Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-09-2007TO: Members of the Sebastian City Council FROM: Al Minner, City Manager RE: MARCH CURRENT TOPIC UPDATES DATE: Monday, April 9, 2007 INDIAN RIVER DEVELOPMENT PROHIBITION Since the construction of the Jerry Sullivan house (located at 1022 Indian River Drive) began in earnest, my office has received a few more comments about development east of Indian River Drive. As we all know, this has been a significant issue for some time. This initiative was started when many members of Council expressed concerns over building heights and development along the riverfront. In response to this directive, under his matters, the City Attorney sought direction from Council at the December 2006 Regular Meeting. At that time, a consensus was formulated to draft an ordinance that would create new building policies east of Indian River Drive. In moving forward, the City Attorney outlined a two-step ordinance that would clearly delineate residential building height restrictions and prohibit filling the river for development purposes. In detail, building height regulations need to be modified because the current code language guiding riverfront development is pliable. This occurs because (1) the crown of Indian River Drive is sometimes higher than the lot's mean seal level elevation; or (2) the mean high water mark provides higher elevations, which allow the building to start at a higher point; and/or (3) the base flood elevation is higher, thereby allowing the structure to rise above 25. The second portion of the draft ordinance, would supplement the height restriction by preventing lots that have riparian rights to be filled. As the City Attorney wrote, regulatory agencies have recently allowed shoreline filling and lots that would seem un-buildable are potentially buildable if owners can prove their riparian rights. Combined together, these two actions would (1) more clearly limit the building height to 25' and, (2) restrict the ability of development on waterfront lots that would ordinarily be unsuitable for construction unless filled. Hence, this action would slow down construction and protect Indian River Drive from over development, thereby preserving Sebastian's fishing village history and the value/view of the riverfront for all citizens. After receiving Council direction, a concept of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Board. In fact, a public hearing was scheduled for the January 18, 2007, Regular Planning and Zoning meeting. However, based on comments from Planning and Zoning members the proposed ordinance was removed from the P/Z agenda. Since all this transpired, a number of issues have engulfed City Hall that have taken precedent over this very important issue. Nonetheless, this issue is very important and should not be forgotten or abandoned as there was clear direction from Council to move forward. Therefore, this correspondence is written to provide a brief update on this issue. The City Attorney and I have discussed this matter in detail, as well as reviewed minutes and the DVD of December 13, 2006 meeting, with the City Clerk. As a result, we are continuing to move forward with the proposed ordinance. The City Attorney will be finishing a draft ordinance of the proposal in accordance with their previous concerns and submitting it to the Planning and Zoning Commission. This action will provide the P/Z with the actual proposed text amendments for the Land Development Regulations (LDR). Please understand that a recommendation from the P/Z is required for text amendments to the LDR. The recommendation does not have to be favorable, however, a recommendation is required. Staff is anticipating that the proposal will meet significant opposition at the P/Z level. Additionally, P/Z may require additional data and analysis that the current Growth Management Department will not be able to process timely. However, if this initiative is to move forward, some additional direction from Council may be required. For example, Council may want to consider (1) granting transfer of development rights to property on the west side of Indian River Drive; or (2) provide financial relief to affected property owners. Nonetheless, as previously directed, staff will move forward on this proposal and will report to Council on this matter with more information as it becomes available. POWERLINE ROAD SOUTH (BARBER STREET - COUNTY 510) On Wednesday, March 28t", a meeting was conducted between Fischer Construction, City staff and Jim Davis (Indian River County Engineer) concerning the construction of Powerline Road. For several months now, there has been confusion as to who is required to pave the road and when it is to be paved. The City and Fischer made two annexation agreements which committed Fischer and Indian River County to asphalt paving Powerline Road. In short, the agreements did not specify how the road was to be constructed (i.e., construction standards such as curb and gutter, road width, etc.) it just stipulated that the road would be completed. Further, Fischer viewed that Powerline Road would be completed in two separate phases in compliance with two separate annexation agreements. First, Fischer planned to construct a paved, twenty-two foot wide road from Barber Street south approximately 1,000 feet (basically from Barber Street to subdivision entrance). The northern most 100 feet of this road would be constructed with curb and gutter to help collect/direct stormwater from Barber Street. In the second phase, Fischer planned to complete asphalt paving of Powerline Road. This requirement is provided in the second annexation agreement. It specifically stated that Fisher would pave Powerline Road from about the entrance of the subdivision south to County Road 510. In addition, the annexation agreement also states that Indian River County will help Fischer acquire road right-of-way and assist in road construction costs. As Fischer and the County moved forward with construction of the road, Fischer allocated enough funds to pay for "Phase 1" (the northern most 1,000 feet of road). For Phase 2 (from the subdivision entrance south to 510), Fischer allocated $200,000 and Indian River allocated $200,000 and committed to acquire all required property for right-of-way acquisition. This provided a road construction budget for Phase 2 of $400,000. Because the County acquired the necessary ROW and because Fischer was moving to pave the first phase, Fischer wanted to pave the second phase of Powerline Road in unison. This is where the confusion and rumors started. Based on specific regulations at the time, Indian River County considered requiring Fisher to provide curb/gutter and underground stormwater infrastructure for the entire length of Powerline Road Phase 2 construction. This requirement would have increased road construction costs from an estimated $400,000 to $1.2 million. At this stage, Fischer stated their plan was to construct a 22-foot wide road with a swale/retention only, while the County pointed to regulation that required a curb and gutter road. With each party not willing to commit more funds to the project, the rumors of who was doing what started, each side balked and the project stalled. At the March 28t' meeting, Jim Davis clarified the County's position and stated that based on new regulation, they would not require Powerline Road to be constructed with curb and gutter. (Remember too, that the City has no way to enforce that curb and gutter be installed.) Since the County was backing off the curb and gutter position, Fischer/County can now return to the original budget plan of building a 22 foot wide asphalt street with a swale/retention ditches. This plan and design is being confirmed with SJRWMD and a meeting was held with SJRWMD on April a and the agency confirmed that because Powerine Road is currently dirt, Fischer/County will be permitted to pave it within specific parameters. As such, the County/Fischer will be proceeding with a design and permitting request on Phase 2. The schedule for improvement is that the first section (Barber — Subdivision entrance) should be paved by the end of June. Fischer is also moving to pave the second portion of the road (entrance —510) in unison. If SJRWMD permitting does not take too long, then this portion of the ij 0: owl 40 1 issom F: Qfvw To,y!: to 111110 :wnr' vi;lq tf; Ifni 01 Q Am :w P41 fG tool 000001 ry"TO.- Aj "m so! A z•is It A SO UWA NOW v;m WCO w.6wv-) wvry Saw Alm: • )c-':: mil axzn wy it: :100mr..' .ef U� fpQ 0 stool •1 4 :j,sy it? si 00 yr QQ CA( Own., yen w 1 "m wv.! viol: SON, 0 inzwok; Sol Whom- 0 s-v owls 1• oq &I wynk :0415, fKA105 �Aj M !Sol road should be finished by the end of June 2007 as well. Conversely, if there is a hold-up in permitting, this portion should be paved shortly after June 2007. The second issue that is associated with this project is private ingress/egress onto Powedine Road from the back yard of residents that live on Filbert Street (which is parallel and east of Power Line Road). This is completely a City issue and needs to be resolved prior to paving the road. The overall City position is that residents should not have backyard entry onto Powerline Road because it is an arterial thoroughfare and that scenario would create a safety situation. However, in years past, the City has issued three or four fence permits that allowed private gated access to Powerline Road. The City Attorney has advised that there may be some issues with now restricting their access. To resolve this issue, City staff will be making visual inspections to identify whether the effected private residents have any other access out of their backyards. If the case proves that no other access exists, the City may have to take the position that access to Powerline is granted for specific residents. However, no other party will be allowed access to Powedine Road. About four residents may be entitled to the grandfather rights. Based on Fischer's construction time line, the City has until the end of April to make a determination on this issue. In summary, other than the secondary driveway access, and assuming there is no regulatory reason for adding curb and gutter, both Fisher and the County are executing the annexation agreements in the manner in which they were approved and road paving should be complete by June. 1793 SHAKESPEARE At the March 2e Council Meeting, Councilmember Al Paternoster introduced a concern about vacant lot clearing. The lot that was apparently cleared was immediately to the north of 1793 Shakespeare. Ms. Nancy Galupo lives at this address and had made a call to me with concerns that overgrowth from neighboring vacant lots was damaging her property. In answering this citizen compliant, I personally viewed the situation and found that two overgrown vacant lots were causing damage to Ms. Galupo's fence and out -building. At that time, I authorized Antoine Vanmeier to handle the matter as a nuisance abatement process, because (1) there was an existence of a public hazard as overgrown lots were causing property damage; and, (2) the City had been in the process of creating an overgrown vacant lot maintenance program. Mr. Vanmeier was instructed to contact the property owner's of the vacant lots and have them cleared back 5 feet. After Mr. Paternoster displayed the pictures at the Council meeting, it was clear that the hired contractor removed more than five feet of brush. In initially investigating this situation, I was concerned that the contractor violated (1) land clearing ordinances, (2) operated without a permit; and, (3) was an unlicensed contractor. However, it turns out the company was licensed and under section 54-3-14.4 of the LDR, removal of nuisance vegetation is permitted. On April 5t', I returned to the lot and it is evident that only nuisance vegetation was removed. No trees were cut down, other than two exotic pepper trees. No grubbing occurred, due to the fact that the soil and vegetation roots were not disturbed. The company is licensed in Brevard County. And because the City had noticed the lot as a public hazard, the intent of Section 54-3-14.4 was followed. Further, after Councilmember Paternoster brought up the situation, I had direct conversation with Mr. Vanmeier and he did attempt to follow the instructions I provided. However, it seems the contractor got a little overzealous, because when they went to grind the removed pepper trees, they fell perpendicular to Ms. Galupo's fence. Hence, the clearing company ground the trees where they laid, taking out more that five feet of nuisance vegetation. On the north side of Ms. Galupo's property, approximately 20 feet was cleared instead of 5 feet. As a result, the company and the lot owner were sent letters that advised that vacant lot clearing should only entail a five foot perimeter next to developed property. Going forward, with the vacant lot -clearing ordinance, we have learned from this situation that it should be a permitted activity. This process will help prevent excessive clearing, by allowing staff to contact contractors and monitor the situation. For example, via the permitting process, "clearing" lines can be placed on affected lots, to ensure that over clearing does not happen in the future. However, on the positive side, I have received notice from the code enforcement department that Ms. Galupo called to compliment Antoine Vanmeier for handling the matter and providing her relief from the overgrown lots. In the end, I think there are positive signs that this initiative can work in harmony with the environment and residents. EASY STREET Since the City was not able to acquire CDBG funds to redevelop East Street, over the past several months, the Engineering Department, with the assistance of the Intems and Public Works, has performed background research regarding the improvement of Easy Street. While the initial hope was to completely rebuild the road (with curb/gutter and underground stormwater), the project can be reduced while still resulting in a quality product. Based on analysis by the Engineering Department, staff is considering a proposal that would (1) widen Easy Street to 22 feet (two standard 11 feet driving lanes); (2) increase the road elevation to improve drainage; and, (3) add striping, crosswalks, signage. The widening will also require the redesign of the swale system. Once swales are modified, their will also be a need to reconstruct sidewalks and driveway entrances (the project would require the reconstruction of 68 driveways/culverts). To complete the project, the costs is still unknown, but a range of $675,000 to $805,000 based on current continuing services contracts has been developed. The difference in estimates is derived from completing the project with internal forces vs. contracted forces, specifically for swale improvement. Item Est Unit Cast Est Number Estimated ($I Unit) of Units Cost Roadway (incl. engineering & survey) • Recycled / Expanded / Raised Base $1.30 / SF 1 mile @ 22 ft. wide $150,000 = approx. 116000 SF • Asphalt Paving (> 1-1/2") $1.30 / SF = approx. 13000 SY $150,000 • Traffic and Crosswalk Markings $35,000 all -in 1 lot, alMn $35,000 Subtotal, Roadway Prelim. Est $ 335,000 Concrete Wort( • Driveway Replacements (size varies) $3000 each 68 each $ 204,000 • Sidewalks (5' wide, 4° thick) $3.25 / SF 26,400 SF $ 86,000 Subtotal, Concrete Work Prelim. Est $ 290,000 Stormwater Swale Work $18 / LF 10,000 LF $ 180,000 TOTAL PREUNINARY ESTINATE is 806,0001 At the present time, staff believes that much of the road design, road construction, sidewalks and driveway replacements can be completed with internal professional services as well as existing continuing service contracts. Some outside engineering services will be required for SJRWMD permitting, but should not be costly. Concerning construction, the estimated unit costs are from current continuing service contracts (i.e. Regan Masonry - Concrete and Elmo Greer — Asphalt). The delay in moving forward with this plan, however, is making a determination on whether internal or contract forces should be used for swale improvements. If contract forces are used, the cost increase for the project will be in the $150,000 range. If City forces are used than costs can be reduced into budget parameters that become affordable with making some budgetary reallocations. The Public Works and Engineering Departments will be meeting with me shortly to make this determination. In short, the decision is based on allowing City crews to be reassigned vs. the cost to contract -out the work. No matter the recommendation on this project, it is, reasonable to expect that construction could start sometime in September 2007. The project is expected to take six months for completion. Once our staff report is complete, I plan to bring you details and a funding plan. Right now approximately $712,000 can be allocated for this project by reallocating the $112,000 FY 07 asphalt budget and FY 07 $400,000 Barber Street Realignment Project to the $200,000 already budgeted for Easy Street. Hence you can see the financial dilemma. The project is easily fundable by using internal forces, but an additional $105,000 must be allocated to complete the project with contracted forces. I -I Zlq ktA:L1I k q-a 41Lem, 11161 I � :�•�1��_I E&D Construction continues to move along on the project. To date, all of the demolition is complete and major portions of interior improvements are being completed. For example, the company is working to remove and refurbish the wood finish on the main staircases and the new ceiling has been framed in on the first floor. The exterior improvements are now starting. In this regard, E&D has begun foundation/block wall construction for the elevator shaft and concrete pads have been poured to support the new exterior staircase on the northeast side of the building. Finally, some interior painting has taken place in the old City Manager/Attomey suit and colors for the remaining painting and carpet have been selected. A few minor additions such as the roof repair, electric/lighting modifications and undiscovered underground utility conflicts (associated with the elevator foundation) have caused some minor setbacks. As a result, we have authorized an extension of 35 days to be provided bringing the new completion date to May 2e. However, this date should not affect the lease arrangements with Indian River Community College and the project remains within the parameters of the total project fund allocation. INDIAN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLEGE Speaking of the Old City Hall project, on Wednesday April 4th, Debbie Krueger, Richer Stringer and I met with David Sullivan of IRCC. We reviewed the draft lease agreement. IRCC is eager to start classes in Sebastian; however, they had concerns with the draft lease proposal. Their issue concerns committing to a full lease agreement and total space on the second floor, when they are unsure if enrollment numbers will support such a financial outlay. After making changing the lease agreement to a use agreement and reducing rental costs from $50 to $35 per class per occurrence, IRCC seemed more amiable to the terms. A second meeting with Dave Sullivan on Monday, April 9th also revealed that IRCC (1) wanted to delay scheduling computer class because such a large financial obligation was required for computer equipment when enrollment numbers are unknown (IRCC will conduct computer class at Sebastian Elementary for Fall 2007); (2) confirmed the City would assume janitorial duties; (3) needed to withdraw providing free training class for City employees; (4) would provide furniture for all four class rooms; and, (5) wanted to defer lease payment until after each semester (Fall, Spring, Summer). We are hopeful that an agreement can be drafted that leaves both the City and IRCC financially whole. We are planning to have a draft use agreement ready for your review in May or June, which will be in plenty of time for IRCC to start a Fall 2007 class offering. wr w :10 i,*...*,::..---.'-.�.--, n= Akio all OVAP �J W Op"m SOON! j m4n; W Ow ;Hj too v m I A, *n Q V. P, VANa 30; 10•!wv so 06 0: a ;113 On 111, UTI: oil Of to! Ila 1ho Q 0 boy w 5:0Y01 SO9G0,0modAC1 0 V 1. wriol., Yoh! 1(h to! ho'. t , 'bii loan: A;y visymmse 1 0; X, yw;�c Ow Own wF OVIKOZAT"m qf;*,.'�"-,..,:i:"...;.-,a-)Oi..,..- 16 >1 pay; so; w V".�;- nyi in; Otte[ DO S. �J-1� wr . SKY 11 W heywARO? SO 00 T; ri! an s, .'r-, j nil 1 it 1: Or TIS ow; 0 v 0 01 01001 aft 11 lon d[Saw . !a :0 110 5�01 Spy, 71; "m 1 14: a -; "N 'r its! Q.'; 0-5 W OF TO v-- Q! 15 wo Wits so; Mon; wISO sW m%:% --d wo r0wv . avu.) INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE STATION #9 On Thursday, March 22, 2007, 1 submitted for your review a proposal submitted to me by Indian River County officials to place Fire Station #9 here at the City Hall complex. This proposal would locate a fire station in the same area that the City has considered construction of a community center. County Administrator Joe Baird has requested a place on the April 11t' agenda to formally introduce the concept to Council. DOG PARK On Saturday, April 1 e, the Recreation Committee has planed a field trip to the Sanford Dog Park. The purpose of the visit is to see first hand the park and make a recommendation to Council on the construction of a Dog Park here in Sebastian. The trip should provide some ideas on what type of amenities should be included in the park. Since the Committee has focused on this topic for some time, they have already discussed a few preliminary recommendations that include (1) making the park surface grass; and, (2) the location Keen Terrace. After the trip, the Committee plans to vote on a formal recommendation at their April 23`d meeting. Subsequently, Committee Chairman Don Wright plans to present a formal recommendation to the Council at your May a Regular Meeting. SIDEWALK UPDATE Jack Regan and the City continue to proceed on the Sidewalk Project. To date, Periwinkle Drive is nearly complete and Regan Masonry will be moving to start sidewalk construction along Bevan Drive. To process work flow more quickly, Regan Masonry removes sod and then forms/pours the sidewalk. In an effort not to interfere with this process, sod is laid once additional sidewalks are built away from the area that requires sod. We have not received too many complaints on this process, but if you do receive complaints about lack of sodding, the issue probably rests in that sod work is followed up several days after the completion of the sidewalk. '/. ROUND UPDATE Sunshine Land Design is making very good progress on the % round project. The company seems to be installing the pipe quickly and accurately. To date they have completed instillation on the following streets; Whitemore, Galilean, Quaker, Coral Reef, Fatima, and Seahouse. That is approximately 40% of the total project. We remain on budget, which was $800,000. TWIN DITCH UPDATE MEI has re -started the Twin Ditch project. They have submitted their construction/dewatering plan and those have been reviewed and permitted bX SJRWMD. MEI is targeting the end of May for completion of major excavation work. On April 9 , SJRWMD met and inspected the construction site. SJRWMD staff was happy with the progress and steps taken fir turbidity control. Staff and CDM are hopeful that the project will move forward without incident. CODE ENFORCEMENT UPDATE Please find attached the Code Enforcement Department report for the month of February.