HomeMy WebLinkAbout11151990 City of Sebastian
POST OFFICE BOX 780127 u SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978
TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 u FAX (407) 589-5570
AGENDA
SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL AND
PLANNING & ZONING COMMITTEE
SPECIAL MEETING
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1990 - ?:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA
ALL PROPOSED ORDINANCES AND INFORMATION ON ITEMS
BELOW MAY BE INSPECTED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK,
CITY HALL, 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA.
1. ROLL CALL
2. iNTRODUCTION
3. REVIEW PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICES BY SOLIN &
ASSOCIATES
4. PUBLIC INPUT
5. DIRECTION BY CITY COUNCIL REGARDING WATERFRONT STUDY
6. ADJOURN
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE CITY
COUNCIL WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING (OR
HEARING) WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND 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 HEARD. (286.0105 F.$.)
November 13, 1990
Mr. Bruce Cooper, Planning Director
City of Sebastian
1225 Main Street
Sebastian, FL 32958
Re: Estimated Work Program, Waterfront Redevelopment Study.
Dear Bruce:
Attached is our estimated work pr,,gram for the Sebastian Waterfront Redevelopment
Corridor Study.
The estimated fee represents the m:,ximum fee anticipated based on the specific scope of
services identified herein. If this bu, lget exceeds the City's desired financial eommitmenl,
SAI will make every attempt to negt, late an amended scope of services to accommodate the
City's fiscal constraints.
V~uFs~
L~ster L Solin, Jr., AICP
LLS/tp
enclosures
CTI'Y OF SEBASTIAN
WATERFRONT RF. DEVELOPMEHT CORRIDOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICF PROPOSAL
TASK#
TASK DESCRIFTION
SITE ANALYSIS el? W/vl.~RFRONT
REDEVE~P~ C~)RRIDOR (WRC)
L0L
°Visual Site Analysb
Site visit to record via sketches and photos the
. following existing condition,s: availability of
developable innd, jnvento~ y of existing uses
(ie.,retaJl, restaurants, the:~ters, arcades),
shoreline circulation (ke. :~ccess, circulation along
shoreline), linkages betwe'-n activity centers,
signage, lighting, roads aw,! traffic circulation,
pedestrinn footpaths and ,'irculation, vegetation,
perking, linkages to surro,mding area, views,
aesthetic quality, drninnge patterns, user profile,
activities.
!.02
Materials
Grephi~ summary of visu:,l assessment.
°WRC illustrntlve Base Maps
°Existing Land Use Map
°Circulation Map deptcth,g shoreline access and
eirculntion~ Ilnknges, traffic and pedestrinn
circulation
°Visual .A.,~sessment Map ~vhich portrays the
nature[ and mnn made elements of the site.
°Photos end Sketches of existinB site conditions
°Text
Narrative summary of visual assessment.
°Each map and drnwing ~vill be explained in
detail to reflect their co, tributlon to the
inventory and A~mlysis process.
TASK#
1.04
1.05
1.06
ZOO
2.01
2.02
:RIPTION P A T C M D
Analysis 4 40 40 0
ical information for the
oils, infrastructure, high
., winds, climate,
~sed infrnstructure
y to EMS, inlrncoastal
nl and visitor
,ealth of existing land
2 8 10 0
~dcal research and
2 16 4 2
hnical research and
~NT 4 4 0 4 *
2 2 0 2 *
n to determine the
:in the WRC. This
ing published
terviewing the following
local developers,
~e industry
~ experts, and others
: of the area.
'2 2 0 2 *
redeveloplnent
TASK DES(
"recludcnl Research and
Collect and analyze techvical
following items: zoning,
hazard areas, flood pin;.,
pr.petty ownership, prop.
improvemenls, accessibili~
navigational access, resid,'.l
demographics, economic
uses.
Drawtngs
Graphic summary of teclmical
analysis.
~ Narrative summary of
analysis.
ECONOMIC ASSAM1 ~NT
'Market Analysis
Conduct a market analysis
viability for potential useq
task will involve researchin
demographic data, and i
persons:
local and county officials,
realtors, appraisers, mnri.e
spokespersons, wnterfro.l
considered knowledgeable
°Fa. risibility Study
Monitor the fensibilily of
alternalives.
TASK#
3.00
3.01
3.02
4.00
4.01
:RIPTiON P A T C M D
20 36 ,36 3 *
8 24 24 0 *
;orkshop with Sebastian
s and special interest
rt concerning
,',r improving the WRC.
following: public notice,
(illustrations,
he 3-4 hour workshop,
orkshop results.
e a two. fold purpose.
,unlly of the site's
~ncilies to support
~ generate feedback
(the users) concerning
: they perceive as
-needs. SAI will
,ds (program elements)
t~ility to accommodate
, 12 12 12 ;3 *
rogram by merging the
~hop results. Case
rfront redevelopment
am.
CONSTRAINT8 6 20 20 7 *
.titles and Constraints 4 10 10 2 * *
ogrnm nnd site
· ntial opportunities hud
~nvimmental,
TASK DF~
PROGRAM MATRIX
"Programming Workshop
Conduct n progrnmmlng
planning officials, residew~
groups
to provide and solicit tnp~t
aspirations and concepts
This task will involve the
create workshop material
questionnaires), conduct
and write description of
"The workshop would hm'e
First, to educate the
physical and economt~ Cnl
redevelopment. Second, I,~
from comnmnity tesidems
specific not.ties and use~
nece~aU in meeting their
futlher evaluate these needs
and determine the sites
them.
~S~ Pr~ Genemtio.
Generate a prellminau
market anal~is and worksho
studies of successful
projects, establish a prog
OPPOR'~JNF~ AND
~Idenl~m~n of O1~
Merge the preliminnu p~
conditions lo ldenti~ ~
constraints; I.e. ph~ical,
managerial, financial.
TASK#
4.02
5.01
5.02
5.03
RIFf ION P A T C M D
2 10 10 ;5
timize oppottu,ities
lentificd.
BNT PLAN 6 58 58 3 *
4 40 140 0 *
epict how
its COlt produce a
(lepcnding on which
is (environmental
ency, optimum
Inn would produce n
le focus of the
: of program elements
: of elements to site
i 14 14 0
sentations for each
dan olIicials.
1 4 4 3
I accompany the plans
on was derived and the
isadvantnges of each.
TASK DESCRJ
'Program Refinement
Refine the program to
and minimize constraints
DE~ION REDEVELOPN1 f~N'i
ALTEI~4ATIVES
Design multiple plans to
opportunities and consttnblts
variety of design solutio,s
factor is made the empha,':is
concefns~ acces$~ cost ef[ic[ellc
density/intensity). Each I'
different result based on
concept.
"Shows relationship.,'
°Shows relatlonship~
condition
°P~esentntion
Generate user-friendly
plan.
Present the plans to Scba,~dan
A written explanation shall
describing how each soh
possible advantages and
TASK#
TASK DF.S(:RiFFiON
IMP~-MENTATION
6.01
' Recomfnend managemcs, strategies to
implement the approved WRC plan.
6.02
' Draft Land Developmen~ Regulations to
implement thc WRC plflf, which include
requirements for land use. density, setbacks, open
space, and overall urbnn ,lesign amenities
(landscaping, parking, lighting, paver~ and
architectural compatibility).
TOTAL HOURS
KEY:
PATC denote Solin and Assoc. staff:
P--Principal, $70/hr
A-'Associate, S$0/hr
T=Technician $35/hr
C-Clerical, $15/hr
M and D denote SAI subconsultnnts:
M=Economist, Edward Mltnick,
D=Waterfront Redevelopment Advisor
Burgtn Dossett, AIA
Asterisks denote the tasks in which
subconsultants would participate.
° Following is the estimated cost based on the stated scope of professional services and
committed staff participation (excludes direct reimbursable expenses).
° If this budget exceeds the City's de~qircd financial commitment, SAI will make every attempt
to negotiate an amended scope of services to accommodate the City's financial constraints.
TASK _ SAI ~IITNICK{ t} DORSSETT{r2~ .FEE{S)
1.00 Site Analysis of Waterfront $11,205
Redeve~nt Corridor
Visual Site Analysis $2,790
Presentation Materials $1,695
Text $ 640
Technical Research & Analysis $3,680
Pre.,,entation Drawings $ 890
Text $1,110
1.01
! .02
1.03
1.04
1.05
1.06
$400
2.00 Economic Assessment
2.01 Market Analysis $ 270 $2,000
2.02 Feasibility Study $ 270 $1,000
3.00 Program Matrix
3.01 Programming Workshop $2,600
3.02 SAI Program Generation $1,905
$6OO
$200
4.00
4.01
4.02
Opl~)rtunit~es and Constraints
Identification of Opportunities
and Constraints
Program Refinement
$1,160
$1,065
5OO
$100
5.00 Dmigu Redvlpt. Plan Altematiw
5.01 Design
5.02 Presentation
5.03 Text
$3,680
$1,260
$ 455
$20O
6.00 Implementation
6.01 Recommended Strategies
6.02 Land Development
Renu~lating Draft
Estimated Cost of Professional Fees
(Excluding Reimbursable Expenses)
$1,285 $ 5OO
$4,040
(1) Edward Mitnick, Real Estate Econ,,mist / Market Analyst
(2) Burgin Dossett, AIA, Waterfront I~ edevelopment Advisor
Estimated
Following is the estimated cost based on the stated scope of professional services and
committed staff participation (excludes direci reimbursable expenses).
if this budget exceeds the City's desired financial commitment, SA[ will make every attempt to
negotiate an amended scope of service.~ to accommodate the City's financial constraints.
1.01
1.02
1.03
1.04
1.05
1.06
TASK .... ~
Site Analysis of WatertiGht
Redevelopment Corridor
Visual Site Analysis $2,790
Presentation Materinis $1,695
Text $ 640
Technical Research & Analysis $3,680
Presentation Drawings $ 890
Text $ I, 110
MITNICK{I ) ~ I?EE_.~
$11,205
$4OO
2.OO
2.01
2.02
3.00
3.01
3.(12
F.~onomic Assessment
Market Analysis
Feasibility Study
Pro~q'nm Matrix
Programming Workshop
SAi Program Generation
270
27O
$2,60(7
$1,9o5
$2,000
$6OO
$200
$3,54o
4.011
4.01
4.02
Opportunities and Constraints
Identification of Opportunities $1,160
and Constraints
Program Refinement $1,065
$ 5OO $1OO
$2,S
5.00 Design ROdvlpL Plan Alternatives
5.01 Design $3,680
5,02 Presentation $1,260
5.03 Text '$ 455
$200
$5,59~
6.00 Implementation
6.01 Recommended Strategies
6.02 Land Development
~ Renula. tinlz Draft
Estimated Cost of Professional Fees
(Excluding Reimbursable Expenses)
$1,285 $ 5OO
$4,040
$28,795 $4,OOO
(I) Edward Mitnlck, Real Estate Economist / Market Analyst
(2) Burgin Dossett, AIA, Waterfiont Redevelopment Advisor
Burgin F_. Dossetl, A.I.A.
Waterfront Redevelopment Advisor"
Subconsallant to SA][
Burgin E. Dossett, PlA, has substantial experience with one of thc nation's leading
redevelopment firms: The Rouse Company. While with the Rouse Company, Mr. Dossett
worked on several festival marketplace redevelopment projects including:'
° Underground Atlanta, Atlanta
° Bayside Marketplace, Miami
° Riverwalk, New Orleans
° Owings Mills Town Center, Baltimore
Mr. Dossett was a key professional tbr The Rouse Company In the development of two of
the nations more successful and dynamic waterfront redevelopment projects: "Bayside" in
Miami and "Riverwalk" in New Orleans, the site of the 1984 World Fair.
With The Rouse Company, Burgin Dossett served as project manager and also performed
serveral management and design acitivities while planning and managing redevelopment
projects. His responsibilities embraced:
° project design:
° analysis of tenant needs;
° historic preservation;
° adaptive re-use;
° budgeting responsibilities; and
° and general project management activities.
Mr. Dossett currently works with the Disney Development Company in programming and
designing mixed use projects, including Disney's upcoming waterfront development,
"Boardwalk." He is also developing a design guideline package for "Boardwalk" which will
ensure that the designed improvements proposed for each merchant/tenant will be
consistent with the project's overall theme.
Education:
Tulane University, Bachelor of Architecture
Professional Status: Registered Architect, State of Georgia
National Council of Architectural Registration Board Certification
American Institute of Architects
National Trust for Historic Preservation
New Orleans Preservation Resource Center .'
SEBASTIAN WA'rEt~FRONT D.[STRiCT
Draft Work Program
1.0
PROJECT DEFINITION & SITE ANALYSIS
Formalize project (tutu,]y) object ives, development
goals, work program and services to be performed.
1.2
Establish study area, prepare scaled project base
m.~[:,.~, aerials, etc.
],.3
Est at) t.ish cc)mm~ni, eat.i.c,t~ nnd task respons
of City, Consultanl..s, P~d)lj.c~ Agencies and other
c, rganj, zations that; will be involved in both t;]~e
deveJopment and approva! process of this projecL.
1.4 Develop and forn,alize a Project Schedule.
1..5 Gat:her, organjz~ a~,~l review exisking a[,plical,l.e
daka for the study area fromm sources inc]t, ding
but not limited to: City, County, FDOT, DNR,
Army C of E, Marine Resources Council.
1.6 Analyze context of ~he property regarding
development and desic, lr~ imp[i_cations. The analysis
wnt~ld in~..lud~, but n,,t b~ lim~.~.~d to: ar-a growth
a.fffecting development, avai]abl, e services,
acc-ssibility (auk,), pedestrian, transit,
watercraft), environmental setting, adjacent area
lan,.t llse and development, relat, ed development
projects.
1.7
Develop study analysis derived £rnm both man-made
and natural constraint.:s and opportunities. Data
sources for th[~ analysis would .include, but not be
limited to: related CJ.t.y (and County) land
deveJopmenl~ and zoning regu].at fens, property
ownership/vacant land as,~essment, property
easements (utility, etc.), existing vehi¢:,llar
accessibil.i, ty and traffic volumes, ~opography,
flood/drainage areas, ve~letation, wet lands,
estuarine sell. in9, unique physical features,
historical features,
1.8 Prepare synthesis maF,(s) of t'he site analysis.
1.9 Review.
2.0
DEVELOPMENT PR()GRAM
2.1
Determine market feasi, bility of various types of
development in terms of land use types, densities
and building type quantities based upon anticipated
market demands.
2.2
2.3
Test and evaluate the development program against
the physical capacities of the site.
'rest and evaluate traffic volume and circulatory
implications to the site an,.] adjoining roadway
network. '
2.4
2.5
Determ'ine general, infrastructure requirements of
the selected development program.
Refine and prepare development program.
2.6 Review.
3.0
4.0
WORKING REPORT
Prepare a Working Report illustrating and describing the
results of work accomplished in Sections 1.0 and 2.0.
This Re~.,ort would document the Site Analysis and the
Development Program summarizing the conclusions and
recommendations from the efforts up to this time. The
presentation quality of thJ.q Report would not be
oriented toward use as a promol:.i~.,nal tool but more of a
working .~ummary; (a formalization ,~f the Si[.e Analy..qis
a~d the Development Program so that all partic[pant.q are
in agreement that it is the "Basis for Design.")
DESIGN
4.1 Prepare Land Use Plans.
4.1.1
Using the Working Paper as the "basis for
de.~ign" and any adjustments authorized by
the Cii. ty to th.o. program, prepare no fewer
than three alternative Land Use plans.
These plans will identify specific land
uses, vehicular and pedestrian c~rculation,
open space system.q, preliminary landscape
concepts, development phasing and
approximate size of land use areas.
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.1.2
4.1.3
Review
Select and refine a final Land Use plan.
All of the elements of the Land Use plan
will be refined, including (but not limited
to) parceliza~ion, vehicular access arid
circulation, roadway widths, pedestrian
circulation, easement requirements,
environmental pt. eservation zones, and a
suggested phasing strategy.
Review.
Prepare an Illustrative Master Plan for approval.
Tile Plan will include, but not be limited to the
delineation of the following: building
configuration and massing, parking (surface and/or
structured), pedestrian/non-vehicular circulation
systems, recreation and open space systems, general
landscape concept, infrastructure systems,
environmental/estuarine zones, and all related
statistics for the Plan.
Review.
Refine and finalize the Master Plan. This Plan
will provide the basis for a Sebastian Waterfront
District zoning, development framework and design
guidelines.
5.0
DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND DESIGN GUIDELINES
5.1 Using the Master Plan as its basis, establish a
Development Framework for the waterfront District.
The Framework will dell. ne the City's intentions for
development of the District and creates the policy
basis for Design Guidelines and subsequent design
controls.
The Framework creates the basis for a cohesive,
functional and economically productive environment
by defining basic Framework Elements including land
use and zoning, circu.[ation and transportation,
landscape and hardscape, and development subareas.
This clear de.finition of the physical structure and
overall land use concept o£ the District will have
will have a number of benefits including:
5.2
5.3
* Exciting developers and publi_c at large
as to ['he possibilities of the District.
* Assuring that all development will meet
the same high standard.
* Defining the essential public improvements
needed to stimulate and complement private
development.
* Assure the maintenance of the very uniqueness
of the City's Waterfront.
Review.
Using the Master Plan and Development Framework as
a basis, develop design guidelines for [.he
Waterfront District. The put.pose of these
Gu:kdelines will be to encourage, through private
and public investment, the development of the
District a.~ a cohesive, functional and aesthetic
whole. The Guidelines will contain standards
addressing the ma.)or components of the physical
development of the District.
The Guidelines do provide a coherent statement of
the C'%ty's intentions and an overall approach to
achieving rlua].ity ~rlv'JroI,inents. Th-.. Gui, deIines
contain specific requirements which provide a
baseline for excellen~ design.
The Guidelines are not and cannot be all-inclusive.
Mere adherence to them will not in itself guarantee
or be sufficient to produce an excellent building
and a quality environment. No set of guidelines
can cover all circumstances. Rather, it is the use
and interpretation of these standards by the City
arid qualified creative de.~ign professionals, fully
supported by committed developers and owners, which
produces the intended results.
5.4 Review.
6.0
ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT
6.1 Using the Master Plan Guidelines and accompanying
Framework Plan develop the documentation required
6.2
for ar~ overlay to the (?.~.ty I,and Development Code
for the Waterfront: DJ. strict. The Over[ay Zoning
would "dovetail" with existing related codes.
Elements shoul,] include, but not be limited to: use
and development intensity of land, parking and
loading requirements, pedestrian access,
performance standards for air, noise and water
quality, landscaping, screening and permitted and
special uses, lot size, coverage and yard
requirements.
Establish the proce.-.~ by which the development
review and approval takes place within the existing
Land. Development Code framework. [nclusive in this
process would be the ,:.c, ord].nation with any
architectural review process.
6.3 Review.
7.0 FINAL PLAN REPORT
8.0 MARKET BROCHURE
(In conjunctio~l with Chamber Commerce and City)
PLANNING AND ZONING MEMBERS LIST
KRULIKOWSKI,STANLEY - CHAIRMAN 5-90
~82 AZINE TERRACE
SEBASTiAN,FL 52958 HOME; 589-0127 WORK~ 589-0510
WADSWORTH,JAMES T. - VICE-CHAIRMAN 6-91
P.O. BOX 2295
SEBASTIAN,FL 52978 HOME; 589-7547 WORK; 251-11~8 TASHA
MAHONEY,WILLIAM
P.O. BOX 857
207 SW DELAWARE
SEBASTIAN, FL 52978
7-92
HOME; 589-8524 WORK; 567-9919
FULLERTON,ROBERT
550 KING STREET
SEBASTIAN,FL 32958
HOME; 589-5375
WORK;
z~-90
O'CONNOR,MAYME D.
1068 MAIN STREET
SEBASTIAN,FL 52958
HOME; 589-2009
12-92
KILKELLY,SHIRLEY
950 FRANCISCAN AVENUE
SEBASTIAN,FL 52958 HOME; 589-5062
11-90
d. W. THOMPSON
125 MAiN STREET
SEBASTIAN, FL 52958
HOME~ 589-0576
2-93
EARL W. SHROYER - ALTERNATE
416 COLUMBUS STREET
SEBASTIAN, FL 52958 ·
HOME: 589-5560
11-92
WORK: 589-b118
JOHN LINDSAY - ALTERNATE
553 CROSS CREEK CIRCLE
SAN SEBASTIAN SPRINGS
SEBASTIAN, FL 52958
2-95
HOME: 589-4224 WORK; 589-696~