Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutInformal Packet 06-04-2009 J _ o AGENDA THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 2009 9:00 A.M. INFORMAL MEETING 1. CALL TO ORDER -COMMISSIONER LEWIS, CHAIR BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2. DISCUSSION ON WESTERN LANDS STUDY CONCEPT -PAYE OUTLAW/MARK SATTERLEE 3. DISCUSSION ON REVISED JOINT PLANNING AND INTERLOCAL SERVICE BOUNDARY AGREEMENT -CITY OF FORT PIERCE -DAN MCINTYRE 4. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS 5. ADJOURNMENT CONFERENCE ROOM #3 ROGER POITRAS ADMINISTRATION ANNEX 2300 VIRGINIA AVENUE, FORT PIERCE FLORIDA 34982 NOTICE: All Proceedings before this Board are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal any action taken by the Board at these meetings will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Upon the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Anv ~artv to the oroceedinas will ha nrantari tha - ITEM N0.2 INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney FROM: Heather Sperrazza Lueke, Assistant County Attorney C.A. NO: 09-689 DATE: May 28, 2009 SUBJECT: Western Lands Planning Proposed Interlocal Agreement Per your request, I have researched the issue of whether Commissioner Coward's position on the board of directors of TCRC&D affects the County's ability to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with them for planning services. First, TCRC&D is anon-profit entity, not a governmental agency. They therefore do not fall under the definition of a "public agency" under Section 163.01, Florida Statutes (2008), and cannot enter into Interlocal Agreements. If the County wishes to use an Interlocal Agreement to choose its lead consultant, TCRC&D would not be eligible. Second, Section 112.313(3) prohibits doing business with one's agency, stating in part that no public officer acting in his or her official capacity shall either directly or indirectly purchase services for his or her own agency from any business entity of which the officer is a director. Also, Section 112.313 (7) prohibits public officers from having a contractual relationship with a business entity which is doing business with an agency of which he or she is an officer. I called the Commission on Ethics and they stated that, under these circumstances, the County could not enter into a contract with TCRC&D so long as Commissioner Coward remains on its board of directors. Please let me know if you have any questions. HSL/ ~n ~i ITEM N0.2 ~ GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT ® PLANNING DIVISION MEMORANDUM TO. Board of County Commissioners FROM: Mark Satterlee, Growth Management Director Kara Wood, Planning Manager DATE: May 18, 2009 SUBJECT: Western Lands Planning May 26, 2009 BOCC Informal Meeting At the April 28, 2009 BOCC Informal Meeting, staff presented a draft outline for a Western Lands Planning Study. The outline included a proposed study area, framework and options for selecting a lead consultant. After reviewing this information, the Commission requested that staff elicit feedback from the public and return with this information in a follow-up discussion at the May informal meeting. Staff solicited public comment through 1. responding to a number of requests on April 29~' to receive a copy of the PowerPoint presentation given to the BOCC, u „ 2. posting a Western Lands Update link on the Growth Management web page on April 30th with a summary of the study intent, a link to the PowerPoint presentation given to the BOCC on April 28"', and an email link to staff for any comments, 3. posting a link to same from the St. Lucie County main web page on May 5th, and 4. sending an email blast on May 4th to all addresses in our contacts list notifying them that the information was posted and staff was receiving comments through May 18tH To date, staff has received two comments in response, one from a citizen and one from FDOT. Both comments were forwarded to the Commissioners upon receipt with staffs response and are attached for your review. None of the feedback so far has requested any change to the proposed study framework or speck direction on the selection of a lead consultant. Staff requests BOCC direction on the proposed study framework and the method for choosing a lead consultant. The three options remain as follows: 1. Establish Interlocal Agreement with other public agency (i.e. TCRPC, FAU, UF, TCRC8~D) • No competitive selection process required • County can provide input/approve technical team 2. Choose from private firm on continuing contract for planning (i.e. MSCW, Miller Legg) • No additional competitive selection process required • County can provide input/approve technical team 3. Utilize RFQ/RFP process • Competitive selection process 4-6 months minimum • Typically involves a team established by proposer ITEM N0.3 = ~ _ INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA • _w . TO: Board of County Commissioners County Administrator FROM: Daniel 5. McIntyre, County Attorney " G C.A. NO.: 09-0679 DATE: May 27, 2009 SUBJECT: Joint Planning and Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement -City of Fort Pierce Attached is an outline of issues based on the current draft County agreement. Also attached is a blackline version of the current draft agreement and a proposed map of the Joint Planning Aren. The current County draft wns drafted in part in response to the City's draft agreement the scope of which was initially restricted to the Research Park. As such, the County's current draft contemplates a series of agreements with the City. One of the issues that the Board may wish to discuss is whether it makes sense for the County to propose a "global" agreement now (in lieu of the current draft) in.view of the City's decision to table consideration of the ordinances annexing the Research Park. DSM/caf Attachments Copy to: Growth Management Director ~"~~~~`it~`l~' It 4Q `s .I Ei 1. ~ a s a Joint Planning and Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement-St. Lucie County ~ City of Fort Pierce Based on Draft County Agreement Issues County Term Proposed 20 Years Mnp of Joint Planning Area (JPA) Map attached Research Park Annexation No annexation by the City Research Park Permits County to issue development permits Annexations within the JPA but outside the The County is willing to discuss as part of Research Park but inside FPUA retail service area negotiations on a broader interlocal service (Potential Annexation Area "A") boundary agreement whether the property that is inside the FPUA retail service urea may be annexed without contiguity Areas outside the Research Park and outside the Eligible for Annexation with the consent of the FPUA retail service area County if they are within the Urban Service Boundary Plan to negotiate an agreement on properties (e.g. Parties agree to enter into negotiations within 3 airport, landfill, jail, etc.) as set out in the months and agree to finalize an additional interlocal County's initiating resolution service boundary agreement within 12 months Design Charette City and County to coordinate Special Planning Area Study County proposes a study of the area around the . Research Park Transportation Concurrency Management Area County proposes creating a TCMA for Kings Highway adjacent to the Research Park Green Building Standards County proposes that Green Building standards apply within the Research Park Ad Valorem Tax Abatement Offers qualified applicants economic incentives including ad valorem tax incentives TCERDA Board Membership Not addressed 5:\ATTY\Docs\7PA Matrix.wpd 171 ISSUES OUTLINE TERM: Maximum of 20 years per Section 171.203(12) [Renegotiation must begin at least 18 months before the termination date] PARTIES: St. Lucie County City of Fort Pierce [Note: City of Port St. Lucie and any Independent Taxing Districts within unincorporated service wren may request participation in the negotiations per Section 171.203(2) and (3) SERVICE AREAS: - .Identify municipal service area - Identify unincorporated service area Services - Public Safety . - Water and Wastewater (Existing Interlocal Agreement) - Fire, emergency rescue and medical (St. Lucie County Fire District) - Road ownership, construction and maintenance - Conservation, parks and recreation - Stormwater management and drainage Service Delivery Issues: - Transfer of services and infrastructure (e.g. roads, drainage, parks) - Report by City of City's planned service delivery - Joint use of facilities ANNExATION AREA: - tied to service areas? - process; schedule H:\MISC\171 Issues Outline.wpd -1' Voluntary Annexations within the municipal service area: - Eliminate contiguity requirement? Effect on service delivery. - Eliminate compactness requirement? Effect on service delivery. - Allow creation of enclaves? Effect on service delivery. - Exempt County facilities/properties from annexation? Involuntary (Legislative) Annexations: - Develop "f lexible process" for securing consents to annexations. Statute does not empower the parties to waive "consent" by Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement. - At initial meeting, City staff seemed to "tie" City agreement on the interlocal service boundary agreement to agreement by County on specified "legislative" annexations. - Require the City to undertake/fund a f fiscal analysis impact upon the County regarding annexations under their process. SPECIAL SITES: Research Park: - Agreement not to annex? Void previous consent to annex? - Joint planning/charette of area surrounding park - Infrastructure delivery and services Airport: - Agreement not to annex? - Void previous consent to annex? - Identify unincorporated service area? - Discuss permitting-land use control (Airport Industrial Park West) H:\MISC\171 Issues Outline.wpd -2- Landfill: - Current agreement allows City to annex in 2009. - Renegotiate - Discuss permitting-land use control Jail - Agreement not to annex? , - Voids previous consent to annex - Discuss permitting-land use control LAND USE/ZONING/CONCURRENCY - Incorporate service areas into comprehensive plans - Clarify when City may rezone annexed property (after inclusion in City's comprehensive plan or upon annexation) - Joint Planning? - Concurrency management system agreement H:\MISC\171 Issues Outline.wpd -3- - Shinn Rd s I 3 v S • I O N : ' Q 'G. _ 1 ~ , ~ # ii' ~ / - / / f ` ' • i ~ • / { ~ r l / _ _ • I ! ~ i' 'I o ~ / / , ! ii ! . / ~',;`5 i 1. f ii!' / 1 -x/'11 / r~ • - ~ ~ / arc ~ Rd` r / / ~ f ~ / - -cJ { ~ rte, T; ,rt ! ~SY k 1. / .r ! ~ ! / 6y f / ~ ~ ~ / ` / j.~ //rl /~i,l~ % ~o6f/ 'f Jr ~ f}~~/ ://r/f. / r % / ~ _ / K L3 ~ ~ ~ _ 'S~ 5th _ , / ;rte / ~ _ . _ - - L. J LJ ~ ~ ~ ~ O o ~ ~ ~ L ~ k ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ N > ~ m v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 m m ~ m v O = SS1 O~ 3 3~ f r- L ~ ~ n D R m x D Ill CC j:~ , ~ F m D ~ c JOINT PLANNING AND INTERLOCAL SERVICE BOUNDARY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY (TREASURE COAST RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT PARK ANb SURROUNDING AREAS) This Joint Planning and Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement (the "Agre ment" is made and entered into this day of , 2009, by and between t e City of Fort Pierce, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the 5 ate of Florida (the "City") and St. Lucie County, a political subdivision of the State of Flori a (the "County"). WHEREAS, the City possesses Municipal Home Rule Powers pursuant to Articl VIII, Section 2(b), Florida Constitution and Section 166.021, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the County.possesses Home Rule powers as anon-charter county pu scant to Section 125.01, Florida Statutes; and. WHEREAS, the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1969, Section 163.01, lorida Statutes, encourages and empowers local government to cooperate with one snot er on matters of mutual interest and advantage, and provides for interlocal agreements b tween local governments on matters such as annexation and joint planning; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Annexation or Contraction Act, Chapter 171, Part I, lorida Statutes, and the Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement Act, Chapter 171, Part II, lorida Statutes, recognizes the use of interlocal service boundary agreements and joint pl nning agreements as a means to coordinate future land use, public facilities and service ,and protection of natural resources in advance of annexation; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Develo meet Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, requires that counties and cities include in their respective planning efforts intergovernmental coordination and partic lady, mechanisms for identifying and implementing joint planning areas, especially for the p rpose of annexation; and- 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\iNTERLOC\FP-TCR&D park B-L.wpd Page 1 f 15 WHEREAS, the State Comprehensive Plan requires local governments to direct development to those areas which have in place the land and water resources, fiscal abilities and service capacities to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner; and WHEREAS, the State Comprehensive Plan requires focal governments to protect the substantial investment in public facilities that already exist and to plan for and finance new facilities in a timely, orderly, and efficient manner; and, WHEREAS, the City and the County wish to adequately plan and develop the area around the Treasure Coast Research and Development Park ("Research Park"), as depicted on Composite Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and surrounding areas, identify the appropriate land uses and transportation infrastructure needs and provider for such lands, ensure protection of natural resources, jointly develop economic development initiatives including the identification of jobs corridors and agree on certain procedures for the timely review and processing of development proposals within those areas; and WHEREAS, the extension of City and County facilities and services to the Research Park and surrounding areas should be provided in prioritized phases. The process and timing of annexation and development review processes for certain designated areas of the City and County should be clearly identified and jointly coordinated in advance of the City and County capital planning, commitment, and expenditure; and . WHEREAS,~Subsection 163.3171(3), Florida Statutes, provides for the adoption of joint planning agreements to allow counties and municipalities to exercise jointly the powers granted under the Act; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City, after consultation with its staff, has determined that the lands included in the Joint Planning Area described herein may be necessary to reasonably accommodate urban growth projected in the City during the term of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City and the County find that the benefits of intergovernmental communications and coordination will accrue to both Parties; and WHEREAS, the elected officials of the City and the County have met and negotiated in good faith to resolve issues relating to annexation and joint planning of the a areas surrounding the Research Park and wish to memorialize their understanding in this Agreement; and S:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR~D Park B-L.wpd Page 2 of 25 WHEREAS, this Agreement is entered into pursuant to authority of Article II of the Florida Constitution, the City of Fort Pierce Charter, and Chapters 125,163,166 a d 171, Florida Statutes (2008). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth n this Agreement, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the City nd the County agree as follows: 1. Incorporation of Preamble. The Preamble above is true and correct and incorp rated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. 2. Establishment of Joint Planning Aren. To establish the means and process b which future annexations and planning activities will be accomplished, the City and the Coun (the "Parties") hereby establish a Joint Planning Aren (JPA), depicted in Composite Exhi it "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. All areas specifically deli eated, mapped and referenced in the legend on Composite Exhibit "A" are within the JPA. 3. Limitation on Future Annexations. A. Within the Joint Planning Area, the City and the County agree to the-fo lowing criteria on annexation: 1. The City agrees not to annex any property within the Researc Park. The County agrees not to use as a basis for objecting to annexations ~ad jacent o the Research Park the fact that the Research Park has not been annexed into the City an such adjacent properties are not contiguous to the City municipal boundaries ursuant to art II of Chapter 171. Florida Statutes. 2. The Count is willin to discuss as art o ne otiations on a b oader interlocal service boundary agreement whether the areas outside the Research Pa k but inside the FPUA retail service area, designated on Composite Exhibit "A" as Po ential Annexation Area "A",may be annexed by the City without the requirement of contigui y with City municipal boundaries. 3. Other areas outside the Research Park and outside the FPUA retail service area, designated on Composite Exhibit "A" as " Area " are eligible for annexation by the City with the prior written consent of the County"i th are within the Urban Service Boundary 1 ~e+e-s, 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCRd~D Pnrk B-L.wpd Page 3 of 15 B. The City and the County agree to develop a schedule of annexation for properties within Potential Annexation Area "A" and "B" that consist of land likely to be developed for urban and economic development purposes under the term of this Agreement and which are therefore appropriate for annexation by the City. C. The City and County agree that the City shall provide notice to the County within thirty (30) days of receipt of any petition to annex properties within the JPA or initiation of an annexation ordinance by the City. , j 4. Counter Consent to Annexations of Potential Annexation Arens by the City. If an annexation ordinance of the City is adopted under the conditions set forth in this Agreement, the County will not challenge, administratively, judicially, or otherwise, such annexations by the City set forth in said annexation ordinance. 5. Land Use Infrastructure and Environmental Agreements for Potential Annexation Arens A-: Process for Incorporating Potential Annexation Areas into City Comprehensive Plan. Future land uses are identified herein and agreed to by the City and the County for each of the areas within Potential Annexation Area "A" and~errt+s~ #tne~#fet~ Area "B". These future land uses will be examined during the City's comprehensive plan update pursuant to the Evaluation and Appraisal Report. During the process to update the City's comprehensive plan, the city and County will agree on future land use categories and design guidelines for the specific lands in Potential Annexation Area "A" and Aren "B". The City will adopt the agreed to future land uses as an overlay to its comprehensive plan. Specific policies addressing allocations of acreage, density, and intensity of development shall be included for each future Innd use category. r , Once in effect, the overlay will serve to govern any future land use map amendments occurring after annexation. Prior to annexation, the County will not revise its future land uses to redesignate any parcels in Potential Annexation Area "A" and Area "B" to a use incompatible with the designations set forth in this Agreement or the overlay. " 11 l~ 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNTIINTERLOC\FP-TCRbD Park B-L.wpd Page 4 of 15 .j ~7LT-VTLTL7 1 f C:...~~ A~cJ ca. 1 C:...,. I~:...i...:..~ I C,..~,..". ..._L7TT 1 r i 6. Intergovernmental Review and Coordination. A. Coordination of Developments of Extrn,jurisdictionai Impact. The ity and the County agree that the impacts of certain development, herein referred to as "Developments of Extrajurisdictional Impacts," in close proximity to the boundaries of the Research Park, whether within the City limits or in the unincorporated area of the ounty, require that the Parties closely coordinate such developments in order to assure the rderly and efficient provision of public facilities and services and compatibility of land use . B. Developments of Extrajurisdictional Impact. defined. Developm nt of Extrajurisdictional Impact shall have meaning Any development within the Joint Planning Area set forth on Composite Exhibit "A" 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR~D Park B-L.wpd Page Of 15 C. Coordination of CountX Planning Activit rte. The County will give the City Planning Director, or designee, written notice of the following matters or applications that relate to Developments of Extra jurisdictional Impact located within the unincorporated area of the County depicted on Composite Exhibit "A" which matters or applications include but are not limited to: (1) Comprehensive Plan Amendments; (2) Rezonings; (3) Conditional uses/Special Exceptions; (4) Planned Unit Developments; or (5) Site Plans D. Development Proposals within the City's Jurisdiction. The City will give the County Growth Management Director, or his designee, written notice of matters or applications that relate to Developments of Extrajurisdictional Impact located within the municipal boundaries of the City depicted on Composite Exhibit "A" which matters or applications include but are nvt limited to: (1) Comprehensive Plan Amendments; (2) Rezonings; ~ . (3) Conditional Uses/Special Exceptions; (4) Planned Unit Developments; or (5) Site Plans E. Process for Coordination of Developments of Extra jurisdictional Impact. The Parties will adhere to the following process in order to facilitate intergovernmental coordination regarding Developments of Extrajurisdictional Impact: (1) Not later than thirty (30) days after receiving an application, and in no event less than thirty (30) days prior to any public hearing on a proposed Development of Extrajurisdictional Impact, the Party with approval authority (the "Approving Party") will transmit the application packet for the proposed development, including all back-up material, to the other Party (the "Reviewing Party"). a. The Approving Party will transmit any substantive changes to the application packet made during the review process to the Reviewing Party within five (5) business days of its receipt by the Approving Party and in no event less than thirty (30) days prior to any public hearing. S:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR&D Park B-L.wpd Page 6 of 15 b. The Reviewing Party will transmit comments within twen (20) working days of receipt of the item(s) listed in subparagraphs C.l, 2, or 3 or D.1. 2, or 3, above. If the Reviewing Party does not respond in writing within twenty (20) workin days, then it is deemed to have no recommended conditions for inclusion in the comprehensi e plan amendment, rezoning, special exception or development concept plan. c. The parties agree to take reasonable steps to facility e the review process set forth herein. (2) Agreement to Incorporate Conditions. a. The City's recommendation to the City Planning and oning Advisory Board and City Commission to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a pr posed Development of Extry jurisdictional Impact will set forth all County-proposed stipulatio s that are based on adopted County standards, neighborhood and community plans, industry standards, or common agreement between the City and County. b, The County's recommendation to the County Planning & oning Commission and County Commission to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a pr posed Development of Extrajurisdictional Impact will set forth all City-proposed stipulatio that are based on adopted City standards, neighborhood and community plans, industry scan ards, or common agreement between the City and County. ' F. Approval of Reviewing Party Not Required. Notwithstanding the pro isions set forth in Section b.E.(2) hereof, unless otherwise specif led herein in Paragraphs 5 nd 9, the Parties will not construe any provision of this Agreement to require: (1) City approval of the County's planning activities or of Developme is of Extrajurisdictional Impact within the unincorporated area of the County; or (Z) County approval of the City's planning activities or of Developme is of Extrajurisdictional Impact within municipal boundaries of the City. G. Coordination of Further Planning Efforts in the JPA. The City n d the County agree to coordinate further long range planning efforts and studies within th JPA. This coordination includes, but is not necessarily limited to (a) implementation of the P nnned Nonresidential Development overlay district within the Research Park; (b) implements ion of a Transportation Concurrency Management Area for Kings Highway; (c) a design charet e for the parcels in Potential Annexation Area "A" and Area "B:'. 5:\ATTYIAGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR&p Park B-L.wpd Page 7 of 15 7. Incorporation into Comprehensive Plans. No later than the next City EAR plan amendments, the Parties will incorporate into the Future Land Use, Transportation, Intergovernmental Coordination, Capital Improvements, and as necessary other Elements of their respective Comprehensive Plans the provisions of this Agreement as is necessary to effectuate the intent of the Agreement and the obligations assumed by each of the Parties. As necessary, within one year of adoption of the comprehensive plan amendments, the Parties will amend their Land Development Codes. 8. Alternative Dispute Resolution. The parties agree to resolve any dispute related to the interpretation or performance of this Agreement in the manner described in Chapter 164, Florida Statutes #~ri-g Win. E 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR&D Park B-L.wpd Page 8 of 15 Fr 9. Agreement on Additional Substantive Standards and Issues In addition to the matters set forth above, the Parties agree to the following additional substantive sta Bards and issues: A. Each party agrees that as a part of its review of development appli atibns within the JPA set forth in Composite Exhibit "A" that it will apply its own cornprehensi a plan policies, land development regulations and methodologies to assess the impacts on th public facilities for which it is financially responsible. In addition, any application in which ' concurrency is determined will be provided to .the other party which will con uct a concurrency review based on its comprehensive plan policies, land development regulnti ns and methodologies to address impacts to public facilities which are its financial respon ibility. Any concurrency approval will incorporate the results of reviews by both Parties. B. The Parties agree to enter into negotiations within three (3) months f the execution of this Agreement and to finalize an interlocal service boundary agreement within twelve (12) months thereafter, and if necessary, a longer timeframe shall be agree to by both Parties, which may create an agreement to address annexation and serviced livery issues within the area identified in the County's initiating resolution (Resolution No. 0 -382). If the agreement is not completed within twelve (12) months and the Parties cannot a ree on a longer timeframe, failure to complete the agreement shall not constitute a material reach of this Agreement. 5:\AT1Y\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR&D Pork B-L.wpd Page 9 of 15 C. The Parties agree that within three (3) months of the execution of this Agreement, they wi II negotiate a scope of services with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council or other acceptable entity which shall create a special planning study for the JPA depicted on Composite Exhibit "A" hereto. The study will be completed in twelve (12) months, and if necessary, a longer timeframe shall be agreed to by both Parties. The study will include, but not be limited to, infrastructure cost estimates, aesthetic improvements, and a determination of which land uses will be compatible and consistent with adjacent developments . No consideration of land use changes by either party, unless mutually agreed upon, shall occur anti! the planning study is completed and mutually agreed upon. If the study is not completed within twelve (12) months and the Parties cannot agree on a longer timeframe, failure to complete the study shall not constitute a material breach of this Agreement. The Parties shall implement the site design and architectural standards recommended by the study. The County and City shall pay their equal share for the cost of the study. D. Both the City and the County agree to respect each others land use compatibility principles in zoning petitions for any parcels within Potential Annexation Aren "A" and Area "B". The land use compatibility reviews referenced above shall include an evaluation of land use density, intensity, character or type of use proposed, and an evaluation of site and architectural mitigation design techniques. E. The Parties agree to cooperate on the preparation and implementation of any neighborhood or community plans within the areas subject to this Agreement. F. The Parties agree that in order to protect the limited, valuable natural and . financial resources that exist within the region, development must proceed in a sustainable manner. Sustainability measures such as Green Building, Florida Green Building Standards and LEED Certification will be encouraged by both Parties for all new development. G. The City and the County agree to coordinate and encourage economic development within the JPA and further agree, to the maximum extent possible, to offer qualified applicants the same economic development incentives including but not limited toad valorem tax incentives. 10. Other Rights and Agreements. A. Other Rights. Nothing in this Agreement precludes either the City or the County from exercising its rights pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, to challenge any regional impact development order. 5:\ATTY\A6REEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR6D Park B-L.wpd Page 10 Of 15 B. Other Contempornneous Agreements. The Parties do not intend f r this Agreement to amend, modify, supersede, or terminate any other agreement between t e City and County in effect as of , 2009. The parties specifically agree th t this Agreement does not amend the utility service area boundaries set out in that ertain Interlocal Agreement dated February 10, 2004. 11. Notice to Parties. All notices, consents, approvals, waivers, and elections t at any Party requests or gives under this Agreement will be in writing and shall be given only b hand delivery for which a receipt is obtained, or certified mail, prepaid with confirms ion of delivery requested. Notices will be delivered or mailed to the addresses set forth b low or as either Party may otherwise designate in writing. If to the County: With a copy to: St. Lucie County St. Lucie County Attorney ATTN: County Administrator 2300 Virginia Avenue 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 If to the City: ~ With a copy to: City of Fort Pierce Fort Pierce~City Attorney ATTN. City Manager Post Office Box 1480 Post Office Box 1480 ~ Fort Pierce, Florid 34954 Fort Pierce, Florida 34954 Notices, consents, approvals, waivers, and elections will be deemed given when re eived by the Party for whom intended. 12. Discharge. This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the City and the County, and no ri ht or cause of action shall accrue upon or by reason hereof, to or for the benefit of an third party. Nothing in this Agreement, either expressed or implied, is intended or s all be construed to confer upon or give any person, corporation or governmental entity othe than the parties any right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement or any pro isions or conditions hereof, and all of the provisions, representations, covenants, and con itions herein contained shall inure to the sole benefit of and shall be binding upon the Parti~s and their respective representatives, successors and assigns. Nothing in this Agreement ay be 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCRd~D Park B-L.wpd Page 11 of 15 relied upon by any current or future parcel owner in the JPA as creating any investment backed expectation of development rights for such parcels. 13. Validity of Agreement. The City and the County each represent and warrant to the other its respective authority to enter into this Agreement, acknowledge the validity and enforceability of the Agreement, and waive any future right or defense based on a claim of illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability ofany nature. The City hereby represents, warrants and covenants to and with the County that this Agreement has been validly approved by the Fort Pierce City Commission at a public hearing of the Fort Pierce City Commission held pursuant to the provisions of Section 163.317(3), Florida Statutes, and Chapter 171, Part II, Florida Statutes, that it has been fully executed and delivered by the City, that it constitutes a legal, valid and binding contract enforceable by the Parties in accordance with its terms, and that the enforceability hereof is not subject to any impairment by the applicability of any public policy or police powers. The County hereby represents, warrants and covenants to and with the City that this Agreement has been validly approved by ordinance of the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners at n public hearing of the Board held pursuant to the provisions of Section 163.317(3), and Chapter 171, Part II, Florida Statutes, that it has been duly executed and delivered by the County, that it constitutes a legal, valid and binding contract enforceable by the Parties in accordance with its terms, and . that the enforceability hereof is~not subject to any impairment by the applicability of any . public policy or police powers. 14. Enforcement. Subject to Section 9 above, this Agreement shall be enforceable by the Parties hereto by whatever remedies are available in law or equity, including but not limited to injunctive relief and specific performance. 15. Covenant to Enforce. If this Agreement or any portion hereof is challenged by any judicial, administrative, or appellate proceeding (each Party hereby covenanting with the other Party not to initiate or acquiesce to such challenge or not to appeal any decision invalidating any portion of this Agreement except as otherwise provided in this Agreement), the Parties collectively an individually agree, at their individual sole cost and expense, to defend in good faith its validity through to a final judicial determination; unless both Parties mutually agree in writing not to defend such challenge or not to appeal any decision invalidating any portion of this Agreement. 16. Term Review and Termination. A. Original Term. This Agreement shall take effect upon its filing with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County and, unless amended or extended in accordance with its terms, shall expire on , 2029. 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR~D Park B-L.wpd Page 12 Of 15 B. Extension. This Agreement shalt be automatically extended past the o iginal term for one additional ten (10) year term unless either the City or the County, as th case may be, delivers a notice of non-renewal to the other Party at least one hundred eight (180) days prior to the expiration of the original term of this Agreement. If it is extended for an additional ten (10) year term, this Agreement shall be automatically extended f r one additional five (5}year term unless either the City or the County, as the case may be, d livers a notice of non-renewal to the other Party at least one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the expiration of the ten (10) year extension. A Party delivering such a notice of non-ren wal as aforesaid may, in such Party's sole discretion, revoke such notice of non-renewal at a time prior to the expiration date of the original term or any extended term of this Agre ent. C. Review. During the comprehensive plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report eview process required by Chapter 163, Florida Sfiatutes, each Party will review the terms f this Agreement and consider amendments, as necessary. D.' Alternate Term. If the law does not allow this Agreement to have th term set forth above, then the term shall be twenty (20) years or the maximum term of years allowed by law, whichever is greater, and at least eighteen (18) months before the exp ration of the twenty (20) year term the Parties agree to commence negotiations for a other interlocal agreement to govern the matters addressed in this Agreement. 17. Amendment. Amendments may be proffered by either Party at any time. Pr posed amendments sha11 be in writing and must be approved by a ma jority of the boards o both Parties. 18. Subsequent Legislative Enactments. The Parties agree and covenant, having gi en and received valuable consideration for the promises and commitments made herein, it i their desire, intent and firm agreement to be bound by and observe he terms of this Agr ement wherever such terms are more stringent than those subsequently enacted by the Legis ature. I9. Miscellaneous. A. Entire Agreement. Except as otherwise set forth herein, this Agr ement embodies and constitutes the entire understanding of the Parties with respect to the s bject matters addressed herein, and all prior agreements, understandings, representatio s and statements, oral or written, are superseded by this Agreement. B. Governing Lnw and Venue. The laws of the State of Florida shall gove n this Agreement, and venue for any action to enforce the provisions of this Agreement sha I be in 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR&D Pnrk B-L.wpd Page 13 of 15 the Circuit Court of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, in and for St. Lucie County, Florida. C. Compliance with Chaster 171 Pnrt II Florida Statutes. The Parties agree that this Agreement also meets the requirements of Chapter 171, Pnrt II, Florida Statutes. 20. Severability. Any term or provision of this Agreement that is invalid or unenforceable in ay situation in any jurisdiction shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or the validity or enforceability of the offending term or provision in any other situation or in any other jurisdiction. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Fort Pierce, Florida, has caused this Agreement to be executed by its Chairman and affixed its official seal, attested by its Clerk pursuant to the Authorization of the Fort Pierce City Commission and St. Lucie County, Florida has caused this Agreement to be executed by its Chair and affixed its official seal, attested by its Clerk, pursuant to the authorization of the Board of County Commissioners on the day and year indicated below. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk Chair Dated : APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: County Attorney CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA ATTEST: BY: City Clerk Mayor 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCRdcD Pork B-L.wpd Page 14 of 15 Dated APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: City Attorney s:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\FP-TCR&D Pnrk B-L.wpd Page 15 of 15 Shinn Rd ~ E r r C - - - _ ~ V G .y - _ f ~ 44~ Q && l . t a. l < K O t C • a ~ • y _ I ~ _ k ! ~ r ~ / ! J ¦ / ~t O- / / , . King • W . l 1, - / - J.enki s ,M i ~ ~i~z.Rd ~ ~ Hartman,. ~ ~ , _ , C~ ~ - ~ r-~--, ` ~ % ~i ~ 5th St ~ _ '~~"j i ~j I~ o O O i o 9 N ~ ~ c o o 7A 3 O ~ s. ` o m ~ c ~ y m m 3 a 'd r~ Q 1 ~ ~ m~ 8 m D ~ @ ~ a w m m a m n n ~ N~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d m ~ o o` obi S Q A ~ ~ 3. II r? ~ ~ ~ m ~ m d ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ cv > D ~ lD