The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMarch 29, 2011 ( ' ~ ~~z _ ~ L »i~, ~ ~ . ~ x L~' 1':.~ [ ~s 'Y~.~ ~f~ ~ i # M AGENDA Tuesday, March 29, 2011 9:00 A.M. INFORMAL MEETING ~ 1. CALL TO ORDER - COMMISSIONER CRAFT, CHAIRMAN BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2. BROCKSMITH ROAD - DON WEST 3. TAYLOR DAIRY ROAD SECURITY FENCE - TODD COX 4. DISCUSSION OF SOLICITATION IN ROADS - KATHERINE BARBIERI 5. WATERWAY CHANNEL DREDGING - COMMISSIONER CRAFT 6. SOUTH BEACH CHARRETTE - COMMISSIONER CRAFT 7. COUNTYWIDE CRIME WATCH/FLEET WATCH PROGRAM - RON ROBERTS 8. UPDATE ON THE FAC LEGISLATIVE MEETING - COMMISSIONERS 9. 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 swom in. Any party to the proceedings will be granted the opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. Item No. 2 1r JOHNATHAN A. FERGUSON~ ATTORNEY AT LAW : *Board Certified City, County and Local Government Law 2366 S. Brocksmith Rd. fergusonlanduselaw.com Ofc. 772-465-0729 Fort Pierce, FL 34945 fergusonlanduselaw@gmail.com Ce11772-97]-7506 . January 31, 2011 Via E-Mail Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson ~ ' St. Lucie County , . 2300 Virginia Ave. . Fort Pierce, FL 34982 Re: Brocksmith Road Repairs and Paving Dear Commissioner Hutchinson: Thank you for hosting the neighborhood meeting on the 26~'. I wanted to follow up in an effort. to further explain what I perceive to be a growing dissatisfaction with the County's response to the Brocksmith Road issues. However, please urxderstand that I am speaking for myself and I do not represent any of my neighbors or wish to imply in any fashion that I speak for any of my neighbors. As was evident at the meeting there is a fair amount of £rustration with what appears to be inconsistent answers from County staff and a lack of ineaningful progress in addressing the coniiition of the road. Unfortunately the County's latest efforts to address tlxe rough road conditions have made it worse. The coquina base that was recently applied generates a xnuch finer powder than the previous surface which results in incredible dust clouds which leads to hazardous driving conditions and is probably causing health problems for people and animals who live closest to the xoad. It was good to hear staf£ commit to looking at some short term solutions in an effort to lessen the dust issue. However, the County also needs to get more serious about exploring long term solutions. Tn part, the frustration for those of us who live out here in the hinterlands is that we perceive that the Gounty is treating Brocksmith Road differently from similarly situated County roads. Granted, we knew what we were getting into when we xnoved west of town and County staff has always been very clear about fhe unlikelihood of the County paving Brocksmith Road (primarily because of right of way issues). However, while we have lived with our dirt road, we have watched for the last five years or so many other less traveled dirt roads being covered by Letter to Coriamissioner Hutchinson . January 31, 2011 ~ Page 2 of 3 . millings or chip seal with no cost to the residents fronting such roads. The following is a list of the more recognizable examples of such County efforts. . Carlton Road (from.the end of improved pavement to Glades Cut-Off Road) - 4.0 miles ~ of millings or chip seal. ~ • Angle Road (from just west of I-95 to its western end) - 2.9 miles of chip seal. • Trowbridge Road (from Orange Avenue to its southern end) - 2.4 miles of chip seal. In addition, Trowbridge Road only appears to have between 45 - 50 feet of right of way. ~ • N. FFA Road (from Orange Avenue to Angle road) - 1.7 miles of chip seal. • Jobnston Road (from north of Meadowwood to Indrzo Road) - 1.7 mil.es of millings or . chip seal. In addition, for most of this stretch it appears that Johnston Road only has 45 - 50 feet of right of way. • McCarty Road (from Midway Road to its southern end) -1.2 miles of millings Peacock Road (from Okeechobee Road fox a distance of one mile) - 1.0 mile of chip seal. ~ In addition, Peacock Road only appears to have 50 feet of right of way and the pavement ~ starts approxunately five feet from the canal top of bank with no guard raiL ~ • There was no apparent stormwater work done in conjnnction with the paving ~ improvements to the roads listed above. • Regarding the right of way issue; Header Canal Road is roughly 40 feet wide from the - Header Canal top of bank to the westexn edge of pavement. Granted there is sufficient space to the west of the pavement, but it is clearly not necessary to have a 70 foot ~ minimum right of way. . • Regarding the right of way issue; the TVC land development regulations allow for rural roads to be built within a 48 foot right of way. The above list of roads represents ovex 15 miles of Couniy roads that have been improved at no cost to the residents of those roads. Brocksmith Road is the only road west of the Turnpike that connects Okeechobee Road to Orange A.venue that is not paved. In addition, I would hazard a guess that Brocksmith Road has more ]ocal and thzough traffic than many of the above listed roads. During the meeting County staff made it clear that there was no Couniy znoney to improve Brocksznith Road. However, according to the latest Capital Improvennent Plan there is r' Letter to Commissioner Hutchinson ~ January 31, 2011 ~ Page 3 of 3 money available for road improvements; it is simply a~matter of reassigning priorities. Towards t1~at end, I would like to request that my neighbors and I be advised when County Commission ~ discussions begin regarding the Capital Improvennent Plan for fiscal year 2011-20I2. In my opinion the County should budget znoney to design and permit iznprovements to Brocksmith Road during 2011-2012 with construction funds budgeted for fiscal year 2012-2013. Again, thank you for your interest and assistance in our Brocksmith Road issues. I ~ believe T can speak for my neighbors in saying that we look forward to continuing to work with ~ County staff on finding reasonable short term and long term solutions. Sincerely, Johnathan A. Ferguson Cc: Commissioner Chris Craft . Commissioner Chris Dzadovsky Commissioner Paula Lewis . . Commissioner Todd Mowery ~ Faye Outlaw, County Administrator Don West, County Engineer ' ~=~t5.'?s^ s~;,xra ~v'S~.r.;'h.s"~4?~~ ~ ~rtY 7~*J• . 130ARD O ~;~i~~ ;yl; ~ga., t i~ <tr,.,, p ;~,~My;~; COUNTY ~ PUQLIC WORKS ~COMMISSlONERS s ~ ~ ~ DEPARTMENT February 10, 2011 Mr: Johnathan A. Ferguson . Attomey at Law 2366 S. Brocksmith Rd. . Fort Pierce, FL. 34945 Dear Mr. Ferguson: Thank you for your letter dated January 31, 2011, in reference to the Brocksmith Road neighbarhood meeting that was held on January 26, 2011. ~ The County is currently researching possible solutions to lessen the dust emissions from the coquina road surface. More informat~on on this topic will be provided to the residents in the near future. ' The long term solution to improving Brocksmith Road must involve a cooperative effort with the Landowners and County working together. The message that the County tried to convey at the recent neighborhood meeting was not well received, as was evidenced by the many questions raised during the meeting. Brocksmith Road is unique from other County roads that have previously been surfaced with asphalt millings or chip seal treatment, The other roadways had adequate drainage, sufficient right-of-way width, and structural criteria, to allow for applications of the improved surface treatment. Furthermore, the application of chip seal or millings did not create a hazardous condifion on the other roadways. ~ 7he problem that would be created with chip seal application on Brocksmith Road is a problem . of life safety. The County would create a more hazardous condition with application of the chip seal surface. Without guardrail and shoulder separation from the canal, the County could not meet any current design standard for highway safety. Brocksmith Road functions as a collector roadway, and is subject to through traffic between Okeechobee Road and Orange Avenue. Although the road is unimproved, the through traffic frips encourage higher speeds, that in turn creates a greater safety hazard. The recognition of the safety issue is what dicta#es the necessity for additional right-af-way. The County recognized this need many years ago, (2003) and mailed letters to all of the Landowners to solicit road right-of-way. To date there has not been a willingness to donate right=of-way that would allow for improvements to be made on Brocksmith Road. Our recent efforts to solicit right-of-way have also been unsuccessful. ~ CHRIS DZADOVSKY, Distrlct No. 1• TOD MOWERY, District No. 2• PAULA A. LEWIS, Disrrlct No. 3• FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, Disirict No. 4• CHRIS CRAFT, District No. 5 County Administraror - Foye W. Oudow, MPA 2300 Virginia Avenue • Ft. Pierce, FL 34982 Public Worlts: (772) 462-1485 • FAX (772) 462-2268 Engineering Division: (772) 462-1707 • Rood b Dridge Division: (772) 462-2511 So~Id Woste Division: (772) 462-1768 • Woter Quolity Division: (772) 462-2511 • Uriliries Division: (772} 462-1150 www.stlucieco.org In 2003, the Board of County Commissioners was unwilling to consider allocating design funds for Brocksmith Road, without first acquiring the necessary road right-of-way. Since we would be unable to construct the improved road design within the existing right-of-way corridor, it does not make sense to expend public funds on a design that cannot be built. ~ A Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU) assessment project would also not be feasible to - implement, without having the necessary road right-of-way. The County staff has spent considerable time and effort to perform an evaluation of the road . right-of-way needs for Brocksmith Road improvements. We would be gfad to share this information with you and discuss this project in more detail. I believe that if you study the survey ~information and come to the same level of understanding as the County staff, you will reach the same conclusion. Brocksmith Road cannot be improved without additional right-of-way. I look forward to meeting with you to discuss the design and surveying details. Sincerely, ~ W'~JD . ~ Donald B. West, P.E. Public Works Director cc: Board of County Commissioners Faye W. Outlaw, MPA, County Administrator Lee Ann Lowery, Assistant County Administrator ~onald Pauley, Road and Bridge Manager Ron Harris, County Surveyor Item No. 4 9, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 N ~ y O 3 ~ Z ~n ~'g N ~ a'a o p~ ~ 0`. U U ~ C d J OI ~ S a (p V ~ ~ a (n N . ' . ~ ~ = ~2 ~•O N> N ly d v ~ ~ U x1fi'~~~ I , l0 •V ~ 6 ~ O O ~ / ! , . C ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ a~ ~ aa°" - ~ ~ ~ i~ J na ~ a" o~ "w^ ' Sa, ~ ~ v~ ~ IS 1` w~ ~ev°°" U 3 ~ ~ ~ , , ~ . . ~~Qg~ . ' a~ 5 / i~ ~ ~ \ ~ ' ~i ' " , ~ L ~~aie,o ' I . `~.3 ~ - I il L ~ .._._.~,C ~a~Ys~e . ~ % `~n Q I i ~ ~ 'O e~sa o/y a~9~ j ~ ~~ien Ar~ /r - 1 i R'ni\ e~V.~ e 1O ~pi { . ~ - pkv+Y ~ ~ ~3_ a a IJJ---~~~''~ , _ - o ~ IrA=r ~ Sunsltine S1a1e ` ~ ~ ~ I - ' 41SZ N .~~~x - 1S 415Z - S ~yc~e ~ ~ _ I~N PM9 osaiy \V ~ ~ I ~ o ay m ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ _ m R S £ 1,~` ° N a > ~o~ee a ~ I ~ tt rm LL E 0 y ~ , ~ " a / . m rnNiY- ~e ~H~ " • 4 m a 0~~d ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ e~ r.. ~ O~ = w ~`Nd 9 Pnl9 a ~ ~ . PMB ai~nl IS 1~od r ~ a IeeH 1@~ s i~ua oW~ol~? mNaawyse~ o . e ~Pii ied o ey ~ ~ ~ ~ ` Pn18 euoneg a ~ _ . . ~ ` m . mH s wN ~ : H BuiN ,(myd ~a P^I9 6 eiwo~i~ej ~ ~ ~ I. ~ ouuol'M o' ~ v` ~ pa a~OUiWaS v ~ ~ , en --uosiaw3 c a` ..°o,, ' ~ .od'yq . ,a . . . / _ p uolsu4o~ 3 . 0 ~ ac0,- ~ . o J e~ G. ~ Pil ua~su4o~ - d . ~ s A~ pe`' . . ,tia,,' . ~A\a9e s • G , Pk~NY a ~ O PEi P~efia~qoN ~ 3 i- a ~ G w i i U ~ ~ _ o ~ _ ~,i, c U ~ ii m ~ 3` - peoa uuiyg ~ ~ ; II = - pil aui~ a6uea . m y' , " C U cil y ~ a I ue~ iepeaH ~ . y U U U~I I ~ ~~Pb 6ufPIOH Ig I ti Iil Ob Oaau$ ' pa u01ye~ I i _ . leue~ 6Z"~ . _ ~ I a U~ 3 U~ ' m N' ~ O ~eueDEZ-0 i I d ~ I o I ~O d i ~ 0~~y0e~~ ~ i i i I ~ I I._ . _ - . ' _ - _ _ . _ _ . J ~f~uno~ aaqou~aa~p Item No. 5 LY,^~ 1~x 5- ~=`.s' ~ N~ i ~o-rn~~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ Office of Management • and Budget/Grants * ~ _ _ Division ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Faye W. Outlaw, MPA, County Administrator THROUGH: Marie M. Gouin 1~ Management & Budge irector FROM: Camille S. Yates Grants Division Mana er DATE: March 23, 2011 SUBJECT: North Hutchinson Island Causeway Channel Shoaling Issue: This memo is to update you on a recent request by a citizen regarding shoaling at the North Hutchinson Island Causeway Channel. Mr. Lenny Schelin spoke to the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) at their February meeting. The FIND Board informed him that they had grant funding available for dredging that the County could apply for. On February 24'h, Mr. Schelin met with Commissioner Chris Craft seeking action on getting the subject channel dredged. Because grant funding was being discussed, Commissioner Craft asked me to attend the meeting along with Mosquito Control and Coastal Management Services Director Jim David and Coastal Engineer Richard Bouchard. Commissioner Craft informed Mr. Schelin that two additional county commissioners would need to embrace the project so that the Board could move forward on it. Channel Location: The channel runs from North Causeway Boat Ramp to Stan Blum Boat Ramp. (See attached map and photos.) Jurisdiction: According to Mr. Schelin, the channel was originally dredged in 1941 by the federal government. The County Parks and Recreation Department has maintained the channel markers. Jurisdiction of the channel is unclear. Public Works Director pon West assumes that the channel maintenance is within federal jurisdiction. Mr. Schelin has spoken to the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Board regarding channel maintenance. They do not have the obligation to maintain the channel, but could potentially provide grant funds to an agency or entity that does dredge it. Mr. Schelin obtained a map from the Fort Pierce Port Master Plan that shows the Port boundary. He claims that since the Plan's Port boundary includes the channel, that the County has jurisdiction. Mr. West says that the boundary was drawn, not to establish jurisdiction, but to help obtain funding. Grant Availability and Match: FIND will fund dredging for any channel that goes to a boat ramp in the coastal areas near the Intracoastal Waterway. Dredging the North Causeway Channel is eligible for FIND Phase 1 funding which consists of survey, design, engineering, and permitting. Phase 1 funding is reimbursable, but not until Phase 2 Construction starts. So the grantee must commit to construction before any money is reimbursed. Phase 2 must be started within three years of Phase 1 funding or the reimbursement is lost. FIND will fund 75% of the project if it goes to more than one public use facility or 50% if it only goes to one. The subject channel accommodates more than one facility. Proiect Costs: Mr. West believes that it would cost up to $100,000 to get a scope of work developed in order to come up with a project cost estimate. This scope of work cost would be incurred prior to submitting a grant request for Phase 1 funding and would not be reimbursable. Available Funds: Funds in the Port Capital budget are committed to Taylor Creek and Second Street projects. There are no other available County funds known at this time. • ~;~i . . . : a. - i , 4~ > ~ . ` # ~s ...i ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~4 ~s. ~ t~ Y `f`S{e ra @ . i ~ ~ ' : Q ~ ~ ~ ~ . . 'r'+~j# ~ l . ~ ~~,F y~ . ~ A~ . , ~ . 3 ~E ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~pQ ~ ~ . ~ p. ~r. ~p _ ~ ; . -a ~ t.. _ ~ ~ ca ~ ;v ~a ~ ~ ~ ; € ~ ~ . ~ _ ~ ~ - _ ~ ~ ' ' U ~ ~1 . - ~ ~ 4 . _ 1 ~i E ^ ~ j ~ ~ . - ~ k~ ~ 3 k 1 ~ ~ . ~ . r iw , ~ r f• c~ ~ ~ ~•1.~* u ~I I I I n= ; V/ ~ _ ~ `~jl ~ II Ilx ~ z ~ 3 ~;~a ~ { 0 ~ k:,! ) 3 t `~`.Y" V , 4 . . - ~~4 z~ d ~ _ ,1 ~ - ~f ; ~ ~ °y ~ ~~e . ~ : ~ :Pi li'I ~ ~ ~a-~„[,~ ~ C ~ ; ~I I ~'I i ~p. i, ~ s ~ lC ' ~ i N ~ ~ ~ ~ 9' . ~ ~ ~ ~.n= C ~ ~ 4 ~ N ~ ~ ~ C x ~ ~ ~ E ~ 7 2 t E E ~ w O ~ Z ~ . }~Y ~ ~~~?z 4. ~ . '..:'.1 ~4' . . . ~ S{r~~ i • 5~ ~ ~ . ~ { • ~ y • ~ ,t~~ . . _ <_a- _ CJ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ N V ~ ` w ~ - w a s ~ iiy 3 ~ ~ y ~ r F . O .a. : ~ ~ . . * Y - z d ~ r 1 . - : : ~,.i~•.~ ~ + ' LL ? c~ ` w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x; ~ ° , ' . ~ ' +i ~ .~yy~~ 4~ ~ I ~ ~~~.i: 1" 1 1 - . ~ 4'. ',~ir ~ S 6,.2. ° ~ , . ~ .d °f...Y ~ ~ ta , , ~ _ '4, -3 • ' ' ~Y. S a, " ~ f't . ~ ~ ~ Rt • _ eY ~ t . 4~~. ~ x . e~ `f ^ ` ~ ~ . ~ t ~ ~4~' 4 ~ ~ t 4 r~ S. ~ . ~ ~.4i~~ °i y ~ x yY S ~ik ~ C~~ ,....V~ ~ '~2'~ i ~ ~t~ ~ • ' ~ . M s s t ~ ~ . i~ f'I~ 3 ~ ~ ~jjFt ~..~F/ ' ~ S~ 1 ! ~ p ~ . ~ ; ~ • ~r_ ~ t J.~ \t'~ ' ~ ~ • r y ~~~7 ' ~ ~ jri. ~ a~ d` ~f Q ~ ~ . w. ~t ~ ~ 4- A o..~ ~ ~ ?~o~~ 4 r m ,s 1: . ~ . ~'~~N • ~ Q . ~ . ~ ~ m C ~ C : f ~ ~ ~ j t~. • m - . . =r ' ~`t Z` . ~ £ . ~ . ~ . ~,a~ f0 • ii o ~ ~ . m ~ N' h ~t;~. J ~ N~ Q ~ a • ~ ~~i ~ o , m ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ m - - ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ° ~ U - N ~ - - y , 'F'` t"-U d 2 p ~ ~ ~ N ~~s. ~ t . ~ - t 7. W ~ ~ 4 j ~ - t - S r Item No. 6 SuNR ~ ~ i ~ s~ s . ~ p ~ / ~ • Corcda c ; 7~'~ OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION TEL. (772) 460-2200 . CITY HALL, 100 NORTH U.S. 1 FAX (772) 467-9264 P.O. BOX 1480 www.cityoffortpierce.com FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34954-1480 a ~ dd ~ i~ ~ ' l February 24, 2011 L~ ~t7 L Cc~ ~,~'~1' Commissioner Chris Craft, Chairman L~ St. Lucie County Board of Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Deax Commissioner Craft: At the February 22, 2011, Fort Pierce City Commission meeting, we discussed the possibility of partnering with St. Lucie County and Mr. Ashton DePeyster for a South Beach Charrette. It is my understanding froxn the South Beach Association that St. Lucie County is supportive and will assist with $10,000 and that Mr. DePeyster is willing to contribute towards the cost of a study. The area to be studied is the western peninsula of South Hutchinson that will incorporate public properties along AlA. It is my intention to have this planning activity occur prior to May 2011 and I would appreciate a letter of support from the Board of County Commissioners. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me Sincerely rs, ~ Robert J. Benton, III Mayor ~t~'iq4 .:~t,n,~'y. ' . YW3-I~.~a•~re~~f ~~..~F.~ MAR 0 ~ 2a11 R G~a ~G~ + ~~~pyyc,~~P, G.d~E,s. xFi~#a~°.GLr!e~.? ~.;~`n,:{~4