescia
Street, from the AGA (Agricultural — 1 du/acre) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned
Unit Development) Zoning District (File No. — PUD-00-011, MJSP-00-009 and RZ-00-015)
BACKGROUND: Westchester Development Company has applied for a Rezoning and Planned Unit
Development/Major Site Plan approval for a new 600-lot single-family subdivision, to
be known as Westchester (PUD). The subject property is located on a 352.98 acre
tract of land situated on the north side of Gatlin Boulevard west of the 1-95
Interchange, approximately one -mile west of the intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and
Brescia Street and zoned AGA (Agricultural — 1 du/acre).
The properties located to the north, south, and west are designated with AGA
(Agricultural — 1 du/acre) zoning. The property to the east, while still zoned AGA is
the subject of a concurrent request for PMUD zoning.
FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A
PREVIOUS ACTION: The Planning and Zoning Commission, by a vote of 5 to 0, with two members recusing
themselves from the proceedings (Mr. Merritt and Mr. Mathes) and two members absent
(Mr. Trias and Mr. Grande), recommended approval of the Rezoning and PUD/Major
Site Plan at its February 15, 2001 meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Draft Resolution 01-010, subject to the cited
conditions contained therein.
COMMISSION ACTION: NCURRENCE:
0 APPROVED F DENIED
OTHER
Douglas M. Anderson
County Administrator
County Attorney
Originating Dept.:
Finance:
Coordination/ Signatures
Mgt. & Budget:
Other:
Purchasing:
Other:
r.• Agenda Request
Item Number S - D
*ft/ Date: March 6, 2001
Consent [
Regular
Public Hearing [ X ]
Leg. I ] Quasi -JD [ X ]
To: _Board of County Commissioners Pr
Submitted By: Community Development Director w
Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider Draft Resolution 01-011 approving the request of Westchester Development
Company, for Preliminary PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) approval for
property located on north side of Gatlin Boulevard immediately west of the 1-95
Interchange, approximately one -mile west of the intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and
Brescia Street. (File No. — PUD-00-011, MJSP-00-009 and RZ-00-015)
BACKGROUND: Westchester Development Company has applied for a Rezoning and Planned Mixed
Use Development/Major Site Plan approval for a 200-lot single-family subdivision, a
153,300 s.f. commercial area, a 2.1 acre church site, a 56.3 acre civic site and 78.19
acres of open space to be known as Westchester PMUD. The subject property is
located on a 223.4 acre tract of land situated on the north side of Gatlin Boulevard
immediately west of the 1-95 Interchange, approximately one -mile west of the
intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescia Street and zoned AGA (Agricultural — 1
du/acre).
The properties located to the north, and south are designated with AGA (Agricultural
— 1 du/acre) zoning. The property to the west, while still zoned AG-1 is the subject of
a concurrent request for PUD zoning. The property to the east is also controlled by
Westchester and shown as "Future Development". The 1-95 Right —of —way is
immediately east of that property.
FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A
PREVIOUS ACTION: The Planning and Zoning Commission, by a vote of 5 to 0, with two members recusing
themselves from the proceedings (Mr. Merritt and Mr. Mathes) and two members absent
(Mr. Trias and Mr. Grande), recommended approval of the Rezoning and PUD/Major
Site Plan at its February 15, 2001 meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Draft Resolution 01-011, subject to the cited
conditions contained therein.
X AVEDMISSION A TION:
DENIED
M
OTHER
County Attorney �—
Originating Dept.:
Finance:
Coordination/ Signatures
Mgt. & Budget:
Other:
Douglas M. Anderson
County Administrator
Purchasing:
Other:
..+
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
COMMISSION REVIEW: March 6, 2001
Resolution No.: 01-011
File No.: RZ-00-015
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Board of County Commissioners
Community Development Director
February 28, 2001
SUBJECT: Petition of Westchester Development Company, for
Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the construction of 200 unit
residential project, a 56.3 acre civic site, 14.1 acres of
commercial uses, a 2.1 acre church site, and 78.19 acres of
open space to be known as the Westchester PMUD (Planned
Mixed Use Development. (File No.: RZ-00-015)
LOCATION: Northwest quadrant of 1-95 and Gatlin Blvd. Approximately 1
mile west of the intersection of Gatlin Blvd and Brescia
Street.
EXISTING ZONING: AG-1 (Agriculture - 1 dwelling unit / acre).
PROPOSED ZONING: PUD (Planned Unit Development).
LAND USE DESIGNATION: MXD - Mixed Use Development - MXD is a designation which
allows for a mix of integrated uses. All proposed uses are
consistent with the MXD land use.
PARCEL SIZE: 223.4 acres
PROPOSED USE: 200 unit residential project, a 56.3 acre civic site, 14.1 acres
of commercial uses, a 2.1 acre church site, and 78.19 acres
of open space.
SURROUNDING ZONING: AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) to the north, south and east.
The property to the west is also zoned AG-1 but is the
subject of a concurrent request by the same developer for
PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) zoning. The
property to the east is controlled by the petitioner and labeled
as future development.
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
FIRE/EMS PROTECTION:
UTILITY SERVICE:
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS:
Right of Way
Adequacy:
Scheduled Area
Improvements:
TYPE of CONCURRENCE
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
All surrounding properties are vacant or are being used for
agricultural purposes.
Station #10 (777 SW Dalton Road) is approximately 5 miles
to the east of the proposed development site.
Water and Sewer Services to be provided by the either St.
Lucie West or Port St. Lucie Utilities.
The existing right-of-way for Gatlin Blvd is 200 feet.
The developer plans to construct a four lane entrance road
to the site within the 200 foot right-of-way provided by this
developer and the adjacent developer to the south.
A Certificate of Capacity will be required with final Planned
Unit Development approvals.
STANDARDS OF REVIEW
AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03
ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
In reviewing this application for proposed amendment to the official Zoning Atlas, the Planning and Zoning
Commission shall consider and make the following determinations:
Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of the
St. Lucie County Land Development Code;
The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the St. Lucie County Land Development
Code. The current application for Preliminary Planned Mixed Use Development approval
has been reviewed for consistency with the provisions of the St. Lucie County Land
Development Code and particularly Section 7.03.00 of the Code and has been determined
to meet all applicable standards of review for Preliminary Planned Unit Development
approvals.
2. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan;
The amendment has been determined to be consistent with all applicable elements of the
County's Comprehensive Plan. The project's density is well below that allowed by the Plan.
If the project were proposed or developed at its maximum density, approximately 600 units
would be allowed. The proposed project in conjunction with the associated Planned Unit
Development (PUD) is providing various services to its anticipated residents including
employment and shopping opportunities, schools, and recreation. The project lies entirely
within the Urban Service Area.
3. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the
existing and proposed land uses;
The proposed Preliminary Planned Mixed Use Development Plan and the accompanying
request for change in zoning have been determined to be not inconsistent with the general
land uses in the surrounding area. The Future Land Use Maps of the County's
Comprehensive Plan indicate that the petitioned properly is suitable for development at a
density of up to 5 du's/acre. The proposed development plans call for a gross density of
1.3 units to the acre based on the residential acreage.
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 development site is proposed to be served with water and sewer services by the either
St. Lucie West or Port St. Lucie Utilities. Port St. Lucie has provided letter indicating that
these services are available. The developer will be responsible for the extension of these
services to the project site.
The subject property is located west of the existing terminus of Gatlin Blvd. According to the
applicant's traffic impact report, the following roadway facilities which are located in the
project study area are scheduled for improvements within the Port St. Lucie Capital
Improvements Program.
Airoso Blvd 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Blvd to Prima vista Blvd FY 2000-2001
Gatlin Blvd 4-lane divided from 1-95 to Port SL Lucie Blvd FY 2001-2002
Bayshore Blvd 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucre Blvd to Prima Vista Blvd FY 2001.2003
The applicant's Traffic Impact Report (TIR) indicates that the project will not negatively
affect any surrounding roadway links. The applicant has committed to construction of a four
lane divided extension of Gatlin Blvd. From its current terminus to the project entrance
(approximately one mile).
The applicant has also agreed to construct a section of a possible north/south arterial
roadway which could ultimately connect to Glades Cutoff Road.
Open space requirements of the Planned Development are met.
The proposed development will address its impact on the School District through payment
of the School Impact Fee or credits toward the fee as may be allowed based on the
provision of an on site school.
All other required public facilities appear to be adequate to handle to proposed
development.
6. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant
adverse impacts on the natural environment;
The proposed amendment is not expected to create adverse impacts on the natural
environment. The proposed development site has been used for agricultural activities in the
past and is nearly all cleared. The applicant, through the Planned Development process,
has proposed a development plan that provides for the protection of the majority of the
remaining environmentally sensitive areas. The applicant will need to obtain permits relating
to environmental impacts on the site prior to any construction. These agency's include but
are not limited to the Army Corp of Engineers, South Florida Water Management District,
and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
The environmental Impact report indicates that there are a number of wetlands located
throughout the subject parcel. In this phase of development, the applicant is proposing to
preserve nearly all of the wetlands on site through incorporation into the project design.
The applicants submission of this project as a Planned Mixed Use Development affords the
maximum amount of existing resource protection while still providing the property owner
with the maximum use potential of the project site.
7. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would adversely effect the
property values in the area.
The proposed development of this property as a 200 unit residential project with the
associated uses is not anticipated to have any significant negative effects on the property
values of the surrounding area.
8. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in orderly
and logical development pattern specifically identifying any negative affects of such
patterns;
While this proposed change in zoning is the first project proposed in the area, it is
consistent with the uses anticipated by the County's Comprehensive Plan. Approval of this
project will provide for an orderly development pattern for this area.
9. 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 has been determined not to conflict with the public interest and
the St. Lucie County Land Development Code.
COMMENTS:
The developers of the Westchester PMUD have submitted a petition for Preliminary Planned Mixed Use
Development site plan approval for the construction of a 200 unit residential project, a 56.3 acre civic site,
14.1 acres of commercial uses, a 2.1 acre church site, and 78.19 acres of open space on a 223.4 acre
parcel of land, located west of 1-95 and North of Gatlin Blvd. The subject property is currently vacant and/or
used for agricultural uses. The surrounding property is also vacant or being used for agricultural purposes.
The developers of this project have submitted the required Environmental and Traffic Impact Reports.
The Environmental Reports did not identify serious environmental constraints to development of this
property. The project site plan shows several small wetlands which are to be removed.
LN
rd+
The majority of the existing vegetation on this property is cabbage palms, several scattered oak hammocks
are also found in future phases. The developer intends to preserve the oak hammocks and preserve or
move the cabbage palms as necessary.
The subject property is located west of the existing terminus of Gatlin Blvd. According to the applicant's
traffic impact report, the following roadway facilities which are located in the project study area are
scheduled for improvements within the Port St. Lucie Capital Improvements Program.
Airoso Blvd 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Blvd to Prima Vista Blvd FY 2000-2001
Gatlin Blvd 4-lane divided from 1-96 to Port St. Lucie Blvd FY 2001-2002
Bayshore Blvd 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Blvd to Prima Vista Blvd FY 2001-2003
The applicant's Traffic Impact Report (TIR) indicates that the project will not negatively affect any
surrounding roadway links. The applicant has committed to construction of a four lane divided extension of
Gatlin Blvd. From its current terminus to the project entrance (approximately one mile).
The applicant has also agreed to construct a section of a possible north/south arterial roadway which could
ultimately connect to Glades Cutoff Road.
On January 18, 2001, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this
petition. Following that hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 to 0 with 2 members absent,
and 2 members recusing themselves to recommend approval of this petition.
On February 15, 2001 the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held an additional public
hearing on this petition. Following that hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 to 0 with 2
members absent, and 2 members recusing themselves to recommend a minor change in the projects
boundaries and to reaffirm their approval of this petition.
Site Plan details for this project are attached to the Westchester PUD package which will be considered as
a separate item on the March 6, 2001 agenda.
If approved, this Resolution would grant Preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for this project.
If approved the developers of this project will have 24 months to receive Final Planned Unit Development
approval for any phase of this project, or the entire project, if the developer so chooses.
Staff recommends approval of Draft Resolution 01-011 subject to the conditions attached as Exhibit'N.
SUBMITTED VVNV Yf
U��
)JKShewchutk
munity Development Director County Attornek
cc: County Administrator
County Attorney
County Engineer
Planning Manager
Greg Boggs
Jim Zboril
En
RESOLUTION NO. 01-011
FILE NO: RZ-00-015
A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A
PROJECT KNOWN AS WESTCHESTER
A PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following
determinations:
■ M ► •T
1. Westchester Development Company presented a petition, fora change in zoning from AG-1
(Agriculture -1 dwelling unit / acre) to PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) for certain
property in St. Lucie County, Florida.
2. On February 15, 2001, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public
hearing, of which due public notice was published in the Port St. Lucie News and the Ft.
Pierce Tribune and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet at least 10 days prior to
the hearing, and recommended to this Board that the requested change in zoning from AG-
1 (Agriculture - 1 dwelling unit / acre) to PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) be
granted.
3. The petitioner is proposing to construct a 200 unit residential project with 14.1 acres of
commercial area, 56.3 acres for civic uses, 2.1 acres for religious use, 76.19 acres of open
space and infrastructure in the northwest quadrant of 1-95 and Gatlin, on the property
described in Part B below.
4. The Development Review Committee has reviewed the preliminary site plan for the
proposed project and found it to meet all technical requirements and to be consistent with
the future land use maps of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, subject to the
conditions set forth in Part A of this Resolution.
5. On February 15, 2001, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public
hearing, of which due public notice was published in the Port St. Lucie News and the Ft.
Pierce Tribune and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet at least 10 days prior to the
hearing, and recommended to this Board that Preliminary Development Plan approval for
the project known as Westchester - a Planned Mixed Use Development, be granted.
6. On March 6, 2001, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishinga notice
of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie News and the Ft. Pierce Tribune and notifying
by mail
all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property.
File No.: RZ-00-015
March 6, 2001
Resolution 01-011
Page 1
7. The proposed project is consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and
standards of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan, and the Code of Ordinances of St. Lucie County.
8. The proposed project will not have an undue adverse effect on adjacent property, the
character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, utility facilities, or other matters
affecting the public health, safety and general welfare.
9. All reasonable steps have been taken to minimize any adverse effect of the proposed
project on the immediate vicinity through building design, site design, landscaping, and
screening.
10. The proposed project will be constructed, arranged and operated so as not to interfere with
the development and use of neighboring property, in accordance with applicable district
regulations.
it. The proposed project will be served by adequate public facilities and services.
12. The applicant has demonstrated that water supply, evacuation facilities, and emergency
access are satisfactory to provide adequate fire protection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of the St. Lucie County,
Florida:
A. Pursuant to Section 11.02.05 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, the
Preliminary Site Plan for the project known as Westchester - A Planned Unit Development
is hereby, approved as shown on the site plan drawings for the project prepared by Thomas
Lucido & Associates, P.A. dated September 15, 2000 and subsequently revised through
February 23, 2001, and date stamped received by the St. Lucie County Community
Development Director on February 23, 2001, subject to the conditions as outline in
attached Echibit'A'
S. The property on which this preliminary approval is being granted is described as follows
See attached legal description - Exhibit'B'
(Location: Northwest quadrant of 1-95 and Gatlin Blvd)
C. The approval of this Preliminary Site Plan is contingent upon the developer obtaining final
Planned Unit Development approval within 24 months of the date of approval of this
resolution. If Final Planned Unit Development approval has not been obtained within this
period, this site plan shall expire on March 6, 2003, unless a Preliminary Site Plan approval
extension is granted in accordance with Section 11.02.06(B), St. Lucie County Land
Development Code.
D. The conditions set forth in Section A are an integral nonseverable part of the site plan
File No.: RZ-00-015 Resolution 01-011
March 6, 2001 Page 2
\.r
Is determined rtly
,+ to
h fn Section �orrrply volun
—�" condition set fo er declines to me null and
If any the develop olution shall beco
b this resolution reaQ al rant
ed by this 'es
approval granted nforceable for any
condition, the site plan aPP Section A,
be Invalid or din
with that c s describe ent
void. plan drewi" Community Developm
ll be attached to the site P. County
A copY of thi s" hall ,solution on file with the St. Lucre
E which plan
e
Director- as follows
After motion and second, the v
ote on this resolution was OX
XX)C
Chairman Frannie Hutchinson
Vice -Chairman
Doug Coward XXX
Commissioner
Cliff Barnes XXX
Commissioner John Bruhn XXX
Commissioner Paula Lewis
PASSED AND DULY
ATTEST:
ADOPTED this 6th day of March, 2001.
MISSIONERS
BOARD OF COUNTY COM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
DEPUTY CLERK
File No.: Sz.00"015
March 6. 2001
BY Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATT
ORNEY
%W
-� EXHIBIT UD CONDITIONS
+,,�• UDIPM
WESTCHEST PRELIM►NARY
DRAINAGE construct the stormwater management system in
and
r Management District regulatory
The developer shall design
1. with applicable South Florida Wa e
accordance planting zones
criteria. stem and any required littoral
The surface water co n constructed
ement system with South Florida
2. designed, constructed and uaementa In accordance
shall be desig
Water Management District ERP req
EDUCATION ro ect shall be subject to the terms and
ment within this
88-16, Educational facility ImpOr
act
3• be amended. Any contribution a `IaT ,gible for
All residential develop
requirements of St. subsequently or facilities shall be he County s
Fees, and as may dedication ubseof school land ermitted under
development or act Fee credit to the extent p
Educational Imp, impact
Fee ordinance.
Educational Facility P
ect to the terms and requirements
FIREIEMS PROTECTION and as may
shall be FireIEMS Impact Fees, s Fire/EMS
4. All development within this project
of St. Lucie County Ordin nce ext Permitted under the Count
ment or dedication of
uently be amended. art of a Fire/EMS Impact
subseq regulations, any contribution toward or development
Impact Fee be considered for all or p
land for Fire/EMS facilities may
Fee Credit.
CONDITIONS
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT
setbacks
be as follows;
5. General building
of the Nor 1�0°dth corridor:
Single-family home sites
west
a
Minimum lot size:
100,w x 125'd
Maximum lot size:
Maximum lot coverage:
800/6
20 feet (15 feet for athaogse IF
Front setback:
front, side loading g
6 feet (0 feet and 12 feet,
Side setback:
homes)
Side setback Corner):
15 feet
15 feet (screen roorr
tr
Rear setback:
other ancillary
Of fiv
minimum
Wesicht-
Poge 1 of 6
4
1
PSL:2941:1
V
provided that no such
property line interferes with any
facility teasement)
ancillary aintenance
drainage °r m
ast of the North,South corridor:
A' home sites e30'w x75'd
Single family 100'w x 130'd
b
Minimum lot size
Maximum lot size'. go%
Max imurn lot coverag ght 35 feet lose homes fr
Maximum building 10 feet (15 feet for tont
perimeter block lot that use a
Front setback: loading driveway)
Side setback
(Lots <50' width):
(Lots >50' width)'
o feet one side/no openings
3 feet on other side (minimum
separation between adjacent structures
is 12 feet or ructurs shallhavehless automatic fire
e
feet separation
sprinkler systems)
3 feet (minimum separation between
adjacent structures is 12 feet or
structures with less than �12^ feel
property line provided that no such
ancillary facility interferes with any
drainage or maintenance easement)
b. Single family home sites east
of the North/South corridor:
Minimum lot size:
30'w x75'd
Maximum lot size:
100'w x 130'd
Maximum lot coverage:
90%
Maximum building height:
35 feet
Front setback:
10 feet (15 feet for those homes on a
perimeter block lot that use a front
loading driveway)
Side setback
(Lots <50' width):
0 feet one side/no openings
3 feet on other side (minimum
separation between adjacent structures
is 12 feet or structures with less than 12
feet separation shall have automatic fire
sprinkler systems)
(Lots >50' width):
3 feet (minimum separation between
adjacent structures is 12 feet or
structures with less than 12 feet
separation shall have automatic fire
Side setback (Corner):
sprinkler systems)
15 feet
Rear setback:
Lots with rear garage access:
15 feet (screen rooms/ pool decks and
other ancillary structures, excluding
garages, may be a minimum of zero feet
from the property line provided that no
such ancillary facility interferes with any
Lots with front garage access:
rainage easemen
1d5 feet (cr enntenance rooms/ pool decks and
other ancillary structures, including
garages, may be a minimum of zero feet
from the property line provided that no
such ancillary facility interferes with any
alley easement width:
t
drainae orMinimum easement)
Minimum alley pavement width:
20 feeg (One-way alleys)
10 feet (One-way alleys)
Minimum alley radius:
25 feet in direction of travel
C.
Multi-Family/Townhome sites east of the North/South Arterial Road
Minimum lot size:
Variable width/average depth 85 feet
Maximum lot size:
Variable width/average depth 110 feet
Maximum building lot coverage:
Variable
Maximum building height:
50 feet
Front setback:
10 feet
PSL:2941:1
Page 2 of 6
Westchester conditions - Preliminary
March 1, 2001
r..
r..r
Side setback between bldgs:
Side setback (Corner):
Rear setback:
Lots with rear garage access:
Minimum alley easement width
Minimum alley pavement width
Minimum alley radius:
20 feet
15 feet
15 feet (screen rooms/ pool decks and
other ancillary structures, excluding
garages, may be a minimum of zero feet
from the property line provided that no
such ancillary facility interferes with any
drainage or maintenance easement)
20 feet (One-way alleys)
10 feet (One-way alleys)
25 feet in direction of travel
6. Any obligation of Westchester Development Company hereunder shall be
assignable to a community development district created by Westchester
Development Company for such purpose.
HABITATAT, VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE
7. Wetlands identified to be preserved on the Master Plan referenced in Part
or as may be delineated in subsequent permitting documentation, shall be
retained and/or restored if necessary, and maintained in accordance with South
Florida Water Management District permit conditions. Such wetlands shall be
protected by conservation easement, deed restriction, or other appropriate legal
mechanism, and future maintenance responsibilities shall be assigned to a
community development district or other entity approved by the South Florida
Water Management District. In the event that threatened or endangered species
are found, Developer shall comply with applicable regulations. As part of Final
Development Plan Approval, wetlands that are identified to be preserved on the
Master Plan referenced in Part _ or as may be delineated in subsequent
permitting documentation, shall be identified by specific numeration.
Wetlands identified to be altered, as depicted on the Master Plan referenced in
Part _, may be altered to the extent shown with the remaining areas of such
wetlands being retained and/or restored if necessary, and maintained in
accordance with South Florida Water Management District permit conditions.
Such wetlands shall be protected by conservation easement, deed restriction, or
other appropriate legal mechanism, and future maintenance responsibilities shall
be assigned to a community development district or other entity approved by the
South Florida Water Management District. In the event that threatened or
endangered species are found, Developer shall comply with applicable
regulations. As part of Final Development Plan Approval, wetlands that are
identified to be altered on the Master Plan referenced in Part _ or as may be
delineated in subsequent permitting documentation, shall be identified by specific
numeration.
Wetlands identified to be impacted on the Master Plan referenced in Part _ or
on subsequent permits, may be altered to the extent shown thereon. If
Page 3 of 6 Westchester Conditions - Preliminary
PSL:2941:1 March 1. 2001
necessary, the Developer shall obtain permit approvals to alter/eliminate these
wetlands from the South Florida Water Management District and the US Army
Corp of Engineers and shall meet all applicable mitigation requirements and
standards. In the event off -site mitigation is required, the applicant shall first
seek to perform all such mitigation in St. Lucie County. As part of Final
Development Plan Approval, wetlands that are identified to be
impacted/eliminated on the Master Plan referenced in Part or as may be
delineated in subsequent permitting documentation, shall be identified by specific
numeration.
10. Lakes or canals shall not be excavated within 200 feet of those wetlands, which
are to be preserved or restored on the project site, unless otherwise approved by
South Florida Water Management District. Any wells in the shallow aquifer shall
not be located within 300 feet of those wetlands, which are to be preserved or
restored on the project site. South Florida Water Management District must
approve any exceptions to this condition.
A copy of any South Florida Water Management District permit or other consent
addressing this condition shall be provided to St. Lucie County prior to final plat
approval.
11. In order to promote maintenance or implementation of predevelopment
hydroperiods within the enhanced and/or restored wetlands and within any
wetland mitigation areas, final drainage plans shall provide for routing of
sufficient volumes of runoff from acceptable sources to the preserved or restored
wetlands prior to routing of any excess runoff through the project off -site
discharge outfall, in accordance with South Florida Water Management District
standards. Control elevations shall be established consistent with the intent to
maintain or improve predevelopment hydroperiods within all wetland areas. The
South Florida Water Management District must approve the routing of runoff and
control elevations as shown on the final drainage plans to achieve the intent
indicated above.
Copies of the South Florida Water Management District construction permits
shall be provided to St. Lucie County prior to final plat approval.
12. The Developer shall plant and maintain a buffer zone of native vegetation around
all enhanced, restored, or created wetlands on site in accordance with the
requirements of the South Florida Water Management District.
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
13. All residential development within this project shall be subject to the terms and
requirements of St. Lucie County Ordinance , Parks Impact Fees, and
as may subsequently be amended. To the extent permitted under the County's
Parks Impact Fee regulations, any contribution toward or development or
dedication of land for recreational facilities may be considered for all or part of a
Parks Impact Fee Credit.
Page 4 of 6 Westchester Conditions - Preriminary
PSL:2941:1 March 1, 2001
i
%W �ftw
ROADS IMPACT FEES
14. All development within this project shall be subject to the terms and requirements
of St Lucie County Ordinance , Roads Impact Fees, and as may
subsequently be amended. Any contribution toward, dedication or development
of road right of way or facilities, including but not limited to all dedications or
improvements in roadway capacity that exceed the need to provide safe and
adequate access for the project shall be eligible for Roads Impact Fee credit to
the extent permitted under the County's Roads Impact Fee Ordinances.
15. Westchester Development Company may apply any credits from transportation
impacts mitigated by Westchester Development Company for the Phase 1
PUD/PMUD in excess of the needs of the Phase I PUD/PMUD toward
transportation impacts generated by development of adjacent properties owned
by Westchester Development Company.
TRANSPORTATION
16. Gatlin Boulevard west of 1-95 shall be designed as a primary public access route
extending from its current terminus to the proposed traffic circle at the
intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and the unnamed north/south corridor. Design
and construction of the roadway shall meet all requirements of St. Lucie County
and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT).
17. The proposed traffic circle and unnamed north/south corridor, as shown on the
site plans referenced in Part _, shall be designed as a primary public access
route. Design and construction of the roadway shall meet all requirements of St.
Lucie County and FDOT.
18. An emergency/temporary access shall be provided to the Westside Residential
prior to the issuance of the 250t' Certificate of Occupancy for a residential unit in
the Westside Residential area.
19. To the extent practical, and based upon the transportation development and
service plans of the local transit providers, the final development plans for the
area referred to as the Westchester PMUD/PUD shall consider the inclusion of
dedicated transit stop and areas in its final project designs.
WASTEWATER
20. All wastewater within the Westchester PMUD/PUD shall be connected to a
central wastewater treatment service, except that temporary buildings shall not
be required to connect to a central wastewater treatment system until such time
as one is made available to the temporary building site or otherwise required by
the St. Lucie County Public Health Unit. For the purpose of this development
order, temporary buildings shall be those used in connection with construction
activities, models, buildings used in connection with agricultural uses, and any
Page 5 of 6 Westchester Conditions - Preliminary
PSL:2941:1 March 1, 2001
other buildings that may be so excepted by the St. Lucie County Code
WATER SUPPLY: POTABLE AND NONPOTABLE WATER
21. All potable water within the Westchester PMUD/PUD shall be provided by a
central potable water system, except that temporary buildings shall not be
required to connect to a central water system until such time as one is made
available to the temporary building site or otherwise required by the St. Lucie
County Public Health Unit. For the purpose of this development order, temporary
buildings shall be those used in connection with construction activities, models,
buildings used in connection with agricultural uses, and any other buildings that
may be so excepted by the St. Lucie County Code.
22. The primary source of irrigation water shall be water derived from the surface
water management system of lakes supplemented by wells as permitted by the f South Florida Water Management District. No withdrawals from lakes shall be
permitted which would adversely affect wetlands required by this development
order to be preserved on site, or wetlands and littoral zones created on site as
mitigation for wetland functions and values lost as a result of this development.
At the time of water use permit issuance or renewal, the developer shall comply
with applicable South Florida Water Management District rules and criteria for
permit issuance, which criteria may in the future require the use of reclaimed
water.
23. To the maximum extent consistent with wetland protection, surficial aquifer
wellfields serving the Westchester PMUD/PUD shall be located such that
principal land uses within the cone of influence of such wells are open space,
preserve, or residential area. In no case shall development, which would use,
handle, store, or produce hazardous or toxic materials, occur within the cone of
influence (i.e., one foot drawdown area) of a surficial aquifer potable water supply
well, unless such use, handling, storage, or production is consistent with binding
wellfield protection regulations.
PSL:2941:1 Page 6 of 6 Westchester Conditions - Preliminary
March 1. 2001
I.. .M0
Exhibit B / PMUD
Being a parcel of land located in Sections 9, and 10, Township 37 South, Range 39
East, St. Lucie County, Florida.
Said parcel being more particularly described as follows:
Begin at the intersection of the centerline of Gatlin Boulevard, (also being the
North line of Section 15) and the Westerly limits of Gatlin Boulevard Right -of -Way and
the Westerly limits of those lands described in an Order of Taking, dated July 24, 1979
and recorded in Official Record Book 311 at Pages 2946 through, 2952, inclusive, Public
Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, and as shown on the Florida Department of
Transportation Right -of -Way maps for State Road #9 (1-95), Section 94001-2412, dated
6/2/77, with last revision of 9/11/79; thence S 89°57'05" W, along said centerline a
distance of 2815.40 feet; thence N 00014'09" E, a distance of 2059.65 feet to the
beginning of a tangent curve concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 3000.00 feet;
thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 36043'47", a distance of
1399.56 feet; thence N 63030'22" E, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence N 63043'13" E,
a distance of 196.38 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the South, having a
radius of 525.00 feet; the chord of which bears N 78°27'42" E; thence along the arc of said
curve through a central angle of 29026'59", a distance of 269.89 feet; thence 86048'48"E,
a distance of 62.97 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Northwest, having a
radius of 275.34 feet; the chord of which bears N 47034'02" E; thence along the arc of
said curve through a central angle of 91011'51 ", a distance of 438.26 feet to a point of
reverse curvature with a curve concave to the East, having a radius of 527.97 feet; the
chord of which bears N 20`16'30" E; thence along the arc of said curve through a central
angle of 40010'52", a distance of 370.26 feet to a point of reverse curvature with a curve
concave to the Northwest, having a radius of 1956.76 feet; the chord of which bears
N 26056'51" E; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 26057'03",
a distance of 920.42 feet to a point of reverse curvature with a curve concave to the
Southeast, having a radius of 525.00 feet; the chord of which bears N 28002'14" E;
thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 21009'50", a distance of
193.92 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Northeast, having a
radius of 1550.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 49°07'13" E; thence along the arc of
said curve through a central angle of 17059'05", a distance of 486.53 feet; thence S
58°06'45" E, a distance of 389.95 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the
Southwest, having a radius of 450.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 29°00'27" E; thence
along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 58012'36", a distance of 457.18 feet
to a point of reverse curvature with a curve concave to the East, having a radius of
1050.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 09°04'45" E; thence along the are of said curve
through a central angle of 18°21'13", a distance of 336.35 feet; thence S 18°15'21" E, a
distance of 855.11 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Southeast,
having a radius of 100.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 31 °48'09" W; thence along the
arc of said curve through a central angle of 32°43'41", a distance of 57.12 feet; thence N
90000'00" W, a distance of 696.16 feet; thence S 00°00'00" W, a distance of 320.00 feet;
.✓
thence S 90000'00" E, a distance of 25.00 feet; thence S 00000'00" W, a distance of
290.00 feet; thence N 90°00'00" W, a distance of 25.00 feet; thence S 00°00'00" W, a
distance of 270.00 feet; thence S 90000'00" E, a distance of 25.00 feet; thence S
00°00'00" W, a distance of 290.00 feet; thence N 90000'00" W, a distance of 15.00 feet;
thence S 00000'00" E, a distance of 275.00 feet; thence S 90°00'00" E, a distance of
945.64 feet; thence S 13°02'47" E, a distance of 115.63 feet to the beginning of a tangent
curve concave to the West, having a radius of 810.00 feet; the chord of which bears S
07*47'10" W; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 41°39'54", a
distance of 589.03 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Northwest,
having a radius of 100.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 28021'25" W; thence along the
arc of said curve through a central angle of 131 °05'52", a distance of 228.81 feet; thence
S 33°05'26" W, a distance of 397.79 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the
Southeast, having a radius of 500.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 16032'43" W; thence
along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 33005'26",a distance of 288.77 feet;
thence S 00000'00" W, a distance of 87.07; Thence N 89°57'05" E. a distance of 588.36
feet; thence S 00002'55" E, a distance of 100.00 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 223.40 acres, more or less.
Mr. Kelly stated that he would like to explain the pr
everyone would understand what it is before ocess of a Planned Unit Development so that
the item is presented. He explained that thereare
three types of planned developments in St. Lucie County. A PUD (planned Unit Development),
which is a purely residential development. A PNRD and a PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development),(Planned Non -Residential Development)
of the Land Development Code. He stated that the whichh are
the
D velopmesections
Com of Chapter 7
WestcPresenting two of the three types, which area PUD on roughly half of the nt
on the other half. The Pant would be
Purposes of the three types are all theept Property and a PMUD
the words residential, mixed use, and no residential, which are to achieve land development of a
for the substitution of
superior quality through encouragement of flexibility and creativity in design. A planned
development of any type or creative
iv a Of
and a site plan. It allows the developer to
present
and seek approval for new or creative concepts and allows for design options that are outside the
four corners of St. Lucie County Land Development Code. He explained that an example that he
Often uses, but is not like the one presented at this meeting but
for a straight rezoning. If a
but a zero lot line development. The
Land Development Code requires a side setback in every c
this
developer should wish to bring up something completely different it may be presented thmugh
that means. If it is approved it becomes that property's zoning with it's own set of standards for
zoning.The process is actually three -fold. There is a approval. The preliminarpreliminary PUD approval and a final
y is considered the Planning and Zoning Commission, which is the
Purpose of these two petitions this evening. The prel
County Commission and then will go back iminary will then go before the god of
again to the Board of County Commissioners for final
approval. If the final approval is substantially like the preliminary, then the County for
has some obligation to approve the petition.
January 18, 2001
page 3
J'-
The responsibility of the Planning and Zoning Commission is to look at the zoning side of this.
He explained that this board does not really spend much time looking at site plans. The site plans
are left up to the County Commission. He explained that this board would need to know enough
about the site plan in order to decide of the appropriateness of the zoning. He stated that this
board will see a few site plans and some issues, but the ultimate job is to make sure this is an
appropriate place for the number of residential units and amount of non-residential type zonings
that will be seen. It is not the job of this board to decide on the overall details, even though they
will be brought up to decide the impacts of the zonings. He asked if there needed to be more
detail explained on these definitions and duties.
Mr. Kelly stated that this evening there would be two separate petitions for Westchester. There is
a Planned Unit Development, which is the residential component and a Planned Mixed -Use
Development, which is the eastern portion of the project that includes residential, civic site,
commercial, office sites, and some concepts that are not often seen in St. Lucie County. As a
general description the entire project is located at the Northwest quadrant of Interstate 95 and the
Gatlin Boulevard extension. He explained it is primarily proposed to be on converted farmland.
He stated that there is not a great deal of environmental impact part of a much larger parcel and
staff believes that the developer will ultimately come back for additional approval. If that should
occur it would at that time trip thresholds and become a Development of Regional Impact and
there will be more review of the development.
The proposal is to extend Gatlin Boulevard from its current terminus to a traffic circlet then turn
to the north on a North south roadway, which would be primary access in to the project. That
roadway in the future could possibly connect to the Glades -cutoff Road in the future. The PUD
portion is to the west of that road and the PMUD is to the east. Staff is still working with the
developer on a number of issues. Even as late as yesterday there was a meeting. He explained
that the school site that is seen in the documents. He stated that particular area will be a called a
civic site. The developer is working with several entities to try to figure out how to provide a
school site. They have not been able to provide any details to staff . He stated that changing the
title to a Civic Site is probably a more accurate term, due to the fact that it was intended to be a
building with multiple uses. He explained there are still on going negotiations with the City on
the capacity of the roadway and other developers involved in that area.
Mr. Kelly explained that in the proposed conditions that were provided separately there were
setbacks and staff is still working out the setbacks with the developer. He stated three major .
concerns and there are many concerns in the fifty proposed conditions that are being negotiated:
Mr. Kelly stated that there are a few he will go over in this evening's meeting. He does not feel
the entire list should be part of any motion this evening. He will only go over the conditions he
feels are important. He would like to mention that it is staff s belief that this will ultimately be a
DRI and the fact that staff wishes to begin working with the developer to make sure all of the
DRI issues are ultimately answered and that is why 6iere are fifty proposed conditions. He doe*,
not feel that at a preliminary PUD and PMUD hearing they are necessary to be imposed in this
board's recommendation to the County Commission.
January 18, 2001 page 4
Mr. Kelly stated that the parcel is fairly irregularly shaped and as the Plans are reviwed later the
e
shapes will be more understood. He stated that there would be two petitions reviewed this
evening and will require separate motions and public hearings. It is his experience and to most of
te the
the
discussion seasoned board
and bee that
t it is not pos open two differesible to nt public hearings gsand make twoends a
general
different motions.
d West
Mr. Kelly stated the PUD (Planned Unit DevelopmtTle Proposed new zoning rth side of Gatlin is PUD.
of Interstate 95 with a current zoning of AG (Agriculture)
The parcel is approximately a little over 373 acres. The proposed use is 600 single-familhas
y lots
with the associated infrastructure, recreational useslandbl pen sace
; ds and ibefore them Staff
is
reviewed the project and finds that it meets the applicable
over if nothing changes�will
mke precorn all wetlands ontion for thissatelThis s a littlebiteport
states that the applicantproposing
inconsistent with the comment, which indicates the development is preserving 33.05 of acres. He would like the developer to come forward and give his presentatibon so that the board
can become familiar to the feel of the development
Mr. Grande asked if the correction of the wording about the inconsistency in the preservation of
the wetlands would be corrected.
Mr. Kelly replied in the affirmative.
the density comparisons to the Future Land Use as opposed
Mr. Grande asked the reasoning for
to current zoning.
Mr. Kelly stated that it could be done either way, but the applicant could easily be requesting an
Mr zoning to something like that The purpose of reviewing rezoning is to make sure that there is
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. This is an increase in the existing zoning but
completely consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
rked out through negotiation with staff and the
Mr. Grande asked if the conditions were wo
developer.
Mr. Kelly replied that ultimately they will be, but the conditions distributed received this board were
re has
written by staff and given to the developer at the same time theme y he ome problems w►
th
been some discussion on some of them at a meeting yesterday.nt
some of them and are others that are not problems. At some point intheeevening he g, such asiwill Poicture t
the ones that should be imposed in the motion at this preliminary e
et
and impact fees.
U,
Mr. Heam asked where the urban service boundary currently located.
Mr. Kelly replied on the western edge of the property.
January 18, 2001
page 5
Mr. Hegener itumdu
the President of ced himself
as to give a Westchester Develo a President ofst
quick introduction to Pment Co Lucie West Development Co
moment to give the Conte mpany, He stated his purpose of his Company and
In earl a little bit of back Conc Concepts
the Westch
Y 1999 his companplannin ester. He would like to take presentation is
West 1 taff Engineering Firms convened hiamling charrette here of this meiiorr master plan community.
West members of the Count
g staff. The purpose of Environmental Consultants
overall design of this was to define issues that and the St. Y and City
need for a co new comm was The first Lucie
corporate Park• In St. Lucie West Problem that could be dealt with in the
and a distribution business. As the discus intS ere is a s Carrie up in St. Lucie Count and higher payin mall industrial park, small office was
a have a location gJObs [here needs to be disc come up ofgeneratin k,
With hi h ten ussion of co g Economic Development
Of location will a g h telecommunications in a cam orate park in this co
n�: 1 attract the type of employer that Pus setting on enough unty, In Order to
There is no such facilityProduce high wages. gh land. This type
rate and a relative rate of low household in me. 2.) There is a social issue, large
generate this
co
an economic development for that employer to be locateThis is d g unemployment
came the need for a corp oime Provide a place that is one portion of
civic site He explained that out of this meeting
that would provide Pazk is a compliment to the corporate park came the need for a
employer. This is what Pedestrian access to everything and be a
recreational became the idea of a civic site that could con inactive to a corporate
nal uses for the community, and medical tiles contain a school , some
house multiple uses such as explained has He explained such discussions with the School Board and othershoWx extremely complex that
Thtere have been to
components presented at this meetingmake this operational. The housing
anticipated to be employed by this care devised in to two types, One is for the families that are
facility and employment corporate m re and allow pedestrian access to the community
type will be linked b well as a more traditional component of housing. Each housing
to the community by and employment
this malting it easy to go to a small retail area to walk
p yment area. That is the overall concept of Westchester.
Mr. Hegener stated he would like to say that his company is extremely proud to be involved with
St. Lucie County. He believes St. Lucie West sets a very good example of the types of things that
can be done. He believes Westchester is an opportunity to design something brand new. He
introduced the Vice -President of Westchester to walk the board through the initial phase of
Westchester.
L4
January 18, 2001 page 6
Mr. Zboril stated that the reason for the two different zonings being requested was something
that came up while working with staff. The western area of the property was more appropriate
for strictly residential uses and the eastern portion would have mixed uses. He would also like to
state that this will be a DRI and they will come back for subsequent approvals. The reason is this
development is being allowed pursuant to State Statute 380.032 which allows for development
agreements with Community Affairs. This development agreement allows them to commence a
certain amount of development underneath a threshold. They are seeking the amount that is
Permitted underneath the multiple use threshold of the DRI process. As a result of the agreement
with Community Affairs they will be agreeing with them that they will be performing a pre -
application conference with the TCRPC and other interested parties with the permitting office
with in 45 days. Additionally, there will be an agreement to submit an application for a
Development approval within 6 months of the execution of that agreement. He stated they are
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there are no adverse transportation
impacts associated with this amount of development being reviewed at this level. Staff has
reviewed the transportation analysis that has been prepared. As indicated by staff there will be
some infrastructure provided to the site at the intersection of Gatlin Boulevard and the creation
of a North/South Road. There is a letter of agreement executed to the City of Port St. Lucie
regarding Gatlin Boulevard East of Interstate 95 and has been approved by the City staff and his
scheduled to go before the City Council for approval. That agreement allows for the developer to
reserve a certain amount of capacity of Gatlin Blvd, which means about 9,500 trips. It allows the
city to receive some transportation impact fees from the developer and allow the City to
complete a six -lane improvement on Gatlin Blvd from I-95 to Port St. Lucie Blvd. He stated that
with regard to the environment and that specifically there are about 5 to 6 acres of wetland
impacts of the 40 acres of wetlands in the first phase of the development. He explained that the
majority of that impact is 50% with the expansion of Gatlin Boulevard. The site was used as a
sod and cattle farm for over 50 years. There .are no on site uplands with native vegetation in the
first phase, nor are there any endangered or threatened plants. The wetlands there have been
impacted by the years of agricultural and open canal draining system.
Mr. Zboril explained the phase one pattern of development is the more conventional cul-de-sac
type of development. They feel this is an appropriate development to minimize the impact of the
system. The wetlands in this area will be made a part of a 90-acre recreation and reserve area.
That recreation and reserve are will have trails that will go through it to link over to the next side
and in to more pedestrian paths The other side will have more grid like housing. This type of
housing was felt to be more- conducive to the area for the mixed use. They are also seeking the
approval for about 75,000 square feet of offices and another 75,000 square feet of commercial
and retail. The office is the initial part of the corporate park that was previously mentioned. The
retail and commercial is thought of to be as a village center to support the residential units that
are there. That would include such uses as Westchester's sales and marketing officeswhat could be
a coffee
,
shop, and restaurants. There is a request for density that is significantly less than
there with the underlying land use. He explained that this is for phase one only and it is currently
standing alone.
Mr. Trias asked to define the corporate park and how the future development works.
January 18, 2001
page 7
4
..i
Mr. Zboril replied that the future plan is that all along I-95 will be a corporate park. Due to
threshold issues they can only seek approval for 75,000 square feet located on 7 to 8 acres at this
time. He stated that through the Dept of Community Affairs there is a density and intensity type
threshold and an acreage threshold.
Mr. Trias asked why that would be done before DRI approval and what is the advantage.
Mr. Zboril replied the main reason is because they are low in the land inventory at development
in St. Lucie West for residential projects. He explained that they need some more residential
projects to keep the buyers happy.
Mr. Jones asked if the streets in the PUD portion going to be private or public.
Mr. Zboril replied they would both be private.
Mr. Jones asked how that would work with the pedestrian access through that area.
Mr. Zboril stated that they envision submitting to the County applications for a Community
Development District.
Mr. Grande asked if there was annexation anticipated in to the City at the earliest point possible.
Mr. Hegener replied that the property is located in St. Lucie County. The St. Lucie County Land
Development Code and Comprehensive Plan provides for the uses that will be there. They wish
to continue the working relationship with the County, even though St. Lucie West is in the City
Of Port St. Lucie.
Mr. Grande stated the utilities would be provided by the City of port St. Lucie and quite
frequently those agreements need annexations.
Mr. Hearn stated he has a concern about the assurances of the building of the multiple use
building and the completion of that before a certain phases are completed. He asked if that would
be part of conditions from staff.
Mr. Kelly replied that it is a- concern of staff. He stated it is also a concern of the developers,
because without those things the community described does not fully exist. He explained that
this evening is more for a general review and consider the appropriateness of having it there
without putting a hard time line on it. The negotiations are still going on and it would be very
difficult to tie a time line to it.
Mr. Hearn stated his concern is that issues like this have come up in the past
January 18, 2001
page 8
Mr. Kelly stated what this board can do is recommend to the County Commission to try and put
a time -line on it. He explained that by that time the developer would have had the opportunity to
work out a lot of the issues.
Mr. Hearn stated he is not sure how to maintain the building zero lot line. If there is painting or
repair work that needs to be done.
Chairman Matthes asked the applicant to come forward and express different communities that
exist with the same approach.
Mr. Zboril stated that the minimum lot size for anything proposed residential is 30 x 85 in a
range of 85 to 135 on the depth and 90 on width. There are not provisions for zero set backs on
two units. If there is zero on one side then there is a setback on the other side.
Mr. Hearn asked if the resident would have to trespass on the neighboring property to do repairs.
He would like to know what the plans are to take of that type of situation.
Mr. Hegener replied that zero lot line projects would apply for an easement or get access by
neighbors. They will provide in the final documentation a Home Owner Association documents,
design criteria, and an outline to show how that will work.
Mr. Grande stated that for Mr. Hearn's benefit there are a number of communities that have that
type of partial zero lot line on one side. Currently on island it works extremely well. There have
never been any problems maintaining the face on the zero lot line side. It is well cared- for in the
association documents.
Mr. Grande asked why on condition #45 is staff reserving the right to move 100 units from one
side to the other.
Mr. Hegener replied that there were some market flexibility. They needed the ability to
determine exactly where the market is going to go during the phasing of the project.
Mr. Grande stated going from East to West from the less dense residential to the more dense
residential area indicates that the residential would have to be expanded at the cost of retail or
commercial on the east side.
Mr. Zboril stated that they are seeking approval for a variable lot size configuration based upon
builder and buyer preference. He stated that there are land areas that are allocated a certain
number of units. Those units may be reached before the land area is exhausted before a certain
set of assumptions. Those land areas may be exhausted based on all the units are used up based
upon the maximum lot sizes, thus meaning they will run out of land before they run out of lots..,
January 18, 2001 page 9
Mr. Kelly interjected and stated that staff wished to speak with board about condition #45. Staff
is going to recommend the transfer can go either way. The total project is still capped at 800
total. If on either side the market demand was for the very smallest of the lots then there would
be additional land available on whichever side. The impacts of this phase are the 800 units and
the intent of condition #45 and the modification to go either way is to cap the number of units at
the total of 800. It started with the transfer to the east, but as discussions went on it became
apparent it could work the other way as long as the total number of units stayed constant.
Mr. Lounds asked if the commercial area was not as absorbed as quickly as hoped, he would like
to know if it is possible to take the commercial area that has been set aside and change it in to
residential.
Mr. Kelly replied that the intent was not to change any of the boundaries between the residential
and non-residential uses. The street pattern is proposed with variable lot widths. If something in
the market dictates the average lot width, it probably uses the land up with the 200 units.
Therefore the uses will not change from residential to non-residential or vice versa.
Mr. Trias asked why they would build with this idea other than what they have previously track
record.
Mr. Hegener replied that nationally and regionally are observing younger families with the
offices in the home. There is a need being seen for this type of neighborhood, because it is
attractive to those types of families. These types of communities on the east side will be seen
with mini -vans and sport utility vehicles as opposed to what may be seen in other areas. They
feel this is an attractive package..
Mr. Grande asked if one side could lay dormant if the transfer of density took place.
Mr. Kelly stated that it could happen even without the transfer of the density either way. He
explained that when he comes back in front of the board in the future is when that will be dealt
with as far as the transfer.
Mr. Merritt would like to hear the rest of the presentation.
Mr. Kelly stated that he only spoke of the PUD only and Mr. Zboril spoke in general of the
whole project. The PMUD is generally located immediately East of the PUD and the North
South road and the zoning is AG -I and the proposed PMUD Zoning District and the Land Use
designation is RU. There are 185 %: acres in that parcel with the proposal of 200 units with
associated infrastructure. The infrastructure includes 153,500 feet of commercial retail and
offices. There is a recreational facility in that there still needs some work. In the PMUD side
there will be the civic site and a smaller civic site, tti'dre are areas for retail and commercial and a
rather large lake that is part of the retention area. There is a grid pattern for the residential area.
There will be a need for 2 different public hearings for each side.
January 18, 2001 page 10
Mr. Heam asked why they are separate and not combined.
Mr. Kelly replied because of open space requirements for maximum amount of residential and
non-residential within the PMUD. In order to make it all fit it worked out this way. The PUD
western portion is much more of a traditional PUD project in itself.
Chairman Matthes opened the public hearing for the zoning change to the PUD. There
being no one the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Matthes opened the public hearing for the zoning change to the PMUD. There
being no on the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Matthes asked if there were any other questions for staff.
Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Zboril if they were trying to get this like the Heathrow Development in
Northern Florida.
Mr. Zboril stated that that market would probably dictate that.
Mr. Kelly stated that he is going to point out the conditions that staff really feels that needs to be
addressed. He stated that 94, 5, and 6 talk about wetlands and there is a lot of verbage in those.
Staff wants to assure that the appropriate agencies look at the wetlands and that they are treated
in a lawful manner. He stated that #18 is the condition that authorizes the developer enter into
agreements for their potable water sources and authorizes. City of Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie West
District, or through a Community Development District create an onsite system. He would
propose #18-a that would say nothing will happen if they do not have potable water. This is a
kind of concurrency condition that will be similar to #24, which is the wastewater. He explained
that #25 has changed in to a civic site instead, but it indicates the developer. will be subject to
educational facility impact fees. Then #27 gives the developer an out stating that if he would
construct a school or dedicate a school site then he would be eligible for credit to impact fees. He
explained that there was the same situation with recreation and open space the developer will be
subject to impact fees. Then 929 should stay there with at least the 40% on the west side which is
part of the code. He stated that #31 which obligates the developers to pay the environmental
impact fees as they may be amended. All impact fees have the clause for amendment. There are
conditions # 43 and #44 obligate them to pay transportation impact fees or a credit can be
worked out with the City. Then #48 requires final development plans and architectural
guidelines. These are the conditions that staff recommends as conditions. The ones that were not
mentioned are not recommended at this time.
Chairman Matthes asked the developers if this was in the realm of their plans or will their be
something to be discussed.
January 18, 2001 page l l
Mr. Zboril stated they are fine with conditions pointed out by Mr. Kelly. He would like to ensure
that the conditions regarding the habitat, wildlife, and vegetation track with the conditions
imposed by South Florida Water Management and the Army Corps of Engineers. That there are
no additional burdens created in seeking those approvals.
Mr. Kelly stated that was the intent in conditions #4,5, and 6.
Ms. Dreyer, attorney representing the applicant, stated the intent of the conditions and the
concerns that staff has for these conditions. She stated that the conditions may be subject to some
further refinement and language clarification prior to the Board of County Commission meeting
with that understanding the conditions are acceptable.
Mr. Grande asked if there are any of the fifty conditions that could be a problem at this point.
Ms. Dreyer replied that there has not been enough time to thoroughly review these conditions
and a number of them will need to be considered during the DRI process, whether they are
appropriate for the first phase of this project is something staff recognizes.
Ms. Lounds asked if it is Ms. Dreyer and staff s understanding that local concerns do not
supercede the Army Corps of Engineers or Drainage district rulings on wetlands.
Ms. Dreyer stated that they understand that wetlands are determined by the water management
district and the federal government.
Mr. Aiken asked staff if changing the language to say "civic' site, instead of school site change
any of the condition.
Mr. Kelly replied that it will change #26 since there are still education facilities imposed on all
new structures in St. Lucie County.
Mr. Hearn asked if on condition #8 what does the word sufficient mean in that language.
Mr. Murphy replied that the condition that are being seen are structured from existing
development orders in the county of DRI nature. The terminology used refers to other permitting
agencies. The terms sufficient routing would imply that it has to satisfy South Florida Water
Management criteria. The language is more to the point of putting people on notice that there are
things that need to by complied with and need to be identified at the preliminary phase. These
will be furthered refined at some point in a year from now.
Mr. Heam asked about condition #9 and how wide does the buffer zone required to be.
January 18, 2001 page 12
fi�'i`\ic'Y�A t'��F+,.�T'�`xa�'.Ya�ititM1,M1YA°�,�x f+,�,'kk r,7•h^' n�' ...
Mr. Murphy replied that the plans show currently 25 feet but the ultimate determination of that
will be that buffer zone requirements of the county and through the Environmental Resource
Permitting criteria. Then the criteria will be 15 feet in the minimum. There will probably be
some different variations before it said and done.
After discussion of the various conditions and a motion to include all the conditions, which was
discussed and withdrawn, Mr. Grande indicated that he believed the conditions to be
inappropriate at this time.
Mr. Grande moved for approval of the Planned Unit Development Mr. Lounds seconded the
motions. Upon a roll call vote the motion was passed unanimously.
Mr. McCurdy moved for approval of the Planned Mixed Use Development to known as
Westchester. Mr. Lounds seconded the motion. Upon a roll call vote the motion was passed
unanimously.
LL
January 18, 2001 page 13
Now %No
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW: 1/18/01
File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
MEMORANDUM
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning Manager
January 11, 2001
SUBJECT: Application of Westchester Development Company, for Preliminary
Planned Mixed Unit Development approval for the Project Known as
Westchester - PMUD, and for a Change in Zoning from the AG-1
(Agricultural —1 du/acre) Zoning District to the PMUD (Planners Mixed Unit
Development - Westchester) Zoning District.
LOCATION: North side of Gatlin Boulevard immediately west of the 1-95
Interchange, approximately one mile west of the intersection
of Gatlin Boulevard and Brescia Street.
ZONING DESIGNATION: AG-1 (Agricultural Residential 1 — du/acre)
PROPOSED ZONING: PMUD (Planned Mixed Unit Development — Westchester)
LAND USE DESIGNATION: RU (Residential Urban)
PARCEL SIZE: 185.5 acres
PROPOSED USE: 200 Single -Family lots with associated infrastructure, open
space and commercial and civic uses.
SURROUNDING ZONING: AG-1 (Agricultural —1 du/acre) to the north, south, east, and
west.
SURROUNDING LAND USES: RU (Residential Urban) to the north, south and west; and
MXD Gatlin Boulevard to the east.
FIRE/EMS PROTECTION: Station #10 (777 SW Dalton Road), is located approximately
5 miles to the east.
UTILITY SERVICE: Port St. Lucie Utilities or St. Lucie West will provide water
and sewer services.
January9, 2001
Page 2
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
RIGHT-OF-WAY
ADEQUACY:
SCHEDULED
IMPROVEMENTS:
TYPE OF CONCURRENCY
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
Petition: Westchester PMUD
File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
See Comments
See Comments
Certificate of Capacity.
lffffffffffffffffff4kf
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 the following determinations:
1.
2.
Whether the proposed rezoning is in conflict with any applicable portions of the
St. Lucie County Land Development Code;
The proposed rezoning has been determined to not be in conflict with any applicable
provision of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. The application for
Preliminary Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) approval has been reviewed for
consistency with the provisions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and
has been determined to meet all applicable standards of review.
Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan;
The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed amendment would be consistent with
all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. This change in zoning will,
for example, allow the applicant to develop the subject property in a manner that
encourages innovative use of land. This Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) will
result in a lesser density than that which would be allowed under the current future land
use designation. There are 200 single-family lots proposed for construction within the
Westchester PMUD. If the subject property were developed at its maximum residential
density, 927 dwelling units would be possible. The PMUD also includes 22.73 acres of
proposed commercial development, a 53.69 acre school site, and a 2.19 acre
institutional site.
14%W ..I
January9, 2001 Petition: Westchester PUD
Page 3 File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
3. Whether and the extent to which the proposed zoning is inconsistent with the
existing and proposed land uses;
This proposed change in zoning and the accompanying Preliminary Planned Mixed Use
Development site plan have been determined to be consistent with the general land
uses in the surrounding area. The Future Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan indicate that the petitioned property is suitable for development at
a density of 5 dwelling units per gross acre. The proposed development indicates a
gross density of 0.96 dwelling units per acre.
4. Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment;
There are no changes that would 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 proposed site plan, which is tied to this rezoning, is expected to create additional
demands on all public facilities in this area. As the proposed development is located within
the service area of the Port St. Lucie Utility Department, the applicant was required to
provide sufficient documentation stating capacity was available to meet the needs of the
proposed project. The Port St. Lucie Utility Department has provided a letter stating that
sufficient water and sewer service is available to support the proposed development. The
developer is currently working with the city to secure this service. Water and sewer service
are also available from St. Lucie West.
The subject property is located west of the existing terminus of Gatlin Boulevard.
According to the applicant's traffic impact report the following three roadway facilities,
which are located within the project study area, are scheduled for improvements within
the Port St. Lucie Capital- Improvement Program (CIP):
Airoso Boulevard 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Boulevard to FY 2000-2001
Prima Vista Boulevard
Gatlin Boulevard 4-lane divided from 1-95 to Port St. Lucie FY 2001-2002
Boulevard
B a y s h o r e 4-lane divided from Port St. Lucie Boulevard to FY 2001-2003
Boulevard Prima Vista Boulevard
The applicant's Traffic Impact Report (TIR) indicates that the proposed project will not
negatively affect any of the surrounding roadway links. The applicant has stated within
the Traffic Impact Report (TIR) that they will commit to constructing that portion of Gatlin
*AW
January 9, 2001 Petition: Westchester PUD
Page 4 File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
Boulevard as a four lane divided roadway from 1-95 to the projects entrance, a distance
of approximately one -mile.
In addition, the applicant will construct a section of a new north/south arterial roadway
which will ultimately connect to Glades Cutoff Road. This additional arterial will be a 4-
lane facility and intersect the southern property line at Gatlin Boulevard, approximately
one mile west of 1-95. Further, the applicant is proposing to construct a new north/south
collector road as part of the proposed development. This collector roadway is proposed
to be located approximately Y2 mile west of 1-95. This collector roadway facility will
provide direct access to a proposed school, a portion of the proposed residential
development and all proposed commercial uses.
The proposed development will provide approximately 72.99 acres (35% of the site) as
open space. This open space includes the 0.26 acres of wetlands, 44.46 acres of lakes,
3.91 acres of parks, 11.98 acres of common area and a 12.38 acre school site.
The proposed development will address its impact on the school district through the
provision of a 12.38 acre school site and /or the construction and operation of a school
on a 54 acre site within the Planned Mixed Use (PMUD) Development area which is the
subject of this petition.
6. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result In
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment;
The proposed amendment is not anticipated to create adverse impacts on the natural
environment. The applicant through the PUD (Planned Unit Development) approval
process, has proposed a development plan that provides for the protection of
environmentally sensitive areas. The applicant will need to obtain all permits relating to
environmental impacts on the site prior to any construction. These agencies include but
are not limited to the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), South Florida Water Management
District (SFWMD) and the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission.
The environmental impact report (EIR) indicates that there are a number of wetlands
located throughout the subject land parcel. In this phase of development, the applicant
is proposing to preserve all of the wetlands located on the land parcel. This will result in
no net loss of wetlands for this development.
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;
The proposed zoning designation would result in an orderly and logical development
pattern. The development is within the urban service boundary west of the 1-95
Interchange along Gatlin Boulevard west of Port St. Lucie. The logical growth pattern
14W
January 9, 2001 Petition: Westchester PUD
Page 5 File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
within this area will allow for the development of this project as an integrated
development with residential and required service components. In this manner, the
applicant is proposing to incorporate a portion of the smart growth ideas into the design
of the overall project. There will be two sections developed within Phase I of the overall
development. The first section is the 600 unit PUD considered in this petition. The
second section is a Planned Mixed Use development (PMUD) which incorporates 200
residential units along with commercial and civic uses.
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, Westchester Development Company, is proposing the development of phase
one of an integrated project which will include residential, commercial and civic uses. This
petition covers the Westchester PMUD, a 200 unit residential project identified as "Eastside" in
the attached plans. The "Eastside" plan also contains commercial, and civic uses associated
with all of phase one development. The total phase one project is 581.63 acres divided into this
208.57 acre Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) and a 373.06 acre PUD which is the
subject of a separate petition. The PUD will be considered as a separate but related project. As
a PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development), the project proposes to develop the subject
property with some flexibility, such as establishing area and yard standards which are different
from those required in the standard zoning districts, and the ability to cluster dwelling units to
protect environmentally sensitive areas and provide for alternate development patterns on site.
The developer is thus able to reduce the environmental impacts on the property to a greater
degree than with more conventional development.
Section 7.01.03(I) of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code requires that 35% of the
site must consist of open space, a minimum or 15% of which must be native upland habitat
preserved in its natural condition. These requirements are met by this PMUD.
Staff has determined that the proposed zoning designation and the Preliminary Planned Mixed Use
Development site plan is compatible with the existing and proposed uses in the area. This petition
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. This development will be at a density below what is permitted by the
Future Land Use Designation of this property. In considering any approval actions, staff
recommends that you forward Resolution attached with this petition to the Board of
County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to the conditions found in said
resolution.
En
..+
January 9, 2001 Petition: Westchester PUD
Page 6 File No.: PUD-00-011, RZ-00-015 and MJSP-00-009
Please contact this office if you have any questions on this matter.
Attachment
cs
cc: Westchester Development Company
Greg Boggs, Thomas Lucido & Associates
File
*%W
Section 3.01.03
Zoning District Use Regulations
3.01.03 ZONING DISTRICTS
A. AG-1 AGRICULTURAL - 1
Purpose
The purpose of this district is to provide and protect an environment suitable for productive
commercial agriculture, together with such other uses as may be necessary to and compatible with
productive agricultural surroundings. Residential densities are restricted to a maximum of one (1)
dwelling unit per gross acre. The number in"()" following each identified use corresponds to the SIC
code reference described in Section 3.01.02(B). The number 999 applies to a use not defined under
the SIC code but may be further defined in Section 2.00.00 of this Code.
2. Permitted Uses
a. Agricultural production - crops ton
b. Agricultural production - livestock & animal specialties roil
C. Agricultural services (or)
d. Family day care homes. cam)
e. Family residential homes provided that such homes shall not be located within a radius of
one thousand (1,000) feet of another existing such family residential home and provided that
the sponsoring agency or Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) notifies
the Board of County Commissioners at the time of home occupancy that the home is licensed
by HRS. (es9)
f. Fishing, hunting & trapping mg)
g. Forestry (m)
h. Kennels. (0752)
i. Research Facilities, Noncommercial (a»)
j. Riding stables. (ress)
k. Single-family detached dwellings. (m)
3. Lot Size Requirements
Lot size requirements shall be in accordance with Table 1 in Section 7.04.00.
4. Dimensional Regulations
Dimensional requirements shall be in accordance with Table 1 in Section 7.04.00.
5. Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements
Off-street parking and loading requirements are subject to Section 7.06.00.
6. Landscaping Requirements
Landscaping requirements are subject to Section 7.09.00.
7. Conditional Uses
a. Agricultural labor housing. t"91
Adopted August 1, 1990 94 Revised Through O8/01/00
Section 3.01.03
Zoning District Use Regulations /
l
b. Aircraft storage and equipment maintenance. (4581)
c. Airports and Flying, landing, and takeoff fields. (4591)
d. Family residential homes located within a radius of one thousand (1,000) feet of another such
family residential home. ow)
e. Farm products warehousing and storage. (422114222)
f. Gasoline service stations. (ss ii
g. Industrial wastewater disposal. (vss)
h. Manufacturing:
(1) Agricultural chemicals r2sn
(2) Food & kindred products (20)
(3) Lumber & wood products, except furniture (24)
i. Mining and quarrying of nonmetalic minerals, except fuels. (14)
j. Retail trade:
(1) Farm equipment and related accessories. (9")
(2) Apparel & accessory stores. (ss)
k. Sewage disposal subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.13. (M)
I. Telecommunication Towers - subject to the standards of Section 7.10.23 ryas)
M. Camps - sporting and recreational. (7we)
8. Accessory Uses
Accessory uses are subject to the requirements of Section 8.00.00, and include the following:
a. Mobile homes subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.05.
b. Retail trade and wholesale trade - subordinate to the primary authorized use or activity.
C. Guest house subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.04. (ssm)
Adopted August 1, 1990 95 Revised Through 06/01/00
♦.e 1*./
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
7.03.00 PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
7.03.01 PURPOSE
The Planned Mixed Use Development District (PMUD) is intended to allow fora combination of residential and
non-residential land development of superior quality through the encouragement of flexibility and creativity in
design options that:
A. permit creative approaches to the development of land reflecting changes in the technology of land
development;
B. allow for the efficient use of land, which can result in smaller networks of utilities and streets and
thereby lower development costs;
C. encourage a broad range of services (shopping, employment, schools, recreation, etc.) in close
proximity to their need;
D. allow for a juxtaposition of land uses both horizontally and vertically, not otherwise allowed;
E. allow design options that encourage an environment of stable character, compatible with surrounding
land uses; and
permit the enhancement of neighborhoods through the preservation of natural features, the provision
of underground utilities, and the provision of recreation areas and open space;
7.03.02 PERMITTED USES AND LOCATIONS
Policy 1.1.6.4 of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan sets forth an intensity plan for each area with a
Mixed Use Development (MXD) future land use designation. Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) zoning
is permitted only within the MXD future land use. Permitted uses within the PMUD zoning.designation vary
by intensity as specified below. Compatibility and relative placement of different uses shall be limited as
specified in Table 7.1, Compatibility of Uses vs. Road Classification & Average Daily Trips.
A. High Intensity
Any permitted use as identified in the Residential, Multiple-Family-5 (RM-5); Residential, Mobile"
Home-5 (RMH-5); Residential, Multiple-Family-7 (RM-7); Residential, Multiple-Family-9 (RM-9);
Residential, Multiple-Family-11 (RM-11); Residential, Multiple-Family-15; (RM-15) Commercial,
Neighborhood (CN); Commercial, Office (CO); Commercial, General (CG); Industrial, Light (IL);
Industrial, Heavy (IH); Utility (U); Institutional (1); or HIRD zoning districts of this Code, any accessory
use specified in the final PMUD, and any conditional use specified in the final PMUD, subject to the
requirements of Section 11.07.00 and any other special requirement as set forth in this Code, may
be permitted in an area designated High Intensity Mixed Use Development to the extent consistent
with the future Land Use designations of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
Adopted August 1. 1990 390 Revised Through 08/01100
M
..1
Medium Intensity
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
Any permitted, use as identified in the Residential, Multiple-Family-5 (RM-5); Residential, Mobile
Home-5 (RMH-5); Residential, Multiple-Family-7 (RM-7); Residential, Multiple-Family-9 (RM-9);
Commercial, Neighborhood (CN); Commercial, Office (CO); Commercial, General (CG); Industrial,
Light (IL); Industrial, Heavy (IH); Utility (U); Institutional (I); or HIRD zoning districts of this Code, any
accessory use specified in the final PMUD, and any conditional use specified in the final PMUD,
subject to the requirements of Section 11.07.00 and any other special requirement as set forth in this
Code may be permitted in an area designated Medium Intensity Mixed Use Development to the extent
consistent with the future Land Use designations of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
C. Low Intensity
Any permitted use as identified in the Residential, Estate-1 (RE-1); Residential, Estate-2 (RE-2);
Residential, Single-Family-2 (RS-2); Residential, Single-Family-3 (RS-3); Residential, Single-Family-4
(RS-4); Residential, Multiple-Family-5 (RM-5); Residential, Mobile Home-5 (RMH-4 Residential,
Multiple-Family-5 (RM-5); Commercial, Neighborhood (CN); Commercial, Office (CO); Commercial,
General (CG); Industrial, Light (IL); or HIRD zoning districts of this Code, any accessory use
specified in the final PMUD, and any conditional use specified in the final PMUD, subject to the
requirements of Section 11.07.00 and any other special requirement as set forth in this Code may
be permitted in an area designated Low Intensity Mixed Use Development to the extent consistent
with the future Land Use designations of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
D. Location Criteria
Planned Mixed Use Development shall be based on and controlled by the roadway classification as
defined in Section 7.03.03(E) The various permitted uses shall be located within the development
based on the, functional classification of and the projected average daily trips on the adjacent
roadway, as per Table 7-1 below.
In the case of large scale developments, the developer shall, subject to the review and approval of
the county, specify the functional classification of each road within the development. In the case of
smaller projects which are located on existing roads, the county's classifications shall be used. In
either case, projected traffic volumes shall be submitted as a part of the required Traffic Impact
Report.
TABLE 7-1
COMPATIBILITY OF USES vs ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION & IMPACT OF USE
USE
USE
ARTERLLL
EL
`COLLECTOR
.1LOmu
LOCAL—,
Residential (individual single family)
< 4,500
Residential individual two or three family)
<4 500
< 4 500
Adopted August 1, 1990 391 Revised Through 08/01100
No.,
..+
TABLE 7-1
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
COMPATIBILITY OF USES vs ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION & IMPACT OF USE
USE
ARTERIAL
COLLECTOR
LOCAL
GENERAL
LOCAL
RESIOENTAL
Residential (other)
> 10,000
4501 - 10,000
<4.500
<4,500
Institutional
> 10,000
4501 - 15,000
< 7,500
< 4.500
Professional Service / Office
> 10,000
4501 - 15,000
< 4,500
Neighborhood Commercial
< 7.500
< 4,500
General Commercial
> 10,000
4501 - 10,000
< 4.500
Public Services / Utilities
> 10.000
4501 - 10,000
< 4,500
Industrial
> 10.000
4501 -15,000
< 7,500
7.03.03 STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS
Standards and requirements for a Planned Mixed Use Development shall be as follows:
A. MINIMUM AREA
Minimum areas for land uses within Planned Mixed Use Developments shall be as specified in Table
7.2 below. Where more that one land use is developed within a Planned Mixed Use Development,
the minimum size of the development shall be the sum of the minimum areas for each land use as
specified in Table 7-2 below. All land included as a part of the minimum requirement shall be
contiguous and under common ownership or control. Residential land uses may not exceed 40
percent of the Planned Mixed Use Development.
TABLE 7-2
- MINIMUM AREA FOR-PLANNED,MIXEpiUSE.DEVELOPMENTS-:.,
LAND USE .:I ` `
"MINIMUM AREA..
(GROSSACRES)
Residential
1
Institutional
1
Professional Service/Office
1
Commercial
1
Public Service/Utilities
1
Industrial
1
Adopted August 1, 1990 392 Revised Through 08/01/00
r10
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
B. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND NON-RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA RATIOS
1. The maximum permitted residential density of a Planned Mixed Use Development shall not
exceed the residential density reflected in the Mixed Use Intensity Plans of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan and referenced in Table 7-3 below. On North and South
Hutchinson Island, the provisions of Section 3.01.03(AA), HIRD (Hutchinson Island
Residential District) shall govern.
2. For non-residential uses, intensity shall be limited by Floor Area Ratios as specified in Table
7-3 below. Floor Area Ratio is defined as the total floor area of the building divided by the
total area of the lot. The total floor area of the building shall include all floors of the building.
TARt F 7-s
tDENS(TY ANDIFILOOR AREA RAT10StFOR PL`71NNED MIXED USBUEVELOPMENTS
'•LANOUSE :
-
`MINIMUM
DU/ACRE
.MAXIMUM -.
; ` DUfACRr
FLOOR AREA
RA'n0
i'NighlMar15l
Residential
5
15
Institutional
1.50
Pmfessional Service/Office
1.50
commercial
1.00
Public Services/Utilities
0'50
Industrial
0.50
- Medium Into
Residential
5
9
Institutional
1.00
Professional Service/Office
1'00
Commercial
0.75
Public ServicestUtilities
0.25
Industrial
0.25
Low Intensity
Residential
0
5
Institutional
0.50
Adopted August 1, 1990 - 393 Revised Through 08101/00
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
TART F 7-s
DENSITY AND FLOOR AREA RATIOS FOR PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS
LAND USE
MINIMUM
DU/ACRE
MAXIMUM
DU/ACRE
FLOORAREA
RATIO
Professional Service/Office
0.50
Commercial
0,50
Public Service/Utilities
0.25
Where mixed land uses are horizontally or vertically integrated on the same parcel, the developer
shall demonstrate that the parcel contains sufficient land area for the proposed uses to have been
approved individually. I
C. DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
For Planned Mixed Use Developments, area, yard, height and other dimensional requirements of
Chapters 7, 8, 9, and 13 shall be determined at the time of final PMUD Plan approval except that for
any structure on North or South Hutchinson Island that has not been occupied, constructed, or has
not received a building permit, site plan or other County development approval as a permitted use
prior to January 10, 1995 the requirements of Section 4.01.00, Hutchinson Island - Building Height
Overlay Zone shall apply.
Where area, yard, height and other dimensional requirements, as defined by the Planned Mixed Use
Development are less restrictive than similar requirements of this Code, approval may be granted by
the Board of County Commissioners upon demonstration that such less restrictive dimensional
requirements are detennined to be consistent with the intent and purpose of the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan, and the other standards and requirements of this Code.
D. PUBLIC FACILITIES
1. In order to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to mitigate impact on the
environment and natural resources, to ensure public safety and to ensure compliance with
the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the Planned Mixed Use Development shall be
designed and located so there will be no net public cost for the provision of water lines,
sewage lines, storm and surface drainage systems, and other utility systems.
2. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities is
six (6") inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County -
Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau.
3. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities,
that are located on a dead-end water main is eight (8") inches. Actual water main
Adopted August 1. 1990 394 Revised Through 08/01/00
*%W
.1111110'
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County -Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau.
The maximum number of fire hydrants that may be located on any dead end water main is
one (1).
4. Fire hydrants shall be provided at a minimum spacing of one every six hundred (600) feet
unless otherwise approved by the St. Lucie County -Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau.
E. TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
Roadway Classification - Roadways in Planned Mixed Use Developments shall be
classified as arterial, collector, or local roads or streets. These classifications are presented
in order of the intensity of their associated uses. Local streets are further subdivided into
residential and general streets. While the uses permitted along these streets differ, neither
of these classifications is intended to be used more intensively than the other. Further
definitions of and standards for these classifications as used for Planned Mixed Use
Developments are found below and in Table 7-4.
Arterial road - A route providing service which is relatively continuous and of
relatively high traffic volume, long average trip length, high operating speed, and high
mobility importance.
FIGURE 73
Adopted August 1, 1990 395 Revised Through 08/01/00
..+
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
Collector road - A route providing service which is of relatively moderate average
traffic volume, moderately average trip length, and moderately average operating
speed. Such a route also collects and distributes traffic between local roads or
arterial roads and serves as a linkage between land access and mobility needs.
C. Local streets - Routes which primarily permit direct access to abutting property and
connections to a higher order roadway. A local street provides service that is
relatively low in volume and short average trip length or minimal through traffic
movements.
(1) Residential local street - a local street on which only residential,
institutional, and neighborhood commercial uses are permitted (see Table
7-1).
(2) General local street - a local street on which some residential uses are
prohibited (see Table 7-1).
2. Roadway Design Criteria - The following criteria shall be used in planning for traffic
circulation.
a. Minimum dimensional requirements for roadways in Planned Mixed Use
Developments shall be as specified in Table 7-4 below, unless otherwise approved.
b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed for smooth traffic flow with
controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
Local streets within the Planned Mixed Use Development shall not be connected to
streets outside the development where their use would encourage through traffic.
C. The proposed Planned Mixed Use Development shall be designed so that it will not
create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the project,
or such surrounding collector or arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not
be adversely affected.
d. The proposed Planned Mixed Use Development shall be designed so that arterial
and collector roads which enter or leave the project, shall connect to roads of the
same or higher classification.
e. As specified in Table 7-1 above, all non-residential land uses, other than
neighborhood commercial, within the Planned Mixed Use Development shall have
direct access to a general local or collector street without creating traffic hazards or
congestion on any street.
f. As specified in Table 7-1 above, all residential land uses within the Planned Mixed
Use Development shall have direct access to a residential local, a general local or
a collector street without creating traffic hazards on any street.
Adopted August 1, 1990 396 Revised Through 08/01/00
%W
v
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
Access points on all collector or arterial streets serving a Planned Mixed Use
Development shall be located and spaced so that traffic moving into and out of the
arterial streets does not cause traffic congestion.
h. Access to arterial streets shall be permitted only for uses with projected average
daily trips (ADTs) of 4,500 or greater (see Table 7-1).
Streets in a Planned Mixed Use Development may be dedicated to public use or
retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall
comply with Chapter 13, Building Regulations and Public Works Construction, of the
St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations. Variations to the standard
minimum right-of-way widths may be considered as part of the Planned Mixed Use
Development if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners,
that the requested variation is consistent with the intent of the County's roadway
construction standards and necessary for the design of the Planned Mixed Use
Development.
j. All roads and streets shall intersect at an approximate ±50 angle of ninety degrees
(900) unless circumstances acceptable to St. Lucie County indicate a need for a
lesser angle of intersection.
k. Street jogs or centerline offsets between any local street or road with another local
street or road, shall be no less than one hundred fifty feet (150).
I. The intersection of any two local roads or streets with a Major Collector or Arterial
Roadway shall be separated by a minimum distance of six hundred sixty feet (660),
as measured from centerline to centerline.
M. Permanent dead-end streets shall not exceed one thousand feet (1000) in length.
Cul-de-sacs shall be provided at the end of all dead end roads or streets greater
than five hundred and one (501) feet in length. The length of a dead-end street shall
be measured along the centerline of the street from the its point of perpendicular
intersection with the centerline of intersecting street to the end of the dead-end street
or roadway. All cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum right-of-way diameter of one
hundred (100) feet.
If the dead end roadway is five hundred (500) feet or less in length, a "Y" or "T' type
of turn around may be approved.
If a dead end street is temporary in nature then a temporary cul-de-sac shall be
required until the roadway is connected to another street or road.
In the center of the cul-de-sac an unpaved island, surrounded by a curb, improved
with grass and landscaping that will not interfere with sight distance, may be
Adopted August 1, 1990 397 Revised Through 08/01100
*and
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
provided. Center islands shall have a diameter of not less than seventeen (17) feet,
unless otherwise approved through the review of the Planned Unit Development.
n. All roadways, exclusive of interior parking and access aisles areas, regardless of
ownership, shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any exterior building
walls, except for security gate houses or similar security structures located in a
private street or road right-of-way.
0. Any pedestrian circulation system and its related walkways shall be separated from
the vehicular street system. This may include, when deemed to be necessary by the
Board of County Commissioners, pedestrian underpasses or overpasses in the
vicinity of playgrounds and other recreation areas, local shopping areas, and other
neighborhood uses which generate a considerable amount of pedestrian traffic.
TABLE 7-4
MIXED USE AREA'ROAD WAY STANDARDS
ROADWAY
CLASSIFICATION/
AYG. DAILY TRIPS
MIN. ROW
WIDTH
MAx NUMBER
OF LANES
MIN LANE WIDTH
SIDEWALKS
BICYCLE LANES
RURAL/URBAN
ARTERIAL ROADS
0 - 13,400
100'
2
12'
6' both sides
6' both sides
13.401.- 29,500
160'
4
12'
6' both sides
6' both sides
29,501 and up
200'
6
1Y
6' both sides
6 both sides
COLLECTOR ROADS
0 - 10,300
80,
2
12'
6' bath sides
5' both sides
10.301 - 22,800
100'
4
12'
6' both sides
5' both sides
LOCAL GENERAL STREETS
0 - 7,500 -
60'
2
12'
6' both sides
Optional
LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREETS
0 - 4,500
40`
2
10712'
6' both sides
Optional
4,500 - 7,500
50`
2
10712'
6 both sides
Optional
Requires curb 8 gutter for stormwaler design unless othervnse approved by County Engineer.
sa,.m: u,wasur. wpre,wea nanawuuen.
•emsorwwmrema oeo.man anm.e„ain. remr.
IeM M Senke SWdaN. W Guilefrea. Msual b%emia. Mr IYY!
Sl Lune WuMy, Cm.n,Nry OerelKmni 0.pN,e,.
Adopted August 1, 1990 _ 398 _ Revised Through 08/01/00
i. %04
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
PARKING AND LOADING
General Provisions
a. The number, type, and location of parking spaces shall be determined at the time of
final Planned Mixed Use Development plan approval. The determination of the
number of spaces required shall be based on Section 7.06.01(F) of this Code. The
number of parking spaces required by this section may be reduced based on
substantial competent evidence that the reduced number of spaces is adequate for
the proposed use or that parking may be shared by proximate uses that operate at
different times or on different days.
b. Reserved parking spaces may be provided, in lieu of paved spaces, subject to
Section 7.06.02(C) of this Code.
2. Off Street Parking and Loading
Off-street parking and loading requirements are governed by Sections 7.06.02 and 7.06.03
of this Code, and the following standards:
a. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be designed to provide travelways
between adjacent uses while discouraging through traffic.
b. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be screened from adjacent roads and
pedestrian walkways with hedges, dense planting, or changes in grades or walls.
3. On Street Parking
In Planned Mixed Use Developments, on street parking may be used so long as the road on
which the on -street parking is proposed lies entirely within the limits of the defined Planned
Mixed Use Development and such parking would not contravene any other provision of this
Code or the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances. Where such on street parking and loading
is used, it shall be consistent with the following design standards:
a. The minimum size of a parking stall shall be as follows
parallel
8 feet X
23 feet
angled
10 feet X
18 feet
handicapped (parallel)
12 feet X
23 feet
handicapped (angled)
12 feet X
18 feet
b. Handicapped parking spaces shall be appropriately marked.
C. Access for emergency fire vehicles shall be in accordance with NFPA standards.
Adopted August 1, 1990 399 Revised Through 00/01/00
..+
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
d. No more than fifteen (15) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row
without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of 360 square feet.
G. LIGHTING
All lighting facilities shall be arranged in such a manner so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous
interference of any kind to adjoining streets or properties. A detailed lighting plan shall be required
for arterial and collector streets and any Planned Mixed Use Development located on North or South
Hutchinson Island.
H. BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING BETWEEN USES WITHIN THE PLANNED MIXED USE
DEVELOPMENT
Mixed Use Developments shall provide buffers and landscaping as required by Section 7.09.00,
unless otherwise approved.
PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PERIMETER BUFFERS
Buffers at the perimeter of the PMUD shall be as specified in Table 7-5 below.
TABLE 7-5
REQUIRED PERIMETER BUFFERS'
,PLANNEDMIXED USE -"
DEVELOPMENT
'BUFFER'.REQUIRED"OF
PMUD-PROPERTY
'�BUFFER'REQUIREDOF -
cAWACENTPROPERTY
RESIDENTIAL
30 Feet
To be determined
by the zoning of the
adjacent property
COMMMERCIAVINSTITUTIONAL
30 Feet
INDUSTRIAVUTILILITY
40 Feet
SETBACKS FROM AGRICULTURAL LAND
Planned Mixed Use Developments adjacent to land used for agricultural purposes, or designated for
agricultural use on the Future Land Use Map of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan shall
provide setbacks from the agricultural land sufficient to protect the function and operation of those
uses from the encroachment of Urban activities or uses.
K. OPEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPING STANDARDS
A minimum of thirty-five (35) percent of the gross area of the land to be committed to a
Planned Mixed Use Development must be for use as common open space, which may
include, parks, recreation areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, marinas,
swimming beaches, common open space, common landscaping or planting areas, or other
areas of public purposes other than street, road or drainage rights -of -way, above ground
Adopted August 1, 1990 400 Revised Through 08/01/00
,%W
..rt
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
utilities, excluding exclusive stormwater treatment facilities, and parking areas.
A minimum of 15 percent of any existing native upland habitat on the property, is -to must be
preserved in its natural condition as part of the required 35 percent common open space,
For each acre of preserved native habitat above the required minimum 15 percent that is
preserved in its original state, credit shall be given at a rate of 150 percent per acre towards
the remaining common open space requirement.
2. All areas to be dedicated for common open space shall be identified as part of the
Preliminary Development Plan for the Planned Mixed Use Development. Areas that are
floodways, lakes, wetlands, and stormwater retention areas may be applied to satisfy the total
common open space, subject to the requirement that 15% of any existing native habitat on
the property must be included as part of the required 35% common open space. As part
of the Final Planned Mixed Use Development submission process, the developer orpetitioner
for the Planned Mixed Use Development shall provide for one of the following:
a. The advance dedication of all common open space to a public, or acceptable
private, agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open
space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it.
All such dedications or conveyances shall be completed prior to the issuance of any
building permits, including land Gearing, for any portion of the Planned Mixed Use
Development ;or,
b. A phased conveyance of the land to be used for common open space to a public or
acceptable private agency thatwill, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common
open space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed
on it. The schedule for the phased conveyance of any such lands to be used for
common open space shall be a specific condition of approval for the Planned Unit
Development .
No such parcel of land dedicated or conveyed for common open space shall be less than one
(1) contiguous acre, and all such areas shall be physically part of the Planned Mixed Use
Development.
3. Areas provided or reserved to meet any other environmental preservation or protection
requirements of this code or other lawful regulatory authority may be counted towards the
overall common open space requirement, provided that the common open space meets the
requirements of this Code.
4. Landscaping for off-street parking and loading areas shall, as a minimum, meet the
requirements of 7.09.00.
5. For Planned Mixed Use Developments to be constructed in stages or phases, the net open
space provided in an individual stage or phase may vary from the required thirty-five (35)
percent if the approved plan for the Planned Mixed Use Development provides for the
required open space, and the County is assured that the open space will be provided.
Adopted August 1. 1990 401 Revised Through 08/01/00
14W
1%W
L. PHASING
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
A Planned Mixed Use Development may be developed in more than one stage or phase.
2. If a Final Development Site Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners is to be
developed in stages or phases, each successive phase shall be constructed and developed
in a reasonably continuous fashion. No more than two (2) years shall elapse between the
completion of any stage or phase, and the final stage or phase shall be completed within ten
(10) years of the date of Final Development Site Plan approval. Extensions of the above
requirements are subject to approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Unless
otherwise amended by the Board of County Commissioners through the Final Development
Site Plan review process, the following sequence of development must be adhered to:
One or more major recreation facilities and other major amenities, planned to serve
the entire development, shall be completed or adequate security posted prior to the
issuance of building or mobile home permits of more than forty (40) percent, or other
percentage as determined by the Board to be appropriately based on circumstances
that include the size of the project and the proposed phasing schedule of the total
number of authorized dwelling units. Recreation facilities or facilities and other
amenities planned to serve one (1) phase of a multi -phased development shall be
completed or appropriate security posted prior to issuance of building or mobile
home permits or the recording of any final plat within that phase.
b. For Planned Mixed Use Developments to be constructed in stages or phases, the
net density of an individual stage or phase may vary from the approved Final Site
Plan subject to the requirements in Section 11.02.05.
3. Notwithstanding the above, if the land is within a Development of Regional Impact and
governed by a development order, the development order shall govern the timing of the
phases or stages of development activity.
M. SIGNS
1. Permitted permanent signs within the Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) zoning
designation shall vary by intensity and use as indicated below. Such signs shall be
consistent with the following Sections of this Code. Chapter 9, Signs; provided, however, that
the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Mixed Use
Development (PMUD) upon compliance with more stringent or restrictive sign regulations in
order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure
compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm,
and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
Adopted August 1, 1990 402 Revised Through 08/01/00
%..
2.
Land Use Classification
High Intensity:
Residential
Institutional
Professional Service/Office
General Commercial
Public Service/Utilities
Industrial
Medium Intensity:
Residential
Institutional
Professional Service/Office
General Commercial
Public Service/Utilities
Industrial
Low Intensity:
Residential
Institutional
Professional Service/Office
General Commercial
Public Service/Utilities
Section 7.03.00
Planned Mixed Use Development
Section 9.01.01(C)
Section 9.01.01(E)
Section 9.01.01(D)
Section 9.01.01(F)
Section 9.01.01(F)
Section 9.01.01(F)
Section 9.01.01(C)
Section 9.01.01(E)
Section 9.01.01(D)
Section 9.01.01(F)
Section 9.01.01(F)
Section 9.01.01(F)
Section 9.01.01(8 )
Section 9.01.01(E)
Section 9.01.01(D)
Section 9.01.01(E)
Section 9.01.01(E)
All other requirements and standards relating to signs within the Planned Mixed Use
Development (PMUD) zoning designation shall be consistent with Chapter 9 of this Code.
Adopted August 1, 1990 403 Revised Through 08/01/00
0
0
c
z
a
F
5
ti a Cn CO
3 �
16..
A Petition of St. Lucie Farms Inc. for a Rezoning from AG-1 (Agricultural, 1 uniVacre) to PUD
(Planned Unit Development) and PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) for the project known
as Westchester, an 800 unit mixed use residential development.
RZ00-015 Community Development
�G1���LLL4 ems
This pattern indicates ceog�n and Do 1.rmation 2=
subject parcel _::-�-•°-'-- —^ N
N
0
0
coo
CD
cCD
a(
_Q
0
CD
co V J
rf-
`)
mm_
V
w
IN
sty Cn
C�
a m
N ;
� 3 �
it
i • OQ � � 56 •lels�•1N
FyY m
a o- i
#� N 3
(D .
� -
`.
..+
CO
�cn
CD
C) �
CD
W �
C) 73
m _
Q
n�
CD
Cn
^T
I �
0
0
Y
CJTl
C
w
cD
r-+
r
0
CD
—n
3
cn
5
0
i
0
.'J�J O� UIU;O�b oo'U,Ait
NO'OIN N N.00.O O:d
O 'O O O O O'Oi0 007i
O.o.O oo 0 0 0 0:0
O o
O OO 0 0 0 O.O O O
O O O O OO.O O O,O
Mco.xx'oX �' »O
cbnC boo o w _5. r
^.. No 0o t�i o
W WW W W W'•W W
W�N�NNiNIWIWIW W:W�N., •
A J J b J A;A A A,A
-
N
O O O O6:6 O O;
O NON O N;O'O O O,O- N
O
O
�o-ee-eUel le•10 Inc 5I UHKI Ivtw obi L21 41Gb r.f72iO4
® 2090606 -Black 2/22/2r"1 0:44 0:002090606 Mary Byrne -Black
`be
ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA
March 6, 2001
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given in accordance with Section 11.00.03 of the St. Lucie County Land
Development Code and in accordance with the provisions of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive
Plan, that the following applicant has reqvesied that the St. Lucie County Board of County
Commissioners consider their request as follows:
1. Westchester Development Company, for a change in zoning from AGA (Agricultural - 1
du/ocre) Zoning District to the PMUD (Planned Mixed Use Development) Zoning Dislrict to be
known as Westchester for the following described property:
Being a parcel of land located in Sections 9, and 10, Township.37 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie
County, Florida. Sold parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commence of the
intersection of the centerline of Gatlin Boulevard, (also being the North line of Section 15) and the
Westerly limits of Gatlin Boulevard Right -of -Way and the Westerly limits of those lands
described In an Order of Taking, dated July 24, 1979 and recorded in Official Record Book 311
at Pages 2946 through, 2952, inclusive, Public Records of St. Lucie County; Florida, and as shown
on the Florida Department of Transportation Right -of -Way mops for State Road #9 (1-95).
Section 94001-2412; doted 6/2/77, with lost revision of 9/11/79, thence N 00°02'55" W, a
distance of 100.00 feet; thence S 89S57'05" W, a distance of 588.36 to the Point of Beginning;
thence. S.89'57'05" W, a distance of 1839.74 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave
concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 175,00 feet; thence along the arc of said curve
through a central angle of 54°37'25", a distance of 166.84 feet to a point of reverse curvature
with a curve concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 300.00 feet }hence along the arc of
said curve through a central angle of 18957'46", a distance of 99.29 febt to a point of reverse
curvature with a -curve concave to the Northeast, having -a rodius-of 175,DO feet, thence along the
arc of sold curve through a central angle of 54°37'25", a distance of 166.84 feet, thence N
00914'09" E. tangent to the lost described curve, a distance.of 1672.37 feet to the beginning of a
tangent curve concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 3100.00 feat; thence along the arc of
sold curve through a central angle of 25'48'20", a distance of 1396.22 feet; thence N 26°02'03"
W, non -tangent to the lost described curve, a distance of 50:O0feet; ttt"tQnce N 63*43'13" E, a
distance of 196.38 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the South, having a radius of
525.00 feet; the chord -of which bears N 78027'42" E; thence along the ckqrrc of said curve through
a central angle of 29'26'59", a distance of 269.89 feet; thence S 86'48'48" E, a distance of
62.97 Feet to the -beginning of a.curve. concave to the. Northwest, having a radius of 275.34 feet;
the chord of which bears N 47°34'02" E; thence along the arc of said curve through a central
angle of 91°1l'Si", a distance of 438,26 feet to a point of reversecurvature with a curve
concave to the East, having a radius of 527.97 Feet, the chord of whfch bears N 20°16'30" E;
thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 40910'52", a distance of 370.26
feet to a point ofreversecurvoture with a curve concave tar the Northwest, having a radius of
1956.76 feet; the chord of which boon N 26°56'51" E; thence along fhe arc of said curve
through a central ongle of-26°57'03".a distance of 920.42-feet. taa-pcInt of reverse curvature
with a curve concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 525.00 feet; the chord of which bears
N 28°D02'14" E, thence along.the arc of said curve through a central angle of 21°09'50", a
distance of 193.92 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Northeast, having
a radius oil550,00 feet; the chord of which bears S 49*07'13" E; thence along the arc of said
curve through a central angle of 17'S9'OS"; a distance of 496.53 feet ence 5 58°06'45" Ea
distance of 389.95 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of
450.00 feet the chord -of which bears S 29'00'27" E; thence-olong the-atc of said curve through
a central angle of 58°12'36", a distance of 457.18 feet to a pant of reverse curvature with a
curve concave to the -East, having aradius-of 1050.00.feet; the chord of which bears S 09904'45"
E; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 18°21'l j",o distance of 336,35
Feet; thence S 18*15'21" E, a distance of 855.11 feet to the beginning of a non -longest curve
concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 100.00 feet; the chord of w1lich bears S 31'48*09"
W; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 32°43'41", a distance of 57.12
feet; thence N 90'OO'OD" W, a distance of 696.16 feet, thence 5 00'00'00" W, a distance of
320.00 feet; thence S 90°00'00" E,o distance of 25.00 feet; thence S 00°00'00" W, a distance of
290.00 feet; thence 90°00'00" W, a distance. of.25.00.feet; thence ..5-QO'00'00" W, a distance
of 270.00 feet thence 5 90000'00" E, a distance of 25.00 feet, thence S 00*00*00" W, a distance
of 2-90.00 feet; thence N 90'00'00" W, a distance of 15.00 feet; thence S 00"00'00" E,a distance
of 275.00 feet; thence S 90'00'00" E, a distance of 945.64 feet; thence S 13*02'47" E, a distance
of 115.63 feat to the beginning of a tangent curve concave to the Wgst, having a radius of
810.00 feet; the chord of which bears 5 07'47'10" W; thence along the arc of said curve through
a central angle of 41 *39*54", a distance of-589.03 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve
concave to the Northwest, having a radius of 100.00 Feet; the chard of which bears S 28021'25"
W; thence- alongthe arc. ofsaid curve through o control angle of 1 31'05'S2", a distance of
228.81 feet; thence S 33'05'26" W, a distance of 397.79 feet to the beginning of o curve
concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 500.00 feet;the chord of which bears S 16'32'43"
W; thence along the arc of sold curve through a central angle of 33005'26",o distance of 286.77
feet; thence S 00'00'00" W, a distance of 87.07 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing
208.59 acres, more or less.
Tax id No.4310-212-0001-000/2 4309-000-0000-000/0
Localion; North of Gatlin Blvd West of Interstate 95
2. Westchester Development Company, for a change in zoning from AG-) (Agricultural - 1
du/ocre) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned UnitDevelopment)Zoning District to be known as
Westchester for the following described property:
Being o parcel of land located in Sections 8; 9,16, & 17, Township 37- South, Range 39 East, St.
Lucie County, Florida.
Said parcel being more particularly described as follows. -
Begin at the intersection of the centerline of Gatlin Boulevard, (also being the North line of
Section. 15). and..the.Westerly Ilmits.of. Gatlin Boulevard Right -of -Way and the Westerly limits of
those lands described in an Order of Taking, doted July 24. 1979 and recorded in Official
Record Book 311 at Pages 2946 through, 2952, inclusive, Public Records of 5t. Lucie County,
Florida, and as shown on the Florida Department of Transportation Right-of-Woy maps for State
Road 99 (1-95), Section 94001-2412, doted 612177, with last revision of 9/11/79; thence S
00'02'55" E, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence S 89057'05" W o distance of 2428.10 feet to the
beginning of a tangent curve concave to the Southeast, having o radius of 175.00 feet; thence
along The orc of said curve through a central angle of 54037'27", a distance of 166.84 feet to a
point of reverse curvature with a curve concave to the North, having a radius of 300.00 feet;
thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 144*37'40", a distance of 757.26
feet to a point; thence S 89'57'05" W, 9 distonco of 4508.78 feet; thence N 00000'00" E( a
distance of 2482.51 feet; thence N 87*16'17" E, a distance of 196.14 foot; thence S 76931'44' E,
o distance of 48.81 feet, thence N 14'12't2" E,a distance of 40.00Felt to the beginning of o
non -tangent curve concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 1950.001feet; the chord of which
bears S 68'58'33" E; thence along the arc of said curve through'a cenkol angle of 13'38'31",0
distance of 464.27 feet; thence N 27'11'31" E, o distance of 100.00 feel; thence S 58'08'06" E,
a -distance of 492.35-feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concovr to the North, having a
radius of 950.00 feet; thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 42'28'21 ", o
distarrceof 704M feet, the ce-N 32'46'1 S" E, non-rongem to lost described curve, a distance of
33.95 feet; thence N 12920'57" W, a distance of 315.54; thence N 7049'36" E, a distance of
214.11 feet; thence-N 84'S2'2W-- E; o-dtstanceof 300.55 feet; thence-N-14'09'S3" W. a distance
of 242.58 feet; thence N 52'27'35" E, a distance of 39.61 feet; thence N 29'13'49" W, a
distance of 280.04 feet; thence N 07613'39" W, c dItIonce of 222.22fe.t; thence N 03*00'12"
E, a distance of 59.95 feet; thence N 04'54'56" W,o distance of 221.93 feet; thence N
17'5113" W; a distance of 60.24 Feet; thence N 3P24'06" E, a distance of 74.68 feet; thence S
70038'31" E, a distance of 91.16 feet; thence S 78'08'31" E, a distance of 187.63 feet to the
beginning of a non -tangent curve concave to the Southeast, having cr rcFqivs of 161.90 feet; the
chord of which bears N 63'40'43" E; thence along theorc of said curve through a central angle
of 65'49'09", a distanceof 1 95.99-feet-to the beginning of arson-tang4knt curve concave to the
Southeast, having a radius of 650.00 feet; the chord of which bears N 31'39'20" E; thence along
the am at said cvrvethrough ccenkof angle of 2e4l'20', o distonc"I 302.78 feet; thence N
45'00'00" E, tangent to last described curve, a distance of 1034.D6 feet; thence S 45'00'00" E, o
distance of 636:49 feet to the beginning of a curve -concave to the Southwest, having a radius of
2900.00 feet; the chord of which bears S 35'41'31" E; thence along the arc of said curve through
a central angle of 16*36'57', o distance of it42.24 feet; thence N-61'44'45" E, non-longent to
last described curve, a distance of 200.08 feet; thence S 26'16'50" E, a distance of 45.00 feet to
the beginningofa-non-tongentcurve concovelo the Southwest, having a rodius of 3102.47 feet;
the chord of which boon 5 12038'54" E, thence along the arc of said curve through a central
\%
`. 14,0
angle of 25'46'06", a distance of 1395.31 feet; thence S 00" 4'09" W, tangent to lost described
curve; adistance -of-1672.35-feet to the beginning of a- tangent curve.cpncove to the Northeast,
having a radius of 175.00 feet; thence along the arc of sold curvo through a central angle of
54°37'21", adistance -of 166.83.feet. to a point of reverse curvature concave to the Southwest.
having a radius of 300.00 feet; thence along the arc of said curve thrqtugh a central angle of
1 B'S7'39", a distance of 99,28 feet to o point of reverse curvature concave to the Northeast,
having a radius of of 175.00 feet, thence along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
54"37'22", a distance of 166.84 feet thence N 89°57'05" E, tangent to the last described curve a
distance of 2428.3 1 feet, thence S 00"02'55" F, a -distance of 100,00 feet to the Point of
Beginning. Containing 373.19 acres, more or less.
Texld No:4308.000-0000-000/7 4309-000-0000-000/0
Location: North of Gatlin Blvd West of Interstate 95
A PUBLIC HEARING will be -held in the. County Commission Chambers, 3rd floor of the Roger
Poitros Administration Annex Bulldin% 2300 Virglnlo Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida on March 6,
2001, begfnningrot 7-00 P:M. ores soon thereafter as possible.
PURSUANT TO Section 286.0105, Florida Stotutes, If a person decides to appeal any decision
made by a -board agency, or commission with respect to any matter considered of a meeting or
hearing, he will need o 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 testimony
and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCI€ COUNTY, FLORIDA
/S/ Frannie Hutchinson, CHAIRMAN
PUBLISH-0ATE: February 24, 2001
TOTAL P.04
AGENDA REOLV�T
ITEM NO. LO
DATE: March 6, 2001
F� oR1oQ CONSENT [ ]
REGULAR [X]
PUBLIC HEARING []
Leg. [ ] Quasi -JD. [ ]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED
BY:
SUBMITTED BY (DEPT):Community Development Department r �GC �
Department Head
SUBJECT: Selection of a Consultant for 2001 Community D elopment Block Grant
(CDBG) Administration and Proposal Writing
BACKGROUND: Federal Regulations and the St. Lucie County Purchasing Manual
require an evaluation procedure for selection of a Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consultant for the writing and
administration of CDBG funds for Economic Development projects. Four
companies responded to the Request for Proposals. A internal
selection committee reviewed and ranked all four proposals using the
established criteria and then sent the top three firms to the Board
for final review and ranking. Each Board member has now ranked each
proposal using the prescribed scoring sheets and criteria
established in the County Purchasing Manual. The Board will
announce the final ranking of the firms at this meeting. The County
is eligible to submit a proposal and receive up to $750,000 in CDBG
funds for economic development projects.
S AVAILABLE• N/A
PREVIOUS ACTION• The Board has previously approved the advertising and issuing
RECOMMENDATION• of an RFP on December 19, 2000.
Pursuant to state requirements outlined in the Small Cities
Community Development Block Grant Program and St. Lucie County
Purchasing Manual, Staff recommends the Board rank the three firms,
selecting the firm with the lowest score.
COMMISSION ACTION: CE
[ Xl APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER: Nancy Phillips chosen
D as Anderson
County Administrator
Coordination/Signatures
County Attorney: Mgt 6 Budget: Purchasing:
Originating Dept: Other:
Finance: (copies only):
Other:
%j. v
Mi ' • i
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TO: Board of County Commission
FROM: Julia Shewchuk, Community Development Director
DATE: March 6, 2001
SUBJECT: Selection of a CDBG Consultant for 2001.
Per the Department of Community Affairs' Small Cities CDBG requirements,
and the St. Lucie County Purchasing Manual, certain procedures must be
followed in procuring professional services for the writing and the
administration of Community Development Block Grants. On December 19,
2000, the Board approved the advertising of a Request for Proposals (RFP)
for the CDBG process. RFP #01-017 was issued and four proposals were
received by the January 17, 2001, deadline. The County Administrator
then formed an internal staff selection committee who reviewed and ranked
the proposals in accordance with criteria and ranking forms published in
the RFP. The Committee met on February 22, 2001, and choose the three
highest ranked firms for submission to the Board. The proposals, ranking
sheets and ranking criteria were forwarded to the Board on February 23,
2001.
Each Commissioner then ranks the proposals based on the highest total
points scored. The scoring sheets will be maintained in grant files as
a public recored. A summary of each Commissioner's personal ranking is
then created by awarded on point to the firm ranked number one by the
Commissioner, two points if ranked number two, and three points if ranked
number three. All Commissioner's points are tabulated and the firm with
the lowest score shall be the firm the County enters into negotiations.
The rankings are presented at the Commission meeting and the winning
bidder announced.
tment
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
~OV
ITEM NO.
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR K
PUBLIC HEARING[ ]
CONSENT[ ]
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): PUBLIC SAFETY JACK T. SOUTHARD
PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: Combining the animal control efforts of St. Lucie County and the
City of Ft. Pierce.
BACKGROUND: See attached letter from Dennis W. Beach, City Manager of Ft. Pierce.
Letter of response from Doug Anderson, County Administrator to Mr. Beach.
FUNDS WILL BE AVAILABLE:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests that the Board, of County Commissioners authorize
permission for staff to discuss consolidation of animal control between
the City of Ft. Pierce and St. Lucie County.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ ] APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[X] OTHER:
No Vote
No Commissioner in favor of combining
Animal Control. No action will be taken.
Review and Approvals
County Attorney: Management & Budget
Originating Dept Other:
CONCURRE E:
Do g s Anderson
County Administrator
Purchasing;
Finance: (Chec or Copy only, if applicable)
Eff. 5/96
SUN,Q
RT PIERCE
I
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
CITY HALL, 100 NORTH U.S. 1
P.O. BOX 1480
FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34954-1480
October 25, 2000
Mr. Douglas M. Anderson
Administrator
Saint Lucie County
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
Dear Mr. Anderson:
TEL. (561) 460-2200
FAX (5611466-5492
Thank you for taking the time to meet with Chief Savage, Sgt. England, Rob Schwerer and me
regarding animal control activities in Fort Pierce.
Our request is that you consider combining the animal control efforts of Saint Lucie County and the
City of Fort Pierce. We currently have two employees with an equipment inventory (attached). A
summary of activity is also included on the attachment. However, Sgt. England, the Police
Department Supervisor of that function, indicates that those statistics could go higher if additional
manpower were dedicated to this effort.
You indicated that you would review the statistics, prepare cost estimates and give us a response
in the near future. I look forward to hearing from you at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Dennis W. Beach
City Manager
DWB/btp
cc: Eugene Savage, Chief of Police
Robert V. Schwerer, Assistant City Attorney
\r r./
S 0 N
CITY tjORT PIEREE
,
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
CITY HALL, 100 NORTH U.S. 1
P.O. BOX 1480
FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34954-1480
January 3, 2001
Mr. Douglas M. Anderson
Administrator
Saint Lucie County
2300 Virginia Avenue J�
Fort Pierce, FL 34982 i
Dear Mr. Anderson:
IT
1P
I"
TEL. (561) 460-2200
FAX (561)466-5492
The attached correspondence came up in my follow up file and I was hoping that you would be
able to provide some information regarding the County's position on this request.
If I can provide additional information, please let me know. I look forward to hearing from you
at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Dennis W. Beach
City Manager
DWB/btp
Attachment
-,i
JAN 4 2001
�._c_:. E
__J
`.r
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
January 11, 2001
Mr. Dennis Beach, City Manager
City of Fort Pierce
P.O. Box 1480
Fort Pierce, Fl 34954
Dear Dennis:
COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
DOUGLAS M. ANDERSON
This is in response to your letters of October 25 and January 3 regarding your request for
St. Lucie County to consider combining the animal control efforts of the County and the
City of Fort Pierce. Attached is an estimated cost for the County to assume the role of
Animal Control for the City of Fort Pierce. Please note that this estimated cost includes
three animal control officers dedicated to the City. In addition to the annual estimated
cost of $109,250 there would be an initial investment of $45,600 for equipment. The
capital equipment replacement cost would occur every 5-7 years thereafter.
In summary, the first year's estimated cost would be $154,850 with $109,250 annually
thereafter. This amount would be adjusted by the Consumer Price Index, or some other
method, each year. In the fifth year the amount would be adjusted up or down based on
actual experience. Anyagreement would be subject to an interlocal agreement approved
by both Commissions.
Please contact me with your thoughts. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Jack Southard, Public Works Director
Maggie Gouin, ManagemenyBudget Director
Robert Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator
Dan McIntyre, County Attomey
JOHN D. BRUHN, District No. 7 • DOUG COWARD. District No. 2 • PAULA A. LEWIS, Dbrrlct No. J • FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, District No. 4 • CLIFF BARNES, District No.
County Admnnistrotor - Douglos M. Anderson
2300 Virqinio Avenue • Forr Pierce, FL 34982-5652 • Phone (561) 462-1450 • TDD (561) 462-1428
INTER -OFFICE
MEMO
TO: DOUGLAS M. ANDERSON, COUNTY ADMINIST
FROM: JACK T. SOUTHARD, PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECT
DATE: JANUARY 2, 2001
SUBJECT: FT. PIERCE ANIMAL CONTROL
The City of Ft. Pierce at this time operates with only two (2) animal control officers.
Many times during the last year due to illness and medical leaves, they have had to
operate with one, and sometimes none, leaving either many calls unanswered or the
complainant is asked to call back later, or they rely on the Ft. Pierce Police
Department to handle. Many times the Police Department in certain emergencies
relies on the county animal control to help out, which we have. Ft. Pierce animal
control has relayed to us that they handled 2,384 calls for service, which we feel is
extremely low due to the reasons stated above.
The following is a breakdown of what they have and what would be needed if the
county were to take over there operation.
Personnel and Operating Cost
3- A/C Officers $ 93,000.00
Overtime 5,000.00
Training and Education 1,500.00
Uniforms, etc. 750.00
Gas, Oil, Grease, Vehicle Insurance, etc. 9,000.00
Total $109
JAN _ 2 2001
CG. ADMIN. (WRe P
%tw
..i
Capital Equipment
3
1994 Ford Trucks
6
800MHz radio's
5
Catch Poles
15
Animal Traps
2
Pairs of Protective Gloves
2
ASP Batons
Total
Explanation of Cost
Personnel
$ 39,000.00 replacements
6,600.00
Same
Same
Same
Same
$ 45,600.00
I believe the City of Ft. Pierce would expect 24/7 coverage from animal control,
lessening the animal complaints from the Ft. Pierce Police Department, so they can
handle priority police calls. St. Lucie County Animal Control does rely on the
Sheriffs office after hours to handle nuisance calls and are only called out after they
have verified animal control is needed. The Sheriffs Office also will lend us a
Agriculture Detective for cruelty calls if needed. Three (3) A/C Officers will still not
provide 24/7 coverage, but late evenings and midnights can be on a call out basis.
Overtime is based on on -call pay, call out, holiday pay and coverage. Training and
education is self explanatory.
Capital Equipment
Both trucks are over 5 years old and do not fit into our fleet management plan or
warranty policies. This would be a one time cost for 5 years.
Radio's will have to be upgraded to the new 800MHz Communication system, county
officers have both a mobile and portable radio. This would be a one time cost for 5-7
years.
Annual Operating Cost
Would consist of gas, oil, general maintenance, pagers, operating and office
supplies, printing, vehicle insurance and communication contract on radios.
r00
Total cost for first year:
Personnel & Operating Cost $ 109,250.00
Equipment $ 45,600.00 Every 61 year
Total Cost $ 154,850.00 (First yearl
$ 109,250.00 (Second year,
increase by
consumer price
index.
St. Lucie County should opt to let the Humane Society cost be the sole responsibility
of the City of Ft. Pierce, and they could negotiate their own contract.
Capital Equipment would be a one time cost for 5 years, renewed on the 6th.
Please review, and let me know when I can sit down with you, to discuss this
proposal.
Thank -you
JTS
wp/doug/fp animal control
I
r
. �,,rrson; the' maxununi
;continues ` today convicted of either of the tLinda
o sc
' from FHP' Capt. ond- . ee: felo}l'
degr.
•4+}'k!'Nltilri 4a 1'' • � o i it r '...•r +
r ♦M a t( Ate 1 l • , 1
Cn
According the`'
� o .. of laws�l ` •'
rj1. i �r i5` r 4 / `.�•waii,.% Iti ,J ,
3 4 ;•,� Xhi r ,. .as .fora
damages. r,•-<. i
4� •,� r; ° 5 exceed1
ing$15,000,�the.restaurant a a''° A I
habi discardin
t of and
, g. empty
a,. box:
greasy..przza .bones, nnd`:ather,! ,,
Y,t;.A6: decided to' debrrs.°from the operation of :the ' �_ • "'"
r end of,the plaza , �restauranty thewal
)directly on '
{ / ''a,$ k- x
y 4r „ n.• It ?. , t
Y r� .ter r•wM{ f'
net Pizza is near : � ;Because of that h ' uit'
A e ,laws }
alleges "the walk i T
a way .became
►e.she. was walk-Yr� greasy .and sl ppeiq;��;: and, the
�Y," :,Messer said �' restauranx-..was. negligent in ,riot ied archways.
�•�v ,t s r E, , i : g 1?atrdns of the « er
S. dang -
nature of the walkway"
,
4 w
he county,% p -o
e SI-dent gas tax,'
!004, to 2014•
aT $424,052 was
ited by `request:
Hector Arias to.
tl�
complete. the'streetscape for'the
orange :Avenue, .project, ( which
.. runs: from Indian Rrver give : to"� `
13th•Str'eet'.,; ,
' _ ! Police thief Eugene Savage "`
p es0 ted `a • ,
propbsAl xo consolr«; .
th'e• ,'county, Then-•. co
mmissa
agreed unanirnou$ly':f :City
r�.
.to begin working with them
,on the matter k ,ilnt
J ryf'�I t ..
1
CQ1- � SS
��1��ITEMIS-:t,:�)
�O>D OF COU i�1
COM Y IIISSSSIO E, RS ME-E-i-EF.T1 N;
`.
""we
03/02/01
ST. LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD
PAGE 1
FZABWARR
WARRANT LIST 24-FEB-2001
TO 02-MAR-2001
F22- UND
I
TITLE
EXPENSES
PAYROLL
001
General Fund
99/00
122,494.28
3.92-
271,679.25
53.72
001125
001128
TC Community Action Aency,FgY
407.48 558.01
4,457.25
796.55
001130
TCction CommunityMActionA/AgencyR1FY00/01
Annex to comp
94.04
0.00
001134
001243
Terrorism pian
Childern's Environ. Learning Center
1,258.52
0.00
1,188.80
001252
001253
Urban Mobile Irrigation Lab Grant
1999 DMS One -Stop Permitting Grant
88.43
1,543.00
0.00
001256
001258
CTD TRIP Grant FY 00/01
TDC Planning ant FY00/01
15,270.00
109.44
0.00
1,453.70
001809
SFWMD-FloridianGrAquifer Well
Fund
01/04
90.95
16,707.74
1,188.80
106,854.59
101
101002
Transportation Trust
Transportation Trust/80% Constitut
11,132.00
0.00
43181.79
102
Unincorporated Services Fund
41145.93
7,417.50
3:806.40
102001
105
Drainage Maintenance MSTU
Library Special Grants Fund
1,905.14
2,021.49
107
107002
Fine & Forfeiture Fund
Fine & Forfeiture Fund-E911 Surchar
166,224.02
7,585.79
49,848.59
27,442.03
112
River Park II Fund
518.15
427.94
0.00
0.00
115
118
Sheraton Plaza Fund
Paradise Park Fund
687.07
0.00
120
122
The Grove Fund
Indian River Estates Fund
153.71
866.22
0.00
0.00
126
Southern Oak Estates Lighting
222.24
666.37
0.00
0.00
139
140
Palm Grove Fund
Port & Airport Fund
1,317.26
5,991.60
140001
145813
Port Fund
IRL SWIM Impound Rest IX
59.50
49.90
0.00
0.00
145814
2000-2001 Lagoon License Plate gran
RAD Fund
3,977.38
5,068.40
0.00
21605.05
160
183
Plan Maintenance
Ct Administrator-19th Judicial Cir
400.65
31405.03
) 001
Ct Administrator-Arbitration/Mediat
261.62
1,850.58
)04
1a3106
Ct Admin.- Teen Court
Domestic Relatptions Hearin FY00-03
199.32
6,158.52
2,673.73
0.00
0.00
FY 00/01
4
15,184.39
4,470.58
185001
SHIP HousingReAssistanceortinant
3.94-
53.72
185204
186
FHFA SHIP 99/00
Recycling Operating Fund
130.98
1,789.01
596.35
186204
Recycling & Education Grant FY00/01
5,830.67
21717.01
0.00
304
316
Communication System Fund
County Capital
116,475.88
0.00
337
362
Lost Tree Estates Capital Fund
Sports Comple Improv Fund
85.55-
274.55
0.00
0.00
390
Treasure Cove Ocean Harbor S Cap
AlA MSB Capital
3,573.99
398.30-
0.00
0.00
391
392
North
Ideal Holding Road MSBU Capital
62.52-
0.00
393
394
Westglen MSBU Forest
Raintree Forestt
N]SBUlCapital
1,3012.27-
0.00
- *4w
..,i
03/02/01
ST. LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD
PAGE 2
FZABWARR
WARRANT LIST #22- 24-FEB-2001
TO 02-MAR-2001
FUND SUMMARY
I
TITLE
EXPENSES
PAYROLL
395
396
River Branch MSBU Capital
Lennard Road 1 - Roaaway Ca ital
497.93
5,102.20
0.00
0.00
397
398
Lennard Road 2 - Water Capi al
Lennard Road 3 - Sewer Capital
956.66
446.47
0.00
0.00
401
Sanitary Landfill Fuild
41,582.54
28,781.07
0.00
401221
418
Wast Tire Grant FY00/01
Golf Course Fund
1,249.50
13,497.33
18,600.42
421
441
H.E.W. Utilities Fund
North Hutchinson Island Utilities
2,179.33
60,450.34
195.17
3,532.77
451
461
S. Hutchinson Utilities Fund
Sports Complex Fund
33,290.22
5,563.91
2,142.60
10,565.74
471
Holiday Pines Utilities Fund
Buildin Code Fund
26,114.90
2,094.91
1,711.75
19,059.28
491
501
Information Technology Fund
82,177.19
237,089.09
66,823.11
3,034.75
505
505001
Health Insurance Fund
Property/Casualty Insurance Fund
118.30
1626.22
510
611
Service Garage Fund
Tourist Development Trust-Adv Fund
5,617.88
15,910.97
9:209.79
2,228.96
615
Impact Fees Fund
10,055.04
157.50
0.00
0.00
625
Law Library
GRAND TOTAL:
1,068,543.18
704,920.24
03/02/01
ST. LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD
PAGE 1
FZABWARR
VOID LIST# 22-
24-FEB-2001 TO
02-MAR-2001
F'""U: 001
- General
Fund
C._-CK
INVOICE
VENDOR
TOTAL
00268764
I2111000
Fla Association of
Counties
20.00
I2111081
60.00
I2111474
225.00
I2111559
85.00
I2111570
225.00
CHECK TOTAL:
615.00
FUND TOTAL:
615.00
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): Leisure Services
ITEM NO. C-2a
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR[]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT[X]
PRESENTED BY:
S. Ann Smith
SUBJECT: Blind Creek Park: Application for Grant Funds from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's South
Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program.
BACKGROUND: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a "call for proposals" for the South
Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program (deadline March 23, 2001). Individual grants, ranging from $1,000
to $50,000, may be awarded by this program for projects seeking to; restore and enhance degraded
coastal uplands and estuarine wetlands, remove exotic vegetation from infested coastal areas, and
promote public awareness of South Florida's ecological problems. Staff is seeking permission to apply
for grant funds from the Coastal Ecosystem program for the continued removal of exotic plant species
at Blind Creek Park for re -stabilization of the dune system and restoration of sea turtle habitat.
FUNDS AVAIL.: N/A
PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize staff to apply to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program for grant funds.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[x] APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
County Attorney: ✓ P
Originating D
ep
t
SAS
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable) ✓
Review and Approvals
i
Management & Budget
Other:
s Anderson
Administrator
Purchasing :,
Eff. 5196
%W *40
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Anna Smith, Ecosystems Manager, Leisure Services Department
DATE: February 23, 2001
SUBJECT: Blind Creek Park: Application for Grant Funds from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program.
BACKGROUND
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a "call for proposals" for the South Florida
Coastal Ecosystem Program (deadline March 23, 2001). Individual grants, ranging from
$1,000 to $50,000, may be awarded by this program for projects seeking to; restore and
enhance degraded coastal uplands and estuarine wetlands, remove exotic vegetation from
infested coastal areas, and promote public awareness of South Florida's ecological
problems. Staff is seeking permission to apply for grant funds from the Coastal Ecosystem
program for the continued removal of exotic plant species at Blind Creek Park for re -
stabilization of the dune system and restoration of sea turtle habitat.
RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the application for
grant funds from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem
Program.
Respectfully submitted,
Anna Smit
Ecosystems Manager
Attachment: Draft Grant Proposal
v
*M0
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program
2001 Coastal Project Proposal
Project Title: Blind Creek Park - Sea Turtle Habitat Restoration
Contact Anna Smith Ecosystems Manager
Information: 2300 Virginia Ave Ft Pierce FL 34982
(561) 462-1685 /fax (561) 462-16840 (sc) 259-1685
annas(a)-stlucieco gov
Project Location
The project is located on South Hutchinson Island in St. Lucie County approximately 6.5
miles south of the Fort Pierce Inlet and just north of the Florida Power and Light Nuclear
Plant in Sections 4,5,8 &9, Township 36, Range 41. (Figure 1)
Project Description
The Blind Creek Park site was purchased through the State's Conservation and Recreation
Lands (CARL), Save Our Rivers (SOR), U.S. Dept. of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
National Coastal Wetlands Restoration Act (NCWRA), and St. Lucie County
Environmentally Sensitive Lands programs. Use of the property is constrained under both
federal and state directives that limit the objectives for the site to: conservation,
preservation, restoration and management of the site's coastal communities for habitat
enhancement, public recreation, and public health. On -site, the natural plant communities
are: Beach Dune, Coastal Strand, Maritime Hammock, and Estuarine Tidal Swamp
(Mosquito Impoundments No. 5 & 6). (Figure 2)
Composed of species such as sea oats (Uniola paniculata), seagrape (Coccoloba uvifera),
cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), scaevola (Scaevola p/umen), saw palmetto (Serenoa
repens), and coastal panicgrass (Panicum amarum), approximately 30 acres have been
invaded by Australian pines (Casuarina spp.). The pines extend from the mean high water
line, in most locations, back to the mangrove edge. As a result, nesting habitat for the
Atlantic loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta), Atlantic green turtle (Chelonia mydas), and
Leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), as well as shorebirds, have been negatively
impacted due to dune de -stabilization encouraged by the roots of these exotics. For the
sea turtles, the roots are a physical obstruction during excavation of the nest cavity, leading
to increased false crawls or nests laid at or below the high tide line. The native dune
vegetation also, has been and is being, negatively impacted due to the constant shade
generated by the pine stands, the thick mat of pine needles and the soil chemistry
reactions which result. Habitat loss is the end result, which directly affects the long term
survival of wildlife, including listed species. (Table 1)
The Blind Creek Park dune restoration project is the mechanical removal of invasive
exotics (Australian pines, Brazilian peppers, and Hawaiian scaevola) from the dunes, and
`W
any dead debris from the surf, along a 2-mile stretch of the Atlantic Ocean extending north
from FPL's Turtle Beach to Blind Creek Park's northern property limits. All removed
material will then be stock piled onsite and burned. Exotics not removed will be killed in
place. Through the following partnership funds the County has completed four (4) zones
of exotic removal: in 1999, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
awarded the County $30,000, which was combined with awarded funds from USFWS
South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program ($43,891), and from FEMA ($52,888 -
Hurricanes Floyd and Irene cleanup).; in 2000, the US Department of Agriculture Natural
Resource Conservation Service donated 1,100 dune plants for two demonstration planting
areas within the projects limits. Most recently, this year (2001), another phase of exotic
removal have been completed with funds provided by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection Bureau of Upland Invasive Plant Management ($35,000). Also,
$75,000 have been provided from the Florida Department of Community Affairs ($50,000)
and the St. Lucie County Solid Waste "Waste Tire Grant" ($25,000) for the construction of
two elevated dune crossovers in phases where exotic removal was completed. The
National Association of Counties has also awarded the County $8,000 for the purchase of
6,100 dune plants and 2 education awareness signs to be installed in mid -late spring of
this year. To date this project has received a total $244,779 of awarded funds, as well as,
uncounted material and labor costs for the activities described above.
Upon formal notification from USFWS to award funds to St. Lucie County, the County will
commence exotic removal activities on the dunes prior to sea turtle season (March 1 -
October 31.) The County's Leisure Services Department will be responsible for the overall
management and completion of this restoration project, and all monitoring and reporting
(semiannual and annual).
Total Project Costs/Budget
The total project cost for just the removal of the invasive exotic plant species in the Blind
Creek Park dune restoration project is $ 272,888, based on the current 4-year contract the
County has with Enviroglades, Inc.. To date, based on the above funds received, only
$108,891 have been for the actual removal of the invasive plants. Therefore, this proposal
requests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem
Program contribute a total of $50,000 for the continued restoration and enhancement of
degraded beach dune habitat within the project length.
Contributing Partners
As stated before, the following partners have either participated or are participating with
the County on this dune habitat restoration project:
1999 - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - $30,000 (exotic removal)
1999 - USFWS South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program - $43,891 (exotic removal)
1999 - FEMA - $52,888 (hurricane cleanup/exotic removal)
2000- USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service - donation of 1,100 plants
2000 - Florida Department of Environmental Protection - $35,000 (exotic removal)
2000 - St. Lucie County Solid Waste - $25,000 (dune crossovers)
2000 - 2001 - Florida Department of Community Affairs - $50,000 (dune crossovers)
2000 - 2001 - National Association of Counties - $8,000 (6,100 dune plants & 2 signs)
Objectives and Statements of Products
The overall objective for this project is to restore and enhance degraded coastal uplands
through the removal and control of invasive exotic plant species (Australian pines, Brazilian
peppers and Hawaiian scaevola). Through which, the County intends to:
Attain and maintain a functioning ecosystem which supports endangered and
threatened species,
Enhance dune stabilization/reduce beach erosion.
Upon completion, demonstrate in the field: 1) the complete removal of Australian pines
from the beach dune system; 2) the revegetation of native dune plant species; and 3) the
enhancement of nesting habitat for sea turtles and shorebirds (increased species diversity).
Project Time Frame
November 1, 2001 - March 1, 2002. (No exotic species removal can occur on the beaches
between March 1 and October 31.)
Actions to Date
As stated before, the County has completed, through partnerships, 4 sections/phases of
exotic removal within the dune restoration project limits, the most recent completed in
January 2001. Within these cleared phases, additional activities include: the installation
of 1,100 donated dune plants by volunteers (April 2000), the construction of two (2)
elevated dune crossovers (final inspection received January 31, 2001), and the purchase
of 6,100 dune plants and 2 educational awareness signs to be installed in March or April
2001.
n
EWA
Table 1 - Species List
Blind Creek Park - Ocean to River
NAME
FWS FGFWFC
Reptiles
Atlantic loggerhead turtle
Caretta caretta T
T
Atlantic green turtle
Chelonia mydas E
E
Leatherback turtle
Dermochelys coriacea E
E
Birds
Roseate spoonbill
Ajaia ajaia
SSC
Little blue heron
Egretta caerulea
SSC
SSC
Snowy egret
Egretta thula
SSC
Tricolored heron
Egretta tricolor
SSC
White ibis
Eudocimus albus
Pelecanus occidentalis
SSC
Brown pelican
E
E
Wood stork
Mycteria americana
T
Least tern
Sterna antillarum
Mammals
West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus E E
FDA
Plants
Leather fern
Acrostichum aureum E
Beach star
Remirea maritima E
E
Bay cedar
Suriana maritima
E
Sea lavender
Argusia gnaphalodes
KEY
E -Endangered
T - Threatened
SSC - Species of Special Concern
Nao,
�ftw
^
.
•!3
u
}\o
0
»
UEj
.c
m
\
@ ,
\....\,
2
� �&» 0
®
�n
2
2 a
j
ee ƒ
64
&
/
)_
Cl)
0
co
. co
»
FiHi
k
<
c
%\
a
a
G
aa� q
�
:
0
1
3
3!
_
%
)
\(
)
«
%
ƒ'
)
\co
±
$
_
\
f
cm
E
!
�
co
LL
.......................................
.
Alu cow o a o
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): Leisure Services
ITEM NO. C-2b
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT[X]
PRESENTED BY:
S. Ann Smith
SUBJECT: Queens Island Preserve: Application for Grant Funds from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program.
BACKGROUND: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a "call for proposals" for the South
Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program (deadline March 23, 2001). Individual grants, ranging from $1,000
to $50,000, may be awarded by this program for projects seeking to; restore and enhance degraded
coastal uplands and estuarine wetlands, remove exotic vegetation from infested coastal areas, and
promote public awareness of South Florida's ecological problems. Staff is seeking permission to apply
for grant funds from the Coastal Ecosystem program for the removal of exotic plant species on the dunes
at Queens Island Preserve for habitat restoration.
FUNDS AVAIL.: NIA
PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize staff to apply to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program for grant funds.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[x] APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
County Attorney:
Originating Dept.
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)
Anderson
Administrator
Review and Approvals
Management & Budge ! �I t
Other:
Purchasing :
Eff. 5/96
hae .,NO
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Anna Smith, Ecosystems Manager, Leisure Services Department
DATE: February 23, 2001
SUBJECT: Queens Island Preserve: Application for Grant Funds from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program.
BACKGROUND
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a "call for proposals" for the South Florida
Coastal Ecosystem Program (deadline March 23, 2001). Individual grants, ranging from
$1,000 to $50,000, may be awarded by this program for projects seeking to; restore and
enhance degraded coastal uplands and estuarine wetlands, remove exotic vegetation from
infested coastal areas, and promote public awareness of South Florida's ecological
problems. Staff is seeking permission to apply for grant funds from the Coastal Ecosystem
program for the removal of exotic plant species on the dunes at Queens Island Preserve
for habitat restoration.
RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the application for
grant funds from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's South Florida Coastal Ecosystem
Program.
Respecffully submitted,
Anna Smith
Ecosystems Manager
Attachment: Draft Grant Proposal
r.r
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program
2001 Coastal Project Proposal
Project Title: Queens Island Preserve - Florida Beach Mouse Habitat
Restoration
Contact Anna Smith Ecosystems Manager
Information: 2300 Virginia Ave Ft Pierce FL 34982
(561) 462-1685 /fax (561) 462-1684: (sc) 259-1685
annas(a)stlucieco aov
Project Location
The project is located on North Hutchinson Island WSt. Lucie County approximately 4.5
miles north of the Fort Pierce Inlet in Sections 14 & 15, Township 34, Range 40. (Figure
1)
Project Description
The Queens Island Preserve site was recently purchased (2000-2001) through the State's
Conservation and Recreation Lands (CARL), Save Our Rivers (SOR), U.S. Dept. of
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service National Coastal Wetlands Restoration Act (NCWRA),
and St. Lucie County Environmentally Sensitive Lands programs. Use of the property is
constrained under both federal and state directives that limit the objectives for the site to:
conservation, preservation, restoration and management of the site's coastal communities
for habitat enhancement, public recreation, and public health.
The Queens Island Preserve site, approximately 288 acres of coastal barrier island natural
communities, is bordered on the east by the Atlantic Ocean and on the west by the Indian
River Lagoon, divided by A1A. On -site, the natural plant communities are: Beach Dune,
Coastal Strand, Maritime Hammock, and Estuarine Tidal Swamp (Mosquito Impoundment
No. 19 B). (Figure 2) On the eastern side of the project site, approximately 8 acres east
of A1A, the coastal strand and dune habitats are composed of species such as sea oats
(Uniola paniculata), seagrape (Coccoloba uvifera), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto),
scaevola (Scaevola plumen), and scattered saw palmetto (Serenoa repens). Within this
8-acre area, portions of the habitats have been invaded with Brazilian peppers (Schinus
terebinthifolius) and Australian pines (Casuarina spp.). The peppers and pines, if not
removed, will negatively impact the nesting habitat of the Atlantic loggerhead turtle (Caretta
caretta), Atlantic green turtle (Chelonia mydas), and Leatherback turtle (Dermochelys
coriacea), asyrell as -shorebirds. Also, the native dune vegetation has been and is being
negatively impacted due to the aggressive growing characteristics of these species, which
will result in habitat loss. This then affects the long term survival of wildlife, including listed
species. (Table 1) An example is the Florida Beach Mouse, extirpated from this area
primarily due to loss of habitat. Based on existing native plant species composition,
minimal restoration efforts would be needed to establish this site as a Florida Beach Mouse
re -introduction site. Once the exotic plant species have been removed from this area,
County staff will coordinate with the USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species
Recovery Program for the potential re -introduction of the Beach Mouse.
The Queens Island Preserve beach mouse habitat restoration project is either the manual
removal of exotic plants with removed material chipped onsite and stumps treated with
Garlon 4 or exotics killed in place. Through the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection Bureau of Upland Invasive Plant Management Program, the County has recently
applied (February 16, 2001) for $18,000 matching funds for this project.
Upon formal notification from USFWS to award funds to St. Lucie County, the County will
commence exotic removal activities on the dunes prior to sea turtle season (March 1 -
October 31.) The County's Leisure Services Department will be responsible for the overall
management and completion of this restoration project, as well as, all monitoring and
reporting (semiannual and annual).
Total Project Costs/Budget
The estimated total project cost for the removal and control of exotic plant species within
this 8-acre area is $38,000. This proposal requests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
South Florida Coastal Ecosystem Program contribute a total of $20,000 towards the
restoration of Florida beach mouse habitat on the Queens Island Preserve site. Any FWS
funds remaining after removal is completed will be utilized to purchase educational public
awareness signs pertaining to the ecosystem and its listed species.
Contributing Partners
As stated before, St. Lucie County has recently applied (February 16, 2001) for $18,000
matching funds from the Florida Departmentof Environmental Protection Bureau of Upland
Invasive Plant Management Program for this habitat restoration project.
Objectives and Statements of Products
The overall objective for this project is to restore and enhance degraded coastal uplands
through the removal and control of invasive exotic plant species. Through which, the
County intends to:
Attain and maintain a functioning ecosystem which supports endangered and
threatened species.
Enhance dune stabilization/reduce beach erosion.
Upon completion, demonstrate in the fiield:1) the complete removal of invasive exotic plant
species from the coastal strand and dune system; 2) the revegetation of native dune plant
species; and 3) the enhancement of Florida beach mouse habitat, as well as, nesting
habitat for sea turtles and shorebirds (increased species diversity).
'W.r
'"d
Project Time Frame
November 1, 2001 - June 1, 2002. (No exotic species removal can occur on the beaches
between March 1 and October 31.)
Actions to Date
Applied to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Upland Invasive
Plant Management for $18,000 matching funds.
'err %NO,
Table 1 - Species List
Queens Island Preserve
NAME FWS FGFWFC
Reptiles
Atlantic loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta T T
Atlantic green turtle Chelonia mydas E E
Leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea E E
Birds
Roseate spoonbill
Ajaia ajaia
SSC
Little blue heron
Egretta caerulea
SSC
Snowy egret
Egretta thula
SSC
Tricolored heron
Egretta tricolor
SSC
White ibis
Eudocimus albus
SSC
Brown pelican
Pelecanus occidentalis
SSC
Wood stork
Mycteria americana
E E
Least tern
Sterna antillarum
T
Mammals
West Indian manatee
Trichechus manatus
E E
Plants
Beach star Remirea maritima
Sea lavender Argusia gnaphalodes
KEY
E - Endangered
T - Threatened
SSC - Species of Special Concern
FDA
E
E
r
.✓
to
C
7
0
U
L
r..
c
ro
_0
c
�zt
r
C
0
O
U
/4unoo aagoyoaqo
*%.
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney
ITEM NO. cli� f 1
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR[]
PUBLIC HEARING []
CONSENT[XI
PRESENTED BY:
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement between St. Lucie County and St. Lucie West Services District Providing
for the Use of the County's Landfill
BACKGROUND:
FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommends that the Board approve the Interlocal and authorize the Chairman to sip
the Agreement.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
County Attorney:
Originating
Finance:
Review and Approvals
Management& Budget:
Other:
Anderson
Administrator
Leisure services:
Other:
`.r r0
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney
C.A. NO: 01-278
DATE: February 23, 2001
SUBJECT: Interloca► Agreement Between St. Lucie County and
St. Lucie West Services District Providing for the
Use of the County's Landfill
BACKGROUND
Attached is a proposed Interlocal Agreement between the County and St. West Services
District providing for the nonexclusive right to use the St. Lucie County Landfill for the disposal of
garbage and trash.
RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Board approve the Interlocal Agreement and authorize the
Chairman to sign the Agreement.
Daniel S. McInty
County Attorney
DSM/mt
Attachment
i
i �ftw
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT entered into this day of
2001, by and between ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of
the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," and the
ST LUCIE WEST SERVICES DISTRICT a Community Development District
created pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, hereinafter
referred to as SLWSD, providing for the SLWSD's use of the County's
Landfill.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED as follows:
1. This Agreement is entered pursuant to Section 163.01, F1.
Stat., Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act.
2. In consideration of the payments provided in Paragraph 3 of
this Agreement, the County hereby grants to SLWSD the nonexclusive
right to use the St. Lucie County Landfill (Landfill) for the
disposal of garbage and trash during the period beginning on the
date of this Interlocal Agreement and continuing until terminated
pursuant to Paragraph 4.
3. In consideration of the formation of this Agreement SLWSD
agrees to the following:
a. SLWSD shall pay to the County on or before the tenth
day of each month the amount due to the County based upon the
records of the St. Lucie County Landfills Scales which indicates
the total weight of garbage and trash deposited at the Landfill
during the previous month by SLWSD's vehicles. Such charges shall
be assessed in accordance with the schedule of fees approved by the
Board of County Commissioners and as may from time to time be
amended. Failure to timely remit the monthly charge as determined
by the County shall be grounds for cancellation of this Agreement
without further notice and for revocation of SLWSD's right to use
the Landfill.
b. SLWSD shall only use the Landfill for the disposal of
garbage and trash generated within the geographic boundaries of St.
Lucie County, Florida.
c. SLWSD agrees that it will not knowingly dispose of or
place at the landfill any hazardous or poisonous waste of other
material; or of any septage or sledge; or any other material the
disposal or placement of which would violate applicable local,
state, or federal permits, regulations, or laws.
d. SLWSD shall comply with the provisions of all permits,
rules, regulations, laws, and ordinances adopted or issued by the
County, State of Florida, or the United States and applicable tot
he Landfill. The violation of any applicable permit, rule,
regulation, law, or ordinance shall be grounds upon five (5) days
written notice to SLWSD, for cancellation of this Agreement and
revocation of SLWSD's right to sue the Landfill and maintain a
Landfill account.
4. The County shall have the right to terminate this Agreement
for any reason upon sixty (60) days prior written notice to SLWSD.
5. This Agreement sets forth the full relationship between the
parties. Collection or other services performed by SLWSD are not
%age ..i
subject to County supervision.
6. SLWSD hereby releases the County from all liability and
shall indemnify and hold the County, its agents, and employees
harmless from any and all claims and causes of action for loss of
property, accident, personal injury or death by reason of any act
or omission of SLWSD, its agents, or employees in the use of the
Landfill and for all claims and causes of action for violation of
any local, state, or federal permits, regulations of
laws due to the placement or disposal of hazardous or poisonous
waste or other material at the County Landfill by reason of any act
or omission of SLWSD, its agent, or employees in the use of the
Landfill.
7. The indemnification set forth in this paragraph is subject
to the limitations contained in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes.
This Agreement embodies the whole understanding of the parties.
There are no promises, terms, conditions or obligations other than
those contained herein; and this Agreement shall supersede all
previous communications, representatives, or agreements, either
verbal or written, between the parties hereto.
8. This Agreement may only be amended by a written document
signed by both parties and filed with the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of St. Lucie County, Florida.
9. This Agreement shall be filed with the clerk of Circuit
Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, prior to its effectiveness.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused the
execution hereof by duly authorized officials on the dates stated
below.
ATTEST: BOARD OF C Y COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUrI LINTY, FLORIDA
BY:
CHAIRMAN
DATE:
AT EST: BY:
TITLE: (if dZ6 e�
DATE: A / A - CV '/
%W
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
•WO
ITEM NO. L - n
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR[]
PUBLIC HEARING []
CONSENT [XX]
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Daniel 5. McIntyre
County Attorney
SUBJECT: Emergency Debris Removal Contract - Phillips & Jordan, Inc.
L
BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum
FUNDS AVAILABLE:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the contract with Phillips & Jordan,
Inc. and authorize the Chairman to sign the contract.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[x] APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ]OTHER:
4 uglas Anderson
/County Administrator
Review and Approvals
County Attorney: Management & Budget Public Safety Dir:
Originating Dept. Public works Dir: Road & Bridge
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable) Eff. S/96
1%W
.✓
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney
C.A. NO. 01-296
DATE: February 27, 2001
SUBJECT: Emergency Debris Removal Contracts - Phillips & Jordan, Inc.
BACKGROUND:
On June 13, 2000, the Board authorized staff to advertise a Request for Proposals (RFP) to
firms interested in providing the County emergency debris removal services. Eight firms responded
to the RFP and all S firms were included on the short list which was approved by the Board on
October 24, 2000. Attached to this memorandum is a contract with Phillips & Jordan, Inc. The
Board has already approved contracts with five (5) of the other firms. Contracts with the remaining
firms will be agendaed when received.
RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Board approve the contract with Phillips & Jordan, Inc. and
authorize the Chairman to sign the contract.
Daniel 5. Mc
County Atto
DSM/caf
Attachments
submitted,
144r
..+
XPHILLIPS & JORDAN, INC.
February 22, 2001
Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney
St. Lucie County
2300 Virginia Avenue
3rd Floor Admin Annex
Ft. Pierce, Florida 34982-5652
Re: Disaster Recovery Contract
Dear Mr. McIntyre:
_3 23
Enclosed you will find four executed originals of the contract as referenced. Please return one
fully executed original for our file.
Should you require anything additional, please contact our office
Sincerely,
Phillips & Jordan, Inc..
'& /" „"
Dorinda Futch
Sr. Contract Administrator
cc: Tim Berkhimer
enclosures(4)
P.O. Box 2295 • Zephyrhills, Florida 33539-2295 • (813) 783-1132 • Fax: (813) 783-3140
C��
CONTRACT
Aiz r
THIS CONTRACT, made this day of Jemueay. 001, between ST. LUCIE
COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter called the "COUNTY",
and PHILLIPS & JORDAN, INC., or his, its or their successors, executors, administrators,
and assigns hereinafter called the "CONTRACTOR":
WITNESSETH:
1. PURPOSE
That Contractor agrees with County, for the consideration herein mentioned, at his,
its or their own proper cost and expense to do all the work and furnish all the materials,
equipment, supplies, and labor necessary to carry out this Contract in the manner and to the
full extent as set forth in the proposal and the accompanying plans, specifications, addenda
if any, and drawings, and they are as fully a part of the Contract as if hereto attached or
herein repeated, and to the satisfaction of the duly authorized representatives of St. Lucie
County, who shall have at all times full opportunity to inspect the materials to be furnished
and the work to be done under this Contract.
2. DESCRIPTION OF WORK
It is agreed that the scope of work to be done under this Contract is as follows:
Contractor shall, upon request, provide the County with the following services:
* Emergency Road Clearance - Removal of debris from the primary
transportation routes as directed by the County.
�k Debris Removal from Public Property -Removal of debris from public rights -of -
way. Removal of debris beyond public rights -of -way as necessary to abate
imminent and/or significant threats to the public health and safety of the
community.
g:\atty\agreemnt\PHILLIPS — 1
* Debris Removal from Private Property - Should an imminent threat to life,
safety, and health to the general public be present on private property, the
Contractor, as directed by the government officials, will accomplish the
removal of debris from private property.
* Temporary Debris Staging and Reduction (TD5RS) The Contractor will
prepare and maintain a sufficient number of TD5R5 facilities to accept and
process all eligible storm debris. Preparation and maintenance of facilities
shall include maintenance of the TDSR5 approach and interior road(s) for the
entire period of debris hauling, including provision of stone for any roads that
require stabilization for ingress and egress. Each facility shall include a roofed
inspection tower sufficient for a minimum of three (3) inspectors for the
inspection of all incoming and exiting loads. All debris shall be processed in
accordance with local, state, and federal law, standards and regulations.
Processing shall include, but is not limited to, reduction by tub grinding and/or
incineration when approved by the County. Prior to reduction, all debris shall
be segregated between vegetative debris, construction and demolition debris,
recyclable debris, white goods and hazardous waste.
,t Generated Hazardous Waste Abatement - Abatement of hazardous waste
identified by County officials in accordance with all applicable Federal, State
and local laws, standards and regulations.
�t Debris Disposal - Disposal of all eligibledebris, reduced debris, ash residue and
other products of the debris management process in accordance with all
applicable Federal, State and local laws, standards and regulations.
* Documentation and Inspections - Storm debris shall be subject to inspection
by County officials. Inspections will be to insure compliance with the contract,
and applicable local, state and federal laws. The Contractor will, at all times,
provide County officials access to all work sites and disposal areas. The
Contractor and the County will have in place at the Temporary Debris Staging
and Reduction (TD5R5) personnel to verify and maintain records regarding the
contents and cubic yards of the vehicles entering and leaving the TDSR5 sites.
The Contractor will assist County officials in preparation of Federal (FEMA)
and State reports for any potential reimbursement through the training of
County employees and the review of documentation prior to submittal. The
Contractor will work closely with the Florida Division of Emergency
Management, FEMA, and other applicable State and Federal agencies to ensure
that eligible debris collection and data documenting appropriately address
concerns of the likely reimbursement agencies.
g: \atty\agreemnt\PHILLIP5 — Z
v
* Work Areas - The County will establish and approve all areas that the
Contractor will be allowed to work. The Contractor will remove all eligible
debris and leave the site from which the debris was removed in a clean and
neat condition.
* White Goods - The Contractor may expect to encounter white goads available
for disposal. Whitegoods will constitute household appliances as defined in the
Florida Administrative Code. The Contractor will dispose of all white goods
encountered in accordance with applicable Federal, State and local laws.
* Hazardous Stumps -The Contractor will remove al I stumps that are determined
to be hazardous to public access and as directed by County officials. Stumps
shall be hauled to TDSR5 sites where they shall be inspected and categorized
by size.
* Fill Dirt - The Contractor shall place compacted fill dirt in ruts created by
equipment, holes created by removal of hazardous stumps and other areas that
pose a hazard to public access upon direction of County officials.
* Documentation and Recovery Process - The Contractor will provide the
following assistance in addition to debris removal:
♦ Recovery process documentation - create recovery process
documentation plan.
♦ Maintain documentation of recovery process.
♦ Provide written and oral status reports as requested by County
officials.
♦ Review documentation for accuracy and quantity.
♦ Assist in preparation of claim documentation.
Upon request, the Contractor shall provide the County with pre -event training and
assistance.
The parties acknowledge that this is a "pre -event" contract. In the event the County
desires to utilize the services of the Contractor, the parties agree to negotiate and enter
into separate "Work Authorizations for each project/site. The Work Authorization shall
be on a form prepared by the County and shall include the specific scope of work, cost and
time of performance for each project.
3. PROJECT MANA6ER
The Project Manager for the County is Raymond Wazny at (561) 462-1485. The
Project Manager for the Contractor is Timothy R. Berkhimer (813) 783-1132. Each party will
notify the other, in writing, of any changes or substitutions of the Project Manager herein
named.
9: \atty\agreemnt\PHILLIP5 - 3
r%w ..+
The parties shall direct all matters arising in connection with the performance of this
Contract, other than invoices and notices, to the attention of the Project Managers for
attempted resolution or action. The Project Managers shall be responsible for overall
resolution or action. The Project Managers shall be responsible for overall coordination and
oversight relating to the performance of this Contract.
4. TERM
The initial term of this Contract shall be one (1) year beginning on January 1, 2001.
The Contract shall renew automatically on January 1 of each subsequent year unless
terminated.
5. TIME OF PERFORMANCE/DELAYS AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME
The Contractor shall begin work immediately upon request by the County and delivery
of a written notice to proceed and shall complete work in accordance with the agreed Work
Authorization. Commencement of the Work by the Contractor shall be deemed a waiver of
this notice. The Work shall be conducted in such a manner and with sufficient labor,
materials, tools, and equipment necessary to complete the Work within the time limit set
forth in the Work Authorization. In the event the schedule as set forth in the Contract
documents is changed, the Contractor shall notify the County, in writing, of the change in
schedule. Such schedule change shall not, however, extend the time for completion unless
approved by the County in writing.
In the sole opinion of the County, should the organization of the Contractor, or its
management, or the manner of carrying on the Work be manifestly incompetent, or inadequate
to do the Work specified within the stated time, then the County shall have the right to take
charge of the Work and finish it and provide the labor, materials and equipment necessary
to complete the Work as planned within the required time and to charge the cost of all such
Work against the Contractor and his, or its Surety shall be held responsible therefore. The
Contractor fully understands and agrees that the County shall not pay for any obligation
incurred or expenditure made by the Contractor prior to the effective date of the notice to
proceed described above, unless the County authorizes such payment in writing.
As the Contractor's only remedy for delay, the County may grant an extension of the
contract time, when a controlling item of Work is delayed by any factors contemplated or not
contemplated at the time of the bid. Such extension of time may be allowed for delays
occurring during the contract time period or authorized extension of the contract time. All
claims for extension of time shall be made in writing to the County. Claims for delay due to
inclement weather shall be made by the 10th day of the month following the month of the
9:Natty\a9reemnt\PHILLIP5 — 4
delay. All other claims shall be made no more than twenty (20) days after the commencement
of the delay. Claims made beyond these time limits shall be null and void. Requests for
extension of time shall be fully documented and shall include copies of daily logs, letters,
shipping orders, delivery tickets, and other supporting information. In case of a continuing
cause of delay only one (1) claim is necessary. Normal working weeks are based on a five (5)
day week. All authorized extensions of time shall be done by Change Order.
6. DELAY DAMAGES
It is mutually agreed between the parties hereto that time shall be of the essence in
the performance of all Work Authorizations performed pursuant to this Contract, and in the
event the work is not completed within the time specified, it is agreed that from the
compensation otherwise to be paid to the Contractor, the County may retain the sum of
$300.00 per calendar day for each day thereafter, Sundays and holidays included, that the
work remains uncompleted, which sum shall represent the actual damages which the County
will have sustained per calendar day by failure of the Contractor to complete the work within
the time stipulated, and this sum is not a penalty, being the liquidated damages the County
will have sustained in event of such default by the Contractor.
7. CONTRACT PAYMENT
The County shall pay the Contractor for the performance of this Contract and
satisfactory completion of the project in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
written Work Authorization. The parties agree to use either (1) the unit price method
(where the scope of work is large and exact measurements of work are difficult to define);
or, (2) the lump sum price (where the scope of work can be clearly defined) in establishing
payment terms in the Work Authorization. All prices must comply with Federal and State
reimbursement guidelines. Prior to January 1 of each year that this Contract remains in force,
the Contractor shall provide the County with its labor and equipment rates for the
subsequent calendar year. The rates for calendar year 2001 shall be those presented in the
Contractor's Response to the County's Request for Proposals which is incorporated by
reference herein.
8. PAYMENT SCHEDULE
The County shall make monthly project payments on account of the Contract. Unless
a different schedule is established in the Work Authorization, upon the satisfactory
completion of the Work Authorization and the delivery by the Contractor to County of
satisfactory releases of liens and claims if applicable, the County shall pay the remaining
g: \atty\a9reemnt\PHILLIP5 - S
,%W *✓
amount found to be due to the Contractor, not later than thirty (30) days after completion
of the Work Authorization and the delivery of releases of liens and claims.
9. AUDIT
The Contractor agrees that the County or any of its duly authorized representatives
Shell, until the expiration of threeyears after expenditure of funds underthis Contract, have
access to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers, and
records of the Contractor involving transactions related to this Contract. The Contractor
agrees that payment(s) made under this Contract shall be subject to reduction for amounts
charged thereto which are found on the basis of audit examination not to constitute allowable
costs under this Contract. The Contractor shall refund by check payable to the County the
amount of such reduction of payments. All required records shall be maintained until an audit
is completed and all questions arising theref rom are resolved, or three years after completion
of the project and issuance of the final certificate, whichever is sooner.
i0. PUBLIC RECORDS
The Contractor shall allow public access to all documents, papers, letters, or other
material subject to the provisions of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, and made or received by
the County in conjunction with this Contract.
11. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY
The Contractor is an independent contractor and is not an employee or agent of the
County. Nothing in this Contract shall be interpreted to establish any relationship other than
that of an independent contractor, between the County and the Contractor, its employees,
agents, subcontractors, or assigns, during or after the performance of this Contract. The
Contractor shall takethe whole responsibility for the means, methods, techniques, sequences,
and production of the Work.
The Contractor shall bear all losses resulting to him, or its subcontractors, on account
of the amount or character of the Work, or because of the nature of the ground in or on
which the Work is done is different from what was assumed or expected, or because of bad
weather, or because of errors or omissions in his or its bid on the Contract price, or except
as otherwise provided in the Contract Documents because of any other causes whatsoever.
Execution of this Contract by the Contractor is a representation that the Contractor has
visited the site, become familiar with the local conditions under which the Work is to be
performed, and correlated personal observations with the requirements of the Contract
Documents.
g: \atty\agreemnt \PHILLIPS - 6
♦W .✓
The Contractor shall protect the entire Work, all materials under the Contract and
the County's property (including machinery and equipment) in, on, or adjacent to the site of
the Work until final completion and Work, from the action of the elements, acts of Phillips
& Jordan, Inc., subcontractors, or except as otherwise provided in the Contract Documents,
and from any other causes whatsoever; should any damage occur by reason of any of the
foregoing, the Contractor shall repair at his, or its, own expenses to the satisfaction of the
County or its Project Manager. Neither the County nor its officers, employees or agents
assume any responsibility for collection of indemnities or damages from any person or persons
causing injury to the Work of the Contractor.
At his, or its expense, the Contractor shall take all necessary precautions (including
without limitation) the furnishing of guards, fences, warnings signs, walks, flags, cables and
lights for the safety of and the prevention of injury, loss and damage to persons and property
(including without limitation) in the term persons, members of the public, the County and its
employees and agents, the Project Manager and his employees, Contractor's employees, his
or its subcontractors and their respective: employees, other contractors, their
subcontractors and respective employees, on, about or adjacent to the premises where said
Work is being performed, and shall comply with all applicable provisions of safety laws, rules,
ordinances, regulations and orders of duly constituted public authorities and building codes.
The Contractor assumes all risk of loss, damage and destruction to all of his or its
materials, tools appliances and property of every description and that of his or its
subcontractors and of their respective employees or agents, and injury to or death of the
Contractor, his or its employees, subcontractors or their respective employees or agents,
including legal fees, court costs or other legal expenses, arising out of or in connection with
the performance of this Contract.
12. INDEMNITY
Contractor agrees to pay of behalf of, protect, defend, reimburse, indemnify and hold
the County, its agents, employees, elected officers and representatives and each of them,
(hereinafter collectively and for the purposes of this paragraph, referred to as "County"),
free and harmless at all times from and against any and all claims, liability, expenses, losses,
costs, fines and damages, including attorney's fees, and causes of action of every kind and
character against County by reason of any damage to property or the environment, or bodily
injury (including death) incurred or sustained by any party hereto, or of any party acquiring
any interest hereunder, any agent or employee of any party hereto or of any party acquiring
an interest hereunder, and any third or other party whomsoever, or any governmental agency,
arising out of or in incident to or in connection with Contractor's performance under this
Contract, the condition of the premises, Contractor's acts, or omissions or operations
g:\atty\agreemnt\PHILLIPS —�
'k.. %00
hereunder, or the performance, non-performance or purported performance of the
Contractor of any breach of the terms of this Contract; provided however that Contractor
shall not be responsible to County for damages resulting out of bodily injury or damages to
property which Contractor can establish as being attributable to the sole negligence of
County, its respective agents, servants, employees or officers.
Contractor further agrees to pay on behalf of and hold harmless and indemnify County
for any fines, citations, court judgments, insurance claims, restoration costs or other Iiabi Iity
resulting from its activities on the project, whether or not Contractor was negligent or even
knowledgeable of any events precipitating a claim or arising as a result of any situation
involving Contractor's activities.
Said indemnification by Contractor shall be extended to include all deliverers,
suppliers, furnishers of material or anyone acting for, on behalf of, or at the request of
Contractor. Contractor recognizes the broad nature of this indemnification and hold
harmless clause and voluntarily makes this covenant. In conformance with Section 725.06
Florida Statutes, the specific consideration given for the promises of the Contractor set
forth with regard to this indemnification and hold harmless clause is $10.00 in hand paid by
the County to the Contractor as a portion of the contract price, receipt thereof is hereby
acknowledged and the adequacy of which the Contractor accepts as completely fulfilling the
obligations of the County under the requirement of Section 725.06 Florida 5tatutes. This
indemnification and hold harmless survives acceptance of the Work. This clause of the
Contract will extend beyond the term of the Agreement for a period of one (1) year after the
date of the acceptance of the Work by the County.
13. INSPECTION
The project will be inspected by the Project Manager for the County and will be
rejected if it is not in conformity with the Contract provisions. Rejected work will be
immediately corrected by the Contractor. When the work is substantially completed, the
Contractor shall notify the County in writing that the work shall be ready for final inspection
on a definite date, at least three (3) calendar days thereafter, which shall be stated in such
notice.
14. INSURANCE
Commercial General Liability:
The Contractor shall maintain and, prior to commencement of this contract, provide
the County with evidence of commercial general liability insurance to include: 1)
9: \atty\agreemnt\PHILLIPS - 8 -
44. ..i
premises/operations, products/completed operations, (including XCU hazards) and personal
and advertising injury for limits of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence; 2) fire damage
for limits of not less than $100,000 per occurrence; 3) medical payments for limits not less
than $5,000 per person and 4) a general, per contract/project, aggregate limit of not less
than $2,000,000. The policy shall also provide the County will be given a thirty (30) day
written notice of cancellation or non -renewal and include County as on additional insured.
Business Automobile Liability_
The Contractor shall maintain and, prior to commencement of this contract, provide
the County with evidence of business automobile liability insurance to include: 1) coverage for
any automobile for limits of not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit (bodily injury d
property damage) per accident and 2) Personal Injury Protection (Florida no-fault) with full
statutory limits. The policy shall also provide the County will be given a thirty (30) day
written notice of cancellation or non -renewal and include County as an additional insured.
Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability
The Contractor shall maintain and, prior to commencing any work pursuant to this
contract, provide the County with evidence of workers' compensation insurance providing
Florida statutory (F.S. 440) limits to cover nil employees and include Employers Liability
coverage with limits of not less than $500,000 for accidents or disease. The policy shall also
provide the County will be given a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation or non -
renewal.
15. DEFAULT; TERMINATION
A. FOR CAUSE
If either party fails to fulfill its obligations under this Contract in a timely and
proper manner, the other party shall have the right to terminate this Contract by giving
written notice of any deficiency and by allowing the party in default seven (7) calendar days
to correct the deficiency. If the defaulting party fails to correct the deficiency within this
time, this Contract shall terminate at the expiration of the seven (7) calendar day time
period.
With regard to the Contractor, the following items shall be considered a
default under this Contract:
g:\atty\agreemnt\PHILLIP5 - 9-
(1) If the Contractor should be adjudged bankrupt, or if he, or it, should
make a general assignment for the benefit of his, or its, creditors, or if a receiver should be
appointed on account of his, or its, insolvency.
(2) If the Contractor should refuse or fail, except in cases for which an
extension of time is provided, to supply enough properly skilled workmen or proper material
or if the Contractor should fail to make prompt payment for materials, or labor or other
services entering into the work.
(3) If the Contractor disregards laws,ordinances, or the instructions of the
Project Manager or otherwise be guilty of a substantial violation of the provisions of the
Contract.
In the event of termination, the County may take possession of the premises and all
materials, tools, and appliances, thereon and finish the work by whatever method it may deem
expedient. In such cases, the Contractor shall only be entitled to receive payment for work
satisfactorily completed prior to the termination date. If such expense off inishing the work
shall exceed such unpaid balance the Contractor shall pay the difference to the County. The
expense incurred by the County as herein provided, and the damage incurred through the
Contractor's default, shall be certified by the Project Manager.
a. WITHOUT CAUSE
Either party may terminate the Contract without cause at any time upon thirty
(30) calendar days prior written notice to the other party. In the event of termination, the
County shall compensate the Contractor for all authorized work performed through the
termination date.
16. NON DISCRIMINATION
Contractor covenants and agrees that Contractor shall not discriminate against any
employee or applicant for employment to be employed in the performance of the Contract
with respect to hiring, tenure, terms, conditions or privileges of employment, or any matter
directly or indirectly related to employment because of age, sex or physical handicaps (except
where based on a bonafide occupational qualification); or because of marital status, race,
color, religion, national origin or ancestry.
9: Natty \agrmrnnt\PHILLIP5 —10 —
17. VERIFICATION OF EMPLOYMENT STATUS
Contractor agrees that it shall bear the responsibility for verifying the employment
status, under the Immigration Reform and Control act of 1986, of all persons it employs in
the performance of the contract.
18. FLORIDA PRODUCED LUMBER
Contractor agrees to comply with the provisions of Section 255.20, Florida Statutes,
(1999) where pertinent.
19. ASBESTOS -FREE MATERIALS
Contractor shall not use any asbestos or asbestos -based fiber materials in the work
performed under this Contract. _
20. ASSIGNMENT
The County reserves the right to freely assign this Contract. The Contractor, however,
shall not assign this Contract to any other persons or firm without first obtaining County's
written approval.
21. ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
In the event of any dispute concerning the terms and conditions of this Contract or
in the event of any action by any party to this Contract to judicially interpret or enforce this
Contract or any provision hereof, or in any dispute arising in any manner from this
Contract, subject to the provisions of Section 768.28, Florida Statutes and in no way altering
the extent of the County's liability under 768.28, Florida Statutes, the prevailing party shall
be entitled to recover its reasonable costs, fees and expenses, including but not limited to,
witness fees, expert fees, consultant fees, attorney, paralegal and legal assistant fees,
costs and expenses and other professional fees, costs and expenses, whether suit be brought
or not, and whether any settlement shall be entered in any declaratory action, at trial or on
appeal. The liability of the Contractor and its surety or sureties, if any, for such fees and
costs is joint and several.
22. NOTICES
g:\atty\agreemnt\PHILLIPS -11-
All notices or other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed
duly given if delivered in person or sent by certified mail return receipt requested and
addressed as follows:
If to County:
5t. Lucie County Administrator
2300 Virginia Ave.
Administration Annex
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
If to Contractor:
Phillips & Jordan, Inc.
Post Office Box 2295
Zephyrhills, FL 33539-2295
23. NON -WAIVER
With copies to:
5t. Lucie County Attorney
2300 Virginia Avenue
Administration Annex
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
The rights of the parties under this Contract shall be cumulative and the failure of
either party to exercise properly any rights given hereunder shall not operate to forfeit any
of the said rights.
24. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The Contractor represents that it presently has no interest and shall acquire no
interest, either direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with the performance
of services required hereunder, as provided for in Florida Statutes 112.311. The Contractor
further represents that no person having any interest shall be employed for said
performance.
The Contractor shall promptly notify the County in writing by certified mail of all
potential conflicts of interest prohibited by existing state law for any prospective business
association, interest or other circumstance which may influence or appear to influence the
Contractor's judgment or quality of services being provided hereunder. Such written
notification shall identify the prospective business association, interest or circumstance, the
nature of work that the Contractor may undertake and request an opinion of the County as
to whether the association, interest or circumstance would, in the opinion of the County,
constitute a conflict of interest if entered into by the Contractor. The County agrees to
notify the Contractor of its opinion by certified mail within thirty (30) days of receipt of
9: \atty\agreemnt\PHILLIP5 —12 —
` W vWo
notification by the Contractor.. If, in the opinion of the County, the prospective business
association, interest or circumstance would not constitute a conflict of interest by the
Contractor, the County shall so state in the notification and the Contractor shall, at his/her
option, enter into said association, interest or circumstance and it shall be deemed not in
conflict of interest with respect to services provided to the County by the Contractor under
the terms of this Contract.
25. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Any disputes relating to interpretation of the terms of this Contact or a question of
factor arising under this Contract shall be resolved through good faith efforts upon the part
of the Contractor and the County or its Project Manager. At all times, the Contractor shall
carry on the work and maintain its progress schedule in accordance with the requirements of
the Contract and the determination of the County or its representatives, pending resolution
of the dispute. Any dispute which is not resolved by mutual agreement shall be decided by the
County Administrator who shall reduce the decision to writing. The decision of the County
shall be final and conclusive unless determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
fraudulent, capricious, arbitrary, so grossly erroneous as to necessarily imply bad faith, or
not be supported by substantial evidence.
26. MEDIATION
Prior to initiating any litigation concerning this Contract, the parties agree to submit
the disputed issue or issues to a mediator for non -binding mediation. The parties shall agree
on a mediator chosen from a list of certified mediators available from the Clerk of Court for
St. Lucie County. The fee of the mediator shall be shared equally by the parties. To the
extent allowed by law, the mediation process shall be confidential and the results of the
mediation or any testimony or argument introduced at the mediation shall not be admissible
as evidence in any subsequent proceeding concerning the disputed issue.
27. INTERPRETATION: VENUE
This Contract 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 Contract may only be amended by written document,
properly authorized, executed and delivered by both parties hereto. This Contract 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 Contract, venue shall be in the Nineteenth Judicial
9: \atty\agreemnt \PHILLIP5 -13 -
circuit for St. Lucie County, Florida, for claims understate law and the Southern District of
Florida for any claims which are justiciable in federal court.
28. PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION BONG
The Contractor shall, upon execution and return of any Work Authorization to the
County, furnish to the County a public construction bond using the form identified in Section
255.05, Florida Statutes or incorporating all of the terms and conditions set forth therein
and covering the faithful performance of this Work Authorization and the payment of all
obligations arising hereunder in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the Contract
amount. The liability of the Contractor and its surety or sureties for the faithful
performance of this Contract and the payment of all obligations arising hereunder is joint and
several. The Contractor shall record the public construction bond in the Official Records for
St. Lucie County and provide the County with a copy of the recorded bond.
The public construction bond required hereunder shall meet the following minimum
standards:
A. The surety issuing the bond must be licensed to do business in the State of
Florida, hold a certificate of authorization to write surety bonds in the State,
hold a currently valid certificate of authority issued by the United States
Department of the Treasury, and otherwise be in compliance with the
provisions of the Florida Insurance Code.
B. The attorney -in -fact must provide a certified copy of his or her power of
attorney to sign the bond.
C. The name, address and telephone number of the surety and its agent must be
listed on the bond.
D. The surety shall have twice the minimum surplus and capital required by the
Florida Insurance Code at the time the Work Authorization is issued.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have accepted, made and executed this
Agreement in counterparts each of which shall be treated as an original upon the terms and
conditions above stated.
ATTEST:
CLERK
g:\atty\agreemnt\PHILLIPS -14 -
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY. FLOMA
BY:
CHAIRMAN
`.
WITNESSES:
9: \atty\agreemnt\PHILLIP5 —15 —
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
PHILLIPS $ �D IN .
BY.
Print Name: !GC
Title:
\.r
ti/
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ITEM NO. C-3C
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR[]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [XX]
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY (DEPT.): County Attorney Donald G. Cole
Property Acquisition Manager
SUBJECT: Right-of-way Abandonment
South 251" Street - Phase IUSt. James Drive
Florida Power and Light Crossing
Request Permission to Advertise Notice of Intent
BACKGROUND: An Agreement of Purchase and ale bed states upeen St. on completion and of South
Power and Light Company (copy ) P
25" Street - Phase I[/St. James Drive, St. Lucie County agrees to abandon
the existing right-of-way of South 251" Street - St. James Drive crossing the
Florida Power and Light parcel (paragraph 26, page 11).
FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A
PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize staff to Advertise the Notice of
Intent to Abandon, authorize the Chairman to execute the Abandonment
Petition and proceed with the abandonment petition.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[g] APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
Administrator
Review and Approvals
��-
[xx] Public Works: [xx] County Engineer:
[xx] County Attorney: �
lxx] Originating Dept.:OCe_ [ ]Comm. Dev.:
[ ] Road & Bridge:
EH. 5196
Finance: (Check for Copy only, if applicable)
G:\ACO\WP\JoAnn\Abandonments\FPL Crossing\NoticeoflntentAgenda.wpd
SEE SHEET 34/08S
(A3OOOKW1I)
I
GIY OF PoRT ST.:LLff 1106�[OIAO/61 9.30 M I �x.n
wi f ----------
MIN
•_ �\ I fl�Op10/91
1,T2-0CWL'Cd/l1 I
22.03 A<
� to 5a u I
I
_,_ m3gp1oma7er' I Subfe� l +I �--
`� 7E.70 M I
!Oct
a�
TRACT W -a
3.57 M __—
I f m FU TOW m d`A la
m w m l n_ .m . x j ' •n a E+ TRACT 3
pHl 14) f392}71S
E
4.21
E �lal. Gn 's S �1t ss'•
_ a� l34267,5•
'��f s. «e n I,Y� . m�nE mI _.S a •s ° E � W,)030/5!
n � a u 'z� �E n � m O�'F �•"'
sa AC TR:,cF ,
47794
V S a Y y In g m I•e.w +.�Ow'a.u.� y a � / m
nl. TRacT '!' ._ _ 'd PAC7.9 T .
FOX -NORTH
-------------
w w O
---------------------------I------------------------------------------------ --r
I
SEE SHEET 34/17S
PRiIP SO FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY, Fd{
t ASSESSMENT MAP SEGTIC
WON is i cI 11�rz I T "T�r�x`�R TONNSi
Dona s rx aexFanlenli'r m4"w.ws ml mzn'�°a
n' u Im O1Y1'PQOUT 1 I= scat= ".E " RANGE
1-8W-345-7334 II <' i < s ... 6..- um[r 140 OF AN IN"
L ^ p 19'4S 14 WEST RIGHT—OF—WAY UNE
0
�s 950 �0 PROPOSED _ ABANDONMENT �opi
S 7. JAME S DR I VE 3 tiS1 DAA 150G
T F, o,\ o S 00'19'28' E 219.90' µ ,55055
p a no l s 320 5 p - 2211,50 EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE
c r N f 550
\ POB ,APj 4
i
J�00
� \
p �0
LJ
J Z F O O
mo /C-�� /
e z O,
p4� /
QQ /
/ tre P
GO
v
/ N J
a
m
/ POC
NORTHEAST COR.
/, SECTION 17
SECTION 77-36 40 5 OOlO'24' /t 1324.86' A 1 —
SECTION 16-36-40
L IVY —EAST UNE SECTION 17
LEGEND: 16 9
POC - POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
POB - POINT OF BEGINNING
a - DELTA
R - RADIUS
L - LENGTH OF ARC
9027FPL
7RrE�SERVATIORS.AGREEmENM
OW! HEREON WERE NOT ABSTRACTED FOR RIGHT OF WAY,
AND/OR EASEMENTS lK RECORD. SUCHKk1, IF DESIRED, AIOUID BE OBTAINED AND CONRRUED BY SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION
HROUGH APPROPRIATE TITLE VERIFICATION.
;NO.
ORIDA POWER do LIGHT COMPANY
CLPSouth 25th Street
CT77EURPENI INC. ABANDONMENT PARCEL
CONSULTING ENGINEERS k LAND SURVEYORS REF. JOB DRAWN BY DATE SURVEY N0.
2980 SOUTH 25th STREET
FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34981 9027.3 MTO 9/16/97 9027.3
567-464-3537 F,B.,PG. ALCULATED B SCALE SHEET NO,
CERTIFICATION NO. L.B. 4286 N/A N/A t- _ 100 2 OF 2
�, J act -7-1a-a33
AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between FLORIDA
POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, a Florida Corporation, whose mailing
address is P. 0. Box 14000, Juno Beach, Florida, 33408-0420,
("Seller"), and ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the
State of Florida, whose mailing address is 2300 Virginia Avenue,
Ft. Pierce, Florida, ("Buyer").
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the
mutual covenants, representations, warranties and agreements
contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration,
the adequacy and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged by the
parties, it is agreed that Seller shall sell and Buyer shall buy
the following real property upon the terms and conditions as
follows:
1. DESCRIPTION
Seller agrees to sell all of Seller's right, title and
interest to that certain real property, together with any
improvements located thereon, located in St. Lucie County,
Florida, which is identified and further described as:
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto (the "Property")
2. PURCHASE PRICE
2.1 The total purchase price for the Property (the
"Purchase Price" is hereby agreed to be Four thousand
eight hundred Dollars and no Cents ($4,800.00).
...s_5rh.2\fp1\contcacr 1
3. TIME OF ACCEPTANCE
If this Agreement is not executed by the Buyer and Seller i �y
23
one or more counterparts on or before December fY, 1997, a
the option of the Buver or Seller this Agreement s�a11 not
take effect and shall be null and void.
4. EFFECTIVE DATE /
The Effective Date of this Agreement shall be the date when
the last one of the Seller and Buyer has signed this
Agreement, which date shall be indicated in the signature
page hereof (the "Effective Date").
5. APPROVALS
The Buyer understands and agrees that, while this Agreement
bears the execution of Seiler, final approval of the
transaction contemplated herein rests with Seller's
Executive Management and/or Board of Directors, and such
final approval cannot be obtained until, on/or about 45 days
of the effective date of this Agreement, Buyer further
understands and agrees that upon notification by Seller that
this Agreement has not been approved by Seller's Executive
Management and/or Board of Directors (which notification, if
required, -Seller Agrees to forward via regular United States
mail to Buyer no later than 50 days of the effective date of
this Agreement shall be deemed immediately cancelled and of
no further force and effect and without Seller's being
obligated for any loss or damage to Buyer whatsoever.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Buyer
...s^_5rh.2\fp1\conCrac: 2
+fir
expressly understands and agrees that this Agreement may be
disapproved by Executive Management and cancelled as
provided above without this Agreement being submitted to
Seller's Board of Directors. -For purposes of this clause,
the term "Executive Management" shall mean the Vice
President or other officer of Seller who is directly
responsible to the President of Seller for the management of
Seller's real estate assets.
6. CLOSING
This transaction shall be closed and the deed and other
closing instruments and possession shall be delivered to
Buyer on or before ninety (90) days of the Effective Date,
unless extended by other provisions of this Agreement. The
precise time and place of closing shall be mutually agreed
upon.
7. EVIDENCE OF TITLE
7.1 Within thirty (30) days from the effective date of this
Agreement, Buyer, at Buyer's expense, may obtain an
owner's title insurance commitment followed by a title
insurance policy from a title insurance company
1icerised by the State of Florida.
7.2 In the event title is not found, by Buyer's attorney,
to be good, marketable and insurable, the title defects
shall be specified in writing and delivered to Seller
within ten (10) days after delivery of such owner's
...s'Srh.2\fpl\conrcacr 3
`,,
en
title insurance commitment, whereupon Seller shall have
the option to elect to correct such title defects.
7.3 If Seller elects not to correct or fails to correct the
title defect within ninety (90) days of the Effective
Date, then Buyer shall exercise either of the following
options:
i) rescind this transaction in which event this
Agreement shall be at an end and neither party
shall have any other or further obligation against
the other by reason or making this Agreement;
ii) elect to accept titie:'to the Property in its
existing condition.
8_ NO REPRESENTATIONS AS TO QUANTITY, QUALITY, OR CONDITION OF
PROPERTY
By its execution hereof, the Buyer understands and agrees
that Seller has made no representations or warranties as to
the quantity, quality or condition of the Property described
herein, the suitability of the zoning thereof, or the
availability of permits relating thereto, and that Buyer is
not relying upon any representation or inducement that may
have been,made by Seller or Seller's representatives, agents
or employees with respect to the quantity, quality or with
respect to the present or future condition, environmental or
otherwise, zoning or permitting of said Property. Buyer
understands and agrees the conveyance of the Property is "AS
... s'_5rh.2\fpl\coM1r Cecr 4
LWA
IS" with a special warranty as to title only and without any
warranty for any other purpose, express or implied.
9. REAL ESTATE TAXES
The real estate taxes for the year in which the transaction
is closed will be prorated on a net basis between the
parties. The prorations shall be based upon the previous
year's taxes, if the current year's assessment is not
available. Either party may request and shall be entitled
to a reproration of taxes when the actual amount for the
year of closing is levied.
10. EXPENSES
Florida documentary stamps on the deed, the cost of
recording the deed, and the cost of an owner's title
insurance commitment and title insurance policy, if desired,
shall be paid by Buyer. The cost of recording any
corrective instrument shall be paid by Seller.
11_ DOCUMENTS FOR CLOSING
At closing, Seller shall deliver to Buyer a Special warranty
Deed in proper form for recording in the form of Exhibit "B"
attached hereto and a Seller's and Non -foreign Affidavit in
the form attached hereto as Exhibit "C".
12. NATURE OF TRANSACTION
Buyer and Seller agree that the transaction contemplated
herein is one "in gross" and not "per acre" or "per square
foot," and any deficiency or surplus which may be determined
to exist in regard to the quantity of the Property described
... s_5ch.2\fp1\conrcac7 5
*%W
%fto
herein shall not effect the Purchase Price set forth in this
Agreement.
13. SELLER'S MORTGAGE AND DEED OF TRUST
Buyer understands that the -Property may be encumbered by the
lien of Seller's 1944 -rust Indenture, as supplemented, and
that Seller will obtain a release of the Property from such
encumbrance, if applicable, on or before the closing date.
Failure to do so shall entitle Buyer to rescind this
transaction, in which event this Agreement shall be at an
end, and neither party shall have any further obligation
against the other by reason of' -making this Agreement.
14. PROPERTY INSPECTION
Buyer, its agents or employees, shall have the right to
enter upon the Property to perform surveys and inspections,
including a non-invasive Phase I environmental assessment
provided, however, prior to such entry Buyer shall have
provided to seller evidence of public liability insurance
satisfactory to Seller covering accidents or injuries which
may occur on the Property. Buyer agrees to leave said
Property in the state approximating its present condition,
to indemnify and hold Seller harmless from any and all
damages to said Property, and to indemnify and hold Seller
harmless from and against any and all claims, losses,
damages, injuries (including death, liabilities and costs),
including attorney's fees resulting from or arising out of
or in connection with Buyer's exercise of its rights under
...;25rh.2\Ppl\conrcacr 6
`W ..
15
this paragraph. Buyer shall complete all studies and
testing within forty-five (45) days of the Effective Date.
If the results of a Phase I environmentai assessment
recommend furthz-r environmental testing, Buyer and Seller
shall negotiate an addendum to the Agreement covering the
scope and terms of the additional testing. In the event an
addendum satisfactory to both parties is not executed within
fifteen (15) days of notice of the recommendations for
additional environmental testing, this Agreement shall
automatically terminate. If, in Buyer's sole discretion,
the Property is unsuited for tli;E intended land use, the
Buyer shall have the right to terminate this Agreement
within the forty-five (45) day period for inspection, or
within any extended period for inspection and testing agreed
upon in writing by the parties, and the parties shall have
no further obligation to each other except as to the Buver's
obligation to indemnify and hold Seller harmless and to
leave the Property in the state approximating its present
condition.
BROKERAGE
Seller and Buyer represent to each other that neither they
nor anyone on their behalf has dealt with or consulted with
any real estate broker or agent in connection with this
matter, and that no commission or finder's fee will be
payable as a result of the execution of this Agreement or
the consummation of the transaction contemplated hereby. In
. ..s'Srh.'_\fpl\cotsr .-acc 7
v ..W 1
the event a real estate broker or agent claims to have dealt
with one of the parties contrary to the foregoing
representation, the party, the broker or agent claims to
have dealt or consulted with agrees to indemnify and hold
the other party harmless against any such claims or demands,
including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred by
such other party.
16. SURVEY
Buyer within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this
?Agreement shall be entitled to have.,.. -the Property surveyed
(the "Survey"), at its sole cost and expense. In the event
the Survey shows any encroachment or other type of
impediment or encumbrance not authorized by Buyer on the
Property, then written notice of such defect shall be given
to Seller by Buyer within ten (10) days after delivery of
such Survey, and said defect shall be governed in the same
manner as objections to the condition of title are dealt
with in Paragraph 6 herein.
17. SURVIVING CLOSING
The covenants by Seller and Buyer to be kept and performed
herein which have not been completed prior to closing shall
survive the closing of this transaction and conveyance of
the documents, and shall be binding upon Seller and Buyer,
their successors and assigns.
...s75Ch.2\[pl\conrracc 8
v
18. LIENS
Seller shall pay all assessments and liens for public
improvements against the Property, if any, which are
certified liens as of the closing date.
19. CONDEMNATION
In the event of the institution of any proceedings, or if
subject to a bona fide threat of such proceedings, judicial,
administrative or otherwise, which shall relate to the
proposed taking of any portion of the Property by Eminent
Domain, Seller may cancel this Agreement, and this Agreement
thereupon shall be of no furthd'r force and effect.
20. TIME OF THE ESSENCE
The parties hereto agree and understand that time is of the
essence in this Agreement.
21. RECORDING
Seller and Buyer agree that neither this Agreement nor any
notice thereof will be recorded in the Official Public
Records of any Clerk of any Circuit Court of the State of
Florida.
22. ASSIGNMENT
This Agreement, and the rights and interest created
hereunder are not assignable by Buyer without the prior
written consent of Seller, which shall not be unreasonably
withheld.
...s_;1h.'\fp1\c0nccacr 9
%W New
23. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
parties hereto, and may not be modified except by an
instrument in writina signed by the parties.
24. ATTORNEY'S FEES
Should any litigation ensue from this transaction, the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the
losing party the prevailing party's reasonable attorneys'
fees therein, plus costs.
25. NOTICE
*a,
Any notice required under this"Agreement shall be delivered
in person or by prepaid overnight courier, registered or
certified mail, return receipt requested to the parties as
follows:
L1414",
St. Lucie County
Attn: County Attorney
2300 Virginia Avenue
Ft. Pierce, FL 34982
SELLER:
Florida Power and Light
Company
Attn:C. Caren Coleman, Atty
P. 0. Box 029100
Miami, FL 33012-9100
and
Florida Power and Light
Company
Attn: Jim Weeks
P. O. Box 14000
Juno Beach, FL 33408
Each notice shall be deemed given on the date same is
delivered, if delivered in person, or on the day after it is
deposited with a courier service guaranteeing overnight
delivery, or upon receipt of registered or certified mail.
...s'_5rh.^\fp1\cortracr 10
%W *M
26. PROPOSED ABANDONMENT
St. Lucie County does hereby agree to abandon the existing
right-of-way of S. 25th Street - St. James Drive crossing
the —Florida Power and Light Parcel more particularly
described in "Exhibit D-1" after the completion of the
widening of S. 25th Street - St. James Drive and acceptance
by the Board of County Commissioners. When the abandonment -
of the existing right-of-way is approved by the Board of
County Commissioners, the resolution will be recorded in the
Public Records of St. Lucie County by December 31, 1999.
27. REAL PROPERTY CONVEYED TO PUBLf AGENCY BY A CORPORATION
The Seller hereby agrees to comply with Florida Statute
Chapter 286.23, "Real Property Conveyed to Public Agency;
disclosure of beneficial interest; notice; exemptions.",
that any person or entity holding real property in the form
of a corporation or any form of representative capacity
whatsoever for others, except as otherwise provided in F.S.
286.23, shall, before entering into any contract whereby
such real property held in representative capacity is sold,
leased, taken by eminent domain, or otherwise conveyed to
the state -or any local governmental unit, or an agency of
either, make a public disclosure in writing, under oath and
subject to the penalties prescribed for perjury, which shall
state his or her name and address and the name and address
of every person having a beneficial interest in the real
property, however small or minimal. This written disclosure
..s^_Sth.2\fp I\wrtr racy 1 1
*Aso
v
shall be made to the chief officer, or to his or her
officially designated representative, of the state, local
governmental unit, or agency of either, which the
transaction is made at least 10 days prior to the time of
closing or, in the case of an eminent domain taking, within
48 hours after the time when the required sum is deposited
in the registry of the court more particularly described in
"Exhibit E"
28. UTILITY EASEMENT
St. Lucie County shall,convey to Florida Power and Light
Company a Utility Easement acra'ss the entire proposed right-
of-way at time of closing for the construction, operation
and maintenance of overhead and underground electric utility
facilities (including poles, wires, cables, conduits and
appurtenant equipment) as more particularly described in
"Exhibit F".
The covenants herein shall bind and the benefits and
advantages shall inure to the respective heirs, executors,
administrators and successors or the parties hereto.
Whenever used, the singular shall include the plural, and
the plural the singular and the use of any gender shall
include all genders.
...;'5rh.2\fp1\cony wcr 12
r..
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto
executed this Agreement as of the respective dates hereinafter
set forth.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
Witness
Print name: augh
Witness
Pri t Name -��p
ATTEST:
... 525rh. \fpl\conrcacr 13
SELLER:
FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT
COMPANY
(Corp Seal)
Print N e: John M. Chism
uector, Corporate Real Estate
Its: ssistant Secretary
^M
Bate:
BUYER:
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political
subdivision of the State of
Florida
By:A"',,airnian
Print Name: Go-,,, 1)- �(u •iP Sr
Its: l 1,,r C V m-a,-n
Date: lala� h-7
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:_ �
I-MM
*W
..r
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ABANDON
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
You will take notice that in accordance with the provisions of Sections 177.101, 336.09 and
336.10, Florida Statutes, as amended, and the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, Section
11.10.01 et. seq., ST. LUCIE COUNTY intends to file a petition requesting that the St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners close, vacate, and abandon that portion of a public right-of-way
hereinafter described, and renounce and disclaim any right of St. Lucie County and the public in
and to the lands lying within that portion of said public right-of-way in St. Lucie County, Florida,
described as follows:
A parcel of land lying in the South Yz of the North Yz of the North '/2 of Section 17.
Township 36 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, being more
particularly described as follows:
For a POINT OF COMMENCEMENT (P.O.C.), start at the Northeast corner of
Section 17, Township 36 South, Range40 East; run thence S 00°10'24" E along the
East line of said Section 17, 1,324.86 feet; thence run S 89041'54" W along the
South line of the North 'h of the North ''/z of said Section 17, a distance of 1,689.80
feet to a point on the East right-of-way line of St. James Drive and the POINT OF
BEGINNING (P.O.B.); thence continue S 89°41'54" W, along said South line, a
distance of 107.09 feet to a point on the West right-of-way line of St. James Drive
and point of curvature of a curve concave to the Northeast having a radius of
950.00 feet, a radial to said point bears S 69055'18" W, thence run Northwesterly
along said curve through a central angle of 19°45'14", an arc distance of 327.53
feet; thence run N 00019'28" W, continuing along said West right-of-way line, a
*r
distance of 342.10 feet to the North line of the South'/2 of the North '/z of the North
/2 of Section 17; thence run N 89°43'14" E, along said North line a distance of 54.07
feet to a point on the West line of a proposed 150 foot wide right-of-way; said point
located on a curve concave to the Northeast having a radius of 1,575.00 feet, a
radial line to said point bears S 71 °26'47" W; the following course runs along the
Westerly line of said proposed 150 foot wide road right-of-way, thence run
Southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 4°44'57", an arc distance
of 130.55 feet to a non -tangent intersection with the East right-of-way line of St.
James Drive; thence S 00'19'28" E, a distance of 219.90 feet to a point of curvature
of a curve concave to the West having a radius of 850.00 feet; thence run
Southeasterly, along said curve through a central angle of 22°11'50", an arc
distance of 329.30 feet to the Point of Beginning.
The herein described parcel contains 64,120 square feet, more or less.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
/s/ FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, CHAIRMAN
PUBLISH DATE: March 10, 2001 and
March 17. 2001
PROOF: St. Lucie County
Property Acquisition Division
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
(561) 462-1440 (fax)
BILL: St. Lucie County
Property Acquisition Division
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
W
�y.%W too
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners
ITEM NO. C-3D
DATE: March 6, 2001
REGULAR[ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [X]
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): Katherine Mackenzie -Smith
Assistant County Attorney
SUBJECT: Partial Release of Lien for St. Lucie County Code Enforcement Board Order Imposing
Fine/Lien in Case No. 90-1724
BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum
FUNDS AVAILABLE:
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Partial
Release of Lien.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[� APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
i Anderson
Administrator
�1 Review and Approvals
V/
County Attorney:_ Management & Budget: Purchasing:
Originating Dept. Sheriff: Other:
Finance:
07
ti. v
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Katherine Mackenzie -Smith, Assistant County Attorney
C.A. NO: 01-281
DATE: February 28, 2001
SUBJECT: Partial Release of Lien for St. Lucie County Code Enforcement Board Order
Imposing Fine/Lien dated in Case No. 90-1724
BACKGROUND:
On February 6, 1991, the St. Lucie County Code Enforcement Board found the property at
2105 Donald Street, Fort Pierce, Florida, to be in violation. On July 3, 1991, the St. Lucie County
Code Enforcement Board issued an Order finding a total fine amount in Case No. 90-174. A
mortgage foreclosure suit and the Notice of Lis Pendens were filed on November 6, 1990. The
Summary Judgment of Foreclosure was entered on June 14, 1991 and the property was sold on July
15, 1991. The Code Enforcement Lien was not recorded until May 16, 1991 in Official Record
Book 738, Page 2486. The July 3, 1991 Code Enforcement Board Order was not recorded until
August 16, 1991 in Official Record Book 751, Page 1259 and January 3, 1995 in Official Record
Book 935, Page 2901.
Based on the above sequence of events and pursuant to Section 48.23, Florida Statutes
(2000), the above referenced Code Enforcement Board lien is not a lien on the property at 2105
Donald Street, Fort Pierce, Florida. Section 48.23, Florida Statutes in pertinent part states:
"... the filing for record of such notice of lis pendens shall
constitute a bar to the enforcement against the property
described in said notice of lis pendens of all interests and
liens... and if such proceedings are prosecuted to a judicial sale
of the property described in said notice of lis pendens, the
property shall be forever discharged from all such unrecorded
interests and liens..."
..r
Norman L. Paxton, Esquire, of Paxton & Williams, requests a Partial Release of Lien
(attached). The Partial Release of Lien will not release the lien from any other property owned by
the violator.
RE COMMENDATION/CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Board authorize the chairman to sign the attached Partial Release
of Lien.
Respectfully submitted,
/Z__ /
Katherine Mackenzie -Smith
Assistant County Attorney
KMS/mt
Attachment
*40
PARTIAL RELEASE
St. Lucie County, holder ofthe instrument described below, inconsideration of $10 and other
valuable consideration received, does hereby release the following described real property from the
following instrument.
Subject Instrument:
St. Lucie County Code Enforcement Board Order Imposing Fine/Lien dated February 6,1991
recorded May 16, 1991, in Official Record Book 738, Page 2486. The July 3, 1991 Code
Enforcement Board Order recorded August 16, 1991 in Official Record Book 751, Page 1259 and
January 3, 1995 in Official Record Book 935, Page 2901.
Real Property Released:
Lot 1 and the East half of Lot 2 in Block 3 of SINDONS SUBDIVISION according to the
plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 54, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County,
Florida
THIS PARTIAL RELEASE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A SATISFACTION OR A RELEASE OF
ANY PROPERTY OTHER THAN THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE
Dated this day of 12001.
ATTEST:
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF ST. LUCIE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
County Attorney
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2001, by , who is personally known to
me or who has produced as identification and who did/did not take an oath.
Notary Public (Signature)
Page 1 of I
`b+
..r
NORMAN L. PAXTON, JR.
GEORGE L. WILLIAMS, III
PAXTON & WILLIAMS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
606 BOSTON AVENUE
FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34950
Katherine Mackenzie -Smith, Esq.
Assistant County Attorney
2300 Virginia Avenue
3`d Floor Administration Annex
Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652
Dear Mrs. Mackenzie -Smith.
February 2 Q, 2001
i
TELEPHONE
561-465-5795
FAX
561-465-1030
Re: 2105 Donald St., Fort Pierce, Fl
Lot 1, and East % of Lot 2, Block 3, Sindons
Subdivision
I represent Gary Cormier who is the owner of the above property, and I am
writing on his behalf to request a release of this property from any lien that may have attached to
the property as a result of the Code Enforcement Orders entered against Anthony P. and
Maryanne T. Lattanzi in 1991.
My client has a contract to sell the above property and the closing is scheduled for
March 12, 2001. My client first learned of the existence of the code enforcement board orders,
when the title commitment was issued in connection with the sale.
County.
I am enclosing copies of the following papers from the public records of St. Lucie
Code enforcement Order dated February 6, 1991 and recorded on May 16,
1991.
2. Code enforcement Order dated July 3, 1991 and recorded on August 16,
1991.
3. Code Enforcement Board Order (certified copy of order) dated July 3,
1991, and recorded on January 3, 1995. T
4. Lis pendens in foreclosure action against Lattanzis (Countrywide Funding ��✓� %
Corp v. Lattanzi) recorded on February 18, 1991.
..r
5. Final Judgment in foreclosure action recorded on June 17, 1991.
6. Certificate of Title in foreclosure action, vesting title in Countrywide
Funding Corps. recorded on July 29, 1991.
7. Special Warranty Deed from the Secretary of Veteran Affairs to Gary
Cormier dated May 28, 1992 and recorded in St. Lucie County on
November 23, 1994 (after erroneous filing in Broward County).
No lien should have attached to the property as a result of the three filings of the
code enforcement orders for the following reasons:
• All of the orders were filed after the filing of the lis pendens in the
foreclosure action. The second two filings were after the issuance of the
certificate of title in the foreclosure_ at the time when the Lattanzis no
longer had title.
• The first two recordings of orders were not certified copies. Section
162.09 of the Florida Statutes, and Section 1-2-25 of the St. Lucie
County Code, requires the filing of a certified copy of a code
enforcement order in order to create a lien.
We are requesting just a partial release of this property from any lien created by
the three orders. The lien may be enforceable against other property of the Lattanzis.
I would appreciate your scheduling this request to be considered by the Code
Enforcement Board or County Commission.
If there is any further information you need I would be happy to provide it.
�i cerely,
may'
,Norman L. IJaxton, Jr.
NLP/cc
4"
AGENDA REQUEST
*00
ITEM NO.
DATE: March 6, 2001
CONSENT [X )
REGULAR [ )
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
Leg. [ ] Quasi -JD. [ ]
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2 PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY (DEPT): Utilities Department���I°%
Bill Blazak, Director
SUBJECT: Authorize the resubmittal of a grant application to the South
Florida Water Management District Alternative Water Supply Funding
Program.
BACKGROUND: In 1996, St. Lucie County received $350,200.00 from South Florida
Water Management District Alternative Water Supply Program to fund
reuse water lines on South Hutchinson Island. Although the
Utilities Department applied for funds last year for the North
Hutchinson Island Reclaimed Water Main Extension West project, it
ranked just below the funding line. For that reason, staff
requests approval to resubmit this project to SFWMD for funding.
The grant request will be for $82,800 to construct an 8" reuse
water main on North Hutchinson Island westward along AlA which
will terminate as a 6" reuse water main at the new county park
across from Little Jim's Boat Ramp. The total project cost is
$165,000.00 and requires a 50% match.
FUNDS AVAIL: In March 2000, the Board approved submitting the grant application
and earmarked the County match of $82,800 from account number 441-
9910-599300-800.
PREVIOUS ACTION: The Board approved submitting an application to SFWMD Alternative
Water Supply Program in March 2000.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the submittal of a grant
application to the South Florida Water Management District and
authorize the County Administrator to sign all documents
associated with the submittal of the grant application.
COMMISSION ACTION:
[ X] APPROVED [ ] DENIED
[ ] OTHER:
County Attorney:
Originating Dept:
Y
Finance: (copies only):
Agealth2obcc.wpd
Mgt S
Public Works:
Administrator
Purchasing:
Other:
%W
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: William Blazak, Utility Director 11(&&�
DATE: March 6, 2001
RE: Alternative Water Source Grant / North Hutchinson Island
BACKGROUND:
UTILITIES
DEPARTMENT
WILLIAM DLAZAK
DIRECTOR
Utilities has applied for this grant the past two years with South Florida Water
Management for extension of a reuse line on North Hutchinson Island.
The Alternative Water Source Grant funding has been reduced as part of the cost saving
measures developed by South Florida Water Management to assist with funding of the
Everglades clean up program. As of this date we have not been officially notified that sufficient
funds will be available for all applications to the grant program. This grant application will
assure the County of an opportunity to be considered as part of the selection process if
Alternative Water Source funding becomes available.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board authorize the submittal of this grant application to the
South Florida Water Management District.
!OHN D. )RUHN. District No. 1 • DOUG COWARD, District No. 2 • PAULA A. LEWIS, District No. 3 • FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, District No. 4 • CLIFF BARNES, Districr No. 5
Counry Adminisnaror - Douglas M. Anderson
2300 Virginia Avenue • Fort Pierce, FL 34982 • Phone (561) 462-1150 • FAX (561) 462-1 153
`.r
1400
741tanative 2Uatel Supply OzanLa ehecklist
This form must be completely filled out with appropriate statements in the space provided (no
references to text), including all requested documents, and appear immediately after the Funding
Proposal. Failure to properly complete this checklist will result in the application being ineligible. Do
not exceed the space provided for answers to each question.
1. Give a brief description of the project ' " '
To construct an 8" reuse water main .(ReNM) on North Hutchinson
Island Westward. along A-1-A which will terminate as a 6" ReWM at
a proposed county park. Connection to an existing 12" ReWM will
be made at the intersection of Mariner Dr. 'and A-1-A.
2. Type of alternative supply to be utilized. (Check all that apply.)
X wastewater reuse stondwater reuse
reverse osmosis brine reuse
blending
other (describe)
3. Amount of funding requested $82 800
Total project cost $165 , 600
Percent of project covered by SFWIMD 50%
Source of other funds SLC
aquifer storage and retrieval
4. Would Applicant be willing to accept less than 50% funding?
X yes no
How would an award of less than 50% affect project timing and completion?
Will require additional appropriations and approval from the
SLC Commission. May affect timing, but it is not anticipated
to be significant.
5. Does the Applicant have funds available and budgeted to pay for the Applicant's share of the
project cost?
X yes no
6. If the Applicant is a public utility, does this project appear on its Capital Improvement Plan?
X yes no
Page I
%W
7. Will water from this project directly replace an existing or proposed withdrawal from a
potable source?
X yes no
If yes, state the quantity of potable water to be replaced:
Quantity 0. 17 ± MGD (thousands; millions gallons per (day_, years
Identify the potable water source from which the water will be replaced:
FPUA Lime Softening WTP and irrigation well from surficial aquifer.
1
8. Does the project provide other water resource benefits in addition to water supply, such as
improving water quality? If yes, briefly describe how the benefits are realized:
Promotes growth of natural flora & fauna occurring on barrier island.
9. List permits necessary for this project.
1) Mariner Dr. and Flotilla R.O.W. (SLC)
2) A 1 A tie—in, runs parallel, and crossing (FDOT)
3) FDEP
10.Is the project being undertaken in response to permit conditions issued or enforcement actions taken
against the Applicant by the SFWMD or any other agency?
yes X no
If yes, explain:
N/A
11. Has the Applicant received funding from the SFWMD for another project since October 1. 1997?
yes X no
12.Is the current application for subsequent funding to a multi -year project previously funded under
this program?
yes X no
.:;eqgih-
� � N
Page 16
%W
on
AGENDA REQUEST ITEM NO. C -5
DATE: March 7, 2001
REGULAR[ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [ ]
CONSENT [XI
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY: Airport Paul Phillips
SUBJECT: Authorize staff to reject the bids for Bid No. 01-021 for the apron construction project
at St. Lucie County International Airport and authorize staff to rebid the project.
BACKGROUND: In December 2000, the St. Lucie County Purchasing Department advertised for
bids for the construction of the aircraft parking apron at St. Lucie County International Airport. A
review of the bid documents revealed an irregularity with the bid documents. Some of the bid
documents were missing an appendix that addressed labor provisions and minority business
enterprises (MBE). As a result, two of the bids received did not include the MBE certifications. One
of the bidders issued a bid protest. The County Attorney reviewed the missing information and
determined that the missing information was material in nature, and that the project should be rebid
in its entirety. Therefore, staff recommends that the Board reject all bids and that the project be
rebid.
FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE IN ACCT#: This project has received 80% funding from Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) and 20% matching funds are available in 140-4220-56300-
400 (Airport Improvements Other than Buildings).
PREVIOUS ACTION: Board approved the project for fiscal year 2000/01.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize staff to reject the bids for Bid
No. 01-021 for the apron construction project at St. Lucie County International Airport and authorize
staff to rebid the project.
COMMISSION ACTION:
k]APPROVED [ ]DENIED
[ ]OTHER:
Reviews & Approvals �/
County --Attorney: L�Q OMB Purchasing��'
Originating Dept: Other: Other:
Finance:(Check fo opy only, if applicable)
'%.
•00
February 15, 2001
St, Lucie County Purchasing Manager
2300 Virginia Ave. Room 228.
Ft. Pierre, FL 34950
Re: Bid # 01-021
Aircraft Parking Apron
St. Lucie County International Airport
St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority
Gentlemen:
.ivr
Sw
iiECEi J'
1001 FEB 15 PH 2 43
ST LUCIE COUNTY
Pursuant to the invitation to Bid on the above referenced project- Bids were received by
St. Lucie County Q 11:30am on February 14, 2001. When the Bid results were
announced Dickerson of Fla. Inc. was read out as the apparent Low Bidder.
Please let this letter serve, as our formal protest should it be the Counties intent to award
this project to them. A review of the Bid Documents on Thursday February 15.2001 with
a county Purchasing Office Representative revealed both Dickerson of Fla. And
Community Asphalt had irregular proposals from that what bad been supplied to us.
Appendix 1-1734 / 1-5-01 addressing Labor Provisions and Minority Business
Enterprises Provisions and the respective forms were included in our proposal which was
supplied by St. Lucie County and not in theirs. We complied with the 5% Minority
Business Requirement whereas they did not comply with the Minority Requirement.
Either we were supplied with an irregular proposal or they were. We respectfully request
a meeting at your earliest convenience in order that a resolution may be reached in this
matter.
If you have any questions relative to this matter, please feel free to give me call.
President
]W/dip
4510 Glades Cut -Oft Rd., P.O. Box 14569, Ff. Pierce. FL 34979 4589. Phone (561) 464 6460, Fax (561) 46&05W
..... ..,. ' .nne Y)717A
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
February 23, 2001
Ranget Construction Industries, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Jim Widmann, vice President
4510 Glades Cut-off Road
P. 0. Sox 14589
Ft. pierce, FL 34979-4589
PuRCHAS]NG
DEPART LENT
CHARLES L OC (T, SR.
Director
Re: Bid #01-021 - ing Apron
A rSt. LuciekCounty International Airport
Dear Mr. widmann:
This is in response to your letter of protest dated February 15, 2001
regarding the aforementioned bid. We have investigated the matter of a discrepancy
regarding the pages addressing the Labor and Minority Business Enterprises
Provisions. It does appear that there were two different appendixes distributed
for this bid.
I have met with the County Attorney and Assistant County Administrator (as
designee of the County Administrator) to review this matter. Due to this
unforeseen discrepance, it has been decided to take this matter before the Board of
County Co nissioners and request that all bids submitted be rejected and request a
new call to bid be instituted.
sincerely yours, �,.�-�
/���
Ruth Tottan
Interim Director
RT:mc
CC: Douglas Anderson, County Administrator
-Robert Bradshaw, Asst. County Administrator
Lan McIntyre, County Attorney
Paul Phillips, Airport Director
Dickerson Florida, Inc.
Community Asphalt Corp.
optimum Service&, Inc.
f' ld & Stoner Inc.
Williams, Hat ie
1aHN D. WWHN. Dlsrla No. 1 • DolG COWARD. D_mc No. 2 P Ad '�1a _ �9 µ A NTE NIlfCHIN$ON. D�rcr[t No. CLIFF 0•'PNES. Os�,�� No. 5
os
2300 Virginia Avenue • Fort Pierce. FL 34982.5652 • Phone (561) 462-1700
FAX (561) 462.1704 + 7DD (561) d62-1428
_... ...,.. '%.P7 TAAZ/LZ/ZO