Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-24-2021 CRA AgendaIndividuals are subject to screening prior to entering any City building and entry may be denied if any indicator of illness or prior COVID exposure is identified. All persons entering City Council Chambers where social distancing is not possible, shall wear face coverings. R-20-32 Sec. 1(1) ma SIERAST HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING & COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2021 — 6:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA ALL AGENDA ITEMS MAYBE INSPECTED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK OR ON THE CITY'S WE13SITE 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. INVOCATION - Cantor Sara Kheel, Temple Beth Shalom 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Council Member Chris Nunn 4. ROLL CALL S. AGENDA MODIFtPATIOyS Modifications lfoor a drons require a unanimous vote of City Council 6. PROCLAMATIONS. AWARDS. BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENTS Presentations otprDdamations, certificates and awards, and brieflimely announcements by Council and Staf. No public input or actions under this heading. Brief Announcements: Saturday, February 27. 2021- Sebastian River Art Club at Riverview Park - 10am — 4pm Saturday, March 6, 2021— Craft Club of Sebastian at Riverview Park - 1 Dam -- 3pm 7. PUBLIC INPUT The heading on Regular Meeting agendas "Public Input" provides an opportunity for individuals to bang NEW INFORMATION OR REQUESTS TO CITY COUNCIL NOT OTHERWISE ON THE PREPARED AGENDA. Individuals are asked to attempt to resolve matters with staff prior to meetings. Individuals are asked to provide copies of materials for Council ono week prior to the meeting if they intend to refer to specific material. City Council will not debate an issue during Public Input but may by consensus direct a Charter Olficar in regard to the item if necessary orplace a requested item on a future agenda. 8. CONSENT AGENDA All items on the consent agenda are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. Therewill be no separate discussion of consent agenda items unless a member of City Council so requests., in which event, the item will be removed and acted upon separately. If a member of the public wishes to provide input on a consent agenda item, he/she should request a Council Member to remove the item for discussion prior to staff of the meeting orby raising hiaherhand to be recognized. pgs 5-14 A. Approve the Removal, Purchase, and Installation of Six "Welcome to Sebastian" Gateway Signs from West Central Signs, Inc. — SignStar in the Amount of $44,000 (Transmittal, Schedule, Specs) 1 of 227 pgs 15-16 B. Approve the Purchase of Golf Cart Batteries for the Sebastian Municipal Golf Course from Royal Battery in the Amount of $17,466.61 (Transmittal, Quote) pgs 17-18 C Approve Road Closure for the Leisure Services Department Easter Egg Hunt on March 26, 2021 (Transmittal, Map) 9. COMMITJE REPOR�$ &APPOINTMENTS City commit os reports andd ouncil Member regional committee reports. No public input or action except for City committee member nominations and appointments under this heading. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS Procedures for lquislative oublic hearings: A Mayor opens hearing t- Attorney reads ordinance title r Staff presentation i Mayor closes hearing i Council deliberation and action pgs 19-49 A. Second Reading & Public Hearing of Ordinance No. 0-21-02 — Adjusting the Police Pension Plan for Changes to IRS Required Minimum Distribution Rules and Provide that the Police Pension Board Shall Adopt Necessary and Appropriate Amendments to Maintain the Police Pension Plan as an IRS Qualified Public Pension Plan (Transmittal, 0-21-02, Letter, IRS Guide, IRS Bulletin) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 58, ARTICLE III, POLICE OFFICERS' RETIREMENT PLAN, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AMENDING SECTION 58-51, BENEFIT AMOUNTS AND ELIGIBILITY; SECTION 58-52, PRE -RETIREMENT DEATH; SECTION 58-55, OP I IONAL FORMS OF BENEFITS; SECTION 58-61, MINIMUM DISTRIBUTION OF BENEFfIS, SECTION 58- 62, MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH, TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH CONFLICT: PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER S ERRORS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS pgs 50-67 A. Presentation by Scott Loiacano, Senior Project Manager, Wright Construction Group, Inc. — Design Build Project of the City of Sebastian Public Works Complex at the Sebastian Municipal Airport Approve Design Build Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) Work Services Agreement with Wright Construction Group, Inc., Awarded Vendor of RFQ #18- 09 Design Build of City Garage and Public Facilities Storage Building Compound at the Sebastian Municipal Airport in the Amount of $9,161,495 (Transmittal, - Proposal, Agreement, Plans, Schedule) 12. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND CONVENE THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING pgs 68,70 A. Approval of Minutes — June 24. 2020 CRA Meeting pgs 71a5 B. Approval of Minutes — January 27, 2021 CRA Meeting 2 of 227 pgs 76A24 C. Authorize the Preparation of a Request for Proposal to Solicit the Future Development of the Harbor Lights Motel Property — 1215 Indian River Drive (Transmittal, RFP Outline, Environmental Screening, Zoning Regulations, Aerial, Survey, Sample Renderings, Sebring's RFP) 100 13. ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AND RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 14. NEW BUSINESS pgs 125-188 A. Review of the City of Sebastian's Local State of Emergency Declaration (Transmittal, Governor DeSantls' Executive Orders 20-52, 20-91, 20-92, 20-114, 20-166, 20-192, 20-213, 20-244, 20-276, 20-297, and 20-316, Sebastian's Amended Local State of Emergency Declaration) pgs 189-223 B. Approve the 3' Amendment to Waste Management's Franchise Agreement for Solid Waste Collection (Transmittal, pgs224-227 C. Consider Supervisor Swan's Request to Hold 2022 Early Voting in Council Chambers — Consider Rescheduling Affected Council Meetings (Transmittal, Letter, 2022 Meeting Dates, Agreement) 15. CITY ATTORNEY MATTERS 16. CITY MANAGER MATTERS 17. CITY CLERK MATTERS 18. CITY COUNCIL MATTERS A. Council Member Jones B. Council Member MCParlIan C. Council Member Nunn D. Mayor Dodd E. Vice Mayor Hill 19. ADJOU RN (All meetings shall adjourn at 9:30Pro unless extended for up to one hall hour by a majority vote of City Counaq NO STENOGRAPHIC RECORD BY A CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER WILL BE MADE OF THE FOREGOING MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BOARD OR AGENCY WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING OR HEARING WILL 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. (F.S.286.0105) IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) OF 1990, ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY'S SEATING ADA COORDINATOR AT 388-8226—ADA@CITYOFSEBASTIAN.ORG AT LEAST 48 HOURS INADVANCE OF THIS MEETING. 3 of 227 Lffy Lf SEB - IAN HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND C®MMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1225 Main Street, Sebastian, FL 32958 The attached June 24, 2020 Community Redevelopment Agency minutes were approved at the February 24, 2021 Community Redevelopment Agency meeting. Chairman Ed Dodd ATTEST: Jeanette Williams, City Clerk Chairman Dodd called for a break at 7:40 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:46 p.m. All members were present. The motion was to disapprove the request to define the accessory structure as the principal structure on the lot; a yes is to deny the application. Roll call: Vice Chairman Mauti - nay Mr. Gilliams - nay Mr. Hill - aye Ms. Parris - nay Chairman Dodd - aye Motion failed. 3-2. MOTION by Mr. Gilliams and SECOND by Ms. Parris to approve the variance for Joseph and Julie Scozzard in regards to lot 26, block 381, Sebastian Highlands Unit 11. Roll call: Mr. Gilliams - aye Mr. Hill - nay Ms. Parris - aye Chairman Dodd - nay Vice Chairman Mauti - nay Motion failed. 3-2. Mr. Gilliams started to make a motion to include a condition that if the Scozzaries would sell the property, they would have to sell the lot to someone who lives within 500 feet of the structure. Chairman Dodd said he wasn't sure how that could be stipulated as the code was clear. The City Attorney advised that the City's position outlined on pages 11-51 of the agenda backup were to be included as part of the record. 7.53 pm 9. Recess the Board of Adiustment Hearina and Convene the Communitv Redevelopment Aoencv Meetin4 Mayor Dodd adjourned the Board of Adjustment Hearing and convened the CRA meeting. A. MOTION by Mr. Hill and SECOND by Vice Chairman Mauti to approve the February 26, 2020 CRA Meeting Minutes passed with a unanimous voice vote. 20.080 B. Approve Sidewalk Reolacemen Inc. Concrete Construction Service the Citv Manaaer to Execute the Minutes Excerot} t at Riverview Park under the Timothv Rose Contracting, Agreement in the Amount of $78.622,36 and Authorize Appropriate Documents (Transmittal. Quote. Bid. Plan, The City Manager said the sidewalk replacement is part of Riverview Park tree protection plan to remove existing sidewalk and replace it with a more substantial sidewalk. in regard to the bidding process, the City Manager explained that the City does multiple year contracts June 24, 2020 Board of Adjustment, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting Page 7 with contractors to obtain the best price and if each project was to go out to bid, the unsuccessful contractors would eventually stop bidding. He noted upon the rebidding process, all contractors are welcome to bid. Chairman Dodd said when there are events in the park the vendors fill up the sidewalk space and asked if they should open up Harrison Drive or Indian River Drive for vendor booths. The City Manager said the plan is to protect the root structure from compaction; and, the ultimate plan is to block off Harrison Street to expand the promenade for booths. MOTION by Chairman Dodd and SECOND by Mr. Gilliams to approve the sidewalk replacement at Riverview Park under the Timothy Rose Concrete agreement. Public Inout Ben Hocker, Sebastian, asked if the material will be permeable to get the water to the roots of the trees. Mayor Dodd advised it would be concrete and the park's trees did not have a problem in receiving water. Bob Bedea said, he too, would like to see pervious surfaces in the park Charles Stadelman, Sebastian, asked if the plan added additional sidewalk to the area. Mayor Dodd advised it would widen the sidewalks and replace them where they exist now. Mr. Stadelman noted there wasn't any disability crosswalk at US 1 and CR512; at Indian River Drive and CR512; or on Harrison Street. Mayor Dodd said FDOT would have to address the crossings on US 1. The Community Development Director said there is not a crosswalk at Indian River Drive because of the drainage structure. She stated she would be open to any suggestions from him or the public. The City Manager stated sidewalk concrete would be six inches thick without rebar. Roll call: Council Member Hill - aye Council Member Parris - aye Mayor Dodd - aye Vice Mayor Mauti - aye Council Member Gitliams - aye Motion carried. 5-0 10. Recess the Communitv Redevelopment Aqencv Meetinq and Reconvene the Reaular Citv Council Meetinq Mayor Dodd adjourned the CRA meeting and reconvened the City Council meeting at 8:09 p.m. All members were present. June 24, 2020 Board of Adjustment, CRA, and Regular City Council Meeting Page 8 CRL SE 1*- --- HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1225 Main Street, Sebastian, FL 32958 The attached January 27, 2021 Community Redevelopment Agency minutes were approved at the February 24, 2021 Community Redevelopment Agency meeting. Chairman Ed Dodd ATTEST: Jeanette Williams, City Clerk Regular City Council & CRA Meeting January 27, 2021 Page 4 The Community Development Director said she would add the St. Sebastian River TMDL which will bolster the policy. Mayor Dodd noted that Dr. Cox suggested that the City should advertise more as they move through the comp plan process. Vice Mayor Hill said the document was well done, staff did an outstanding job incorporating the community's comments. Council Member Jones thanked everyone who worked on this; it will keep the City one of the most beautiful cities on the coast. Council Member McPartlan said this was the City's vision for next 20 years but noted that things change and he hopes they will still be on track in seven years. Mayor Dodd said the Community Development Department has done a fantastic job but he noted it will require a lot of changes in the Land Development Code so their work is hardly over. MOTION by Vice Mayor Hill and SECOND by Council Member Jones to approve Ordinance No. 0-21-01 on first reading providing for the transmittal of the proposed City of Sebastian Proposed Comprehensive Plan 2040 passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 11. Mayor Dodd recessed the City Council Meeting and convened the Community Redevelopment Agency meeting at 7:07 p.m. A. ADgroval of Minutes — December 9, 2020 CRA Meetinq MOTION BY Mr. McPartlan and SECOND by Mr. Nunn to approve the December 9, 2020 CRA Meeting minutes passed with a unanimous voice vote. 5-0 21.017 B. Discussion of Septic to Sewer Program Ootions and Provide Directive to Staff (Transmittal. Reoort) The City Manager said in 2019, the County noticed residents that sewer was available and since then the City has provided grants for conversions and notified others by flyers, notices, and news blasts that grant money was available. He said there are requirements in state statutes and city code that if sewer is available, it is mandatory to hook-up and the Health Department also requires a hookup if a septic system fails. He asked Council how they would like staff to proceed with a program to get approximately 140 properties in the CRA District off of septic systems. He said about 40 systems have to be put on a gravity system for about $4,000-$5,000 a unit. Mayor Dodd noted the City will lose grant money if people don't use the program; and the residents will lose the County's impact fee reduction currently available. He said during his discussions with the City Manager to come up with an objective to present to Council, he found out there is grant money available but this particular program requires 95% of the properties to connect which won't happen voluntarily. Regular City Council & CRA Meeting January 27, 2021 Page 5 7:21 pm He said what would be the process that the City could assume the financial contracting/managing responsibility to get these transactions to take place and cover that as much as possible with grant programs that will pay the cost to connect. He said it is feasible to do this and then go after each property owner for the ERUs to reimburse the City for what they couldn't cover with the grants. He said it is a way to get all the properties off the septic systems. He asked the other members if they had any interest in this. In response to Council Member Nunn, the City Manager said people have not come to the City to find other funding alternatives. He said if the Mayor's suggestion can help get the conversions paid for, he was in favor of it. Vice Mayor Hill said he was in favor of it and was a strong proponent of getting the sewer line in but he was concerned with the economic condition the small businesses and restaurants are in and that the City many be burdening them with additional expenses. He said if there was a way to get this paid without impacting the businesses, he would support it. Mayor Dodd said he also did not want to request money from businesses right now but possibly in 18-24 months. Vice Mayor Hill noted one thing in the agenda backup is to have an engineer start the process for approximately a year then they would have to wait to plan for any infrastructure improvements. Mayor Dodd said he would like Council to direct the City Manager to put together a project plan where the City takes on financing for the engineering work to do it. He said 100 lift stations would be unfathomable which is what will happen if the individual businesses go forward, so an engineering firm can determine how many lift stations to service a certain amount of businesses. Mayor Dodd explained one caveat is there are 40 gravity fed properties that in a year and half from now will have to pay an additional $600-700 County impact fees that they don't have to pay today. He said those properties can be done quickly at a savings with the grant money currently in the system. The City Manager said a portion of the City's available $160,000 is the match to the Indian River Lagoon Council of which $80,000 has to be spent by September. He said if they explain to the Indian River Lagoon Council their intent, the Indian River Lagoon Council may grant an extension. The Community Development Director said a single ERU is $2,796. Mayor Dodd said the City could pay that and roll that money into the 25% match they would expect from the property. Council Member Nunn asked if they could request the County to extend the impact fee reduction. The City Manager said he asked last year and the administrator said it would have to go back to the commissioners but he could not support the idea. Regular City Council & CRA Meeting January 27, 2021 Page 6 7.29 pm The Community Development Director said the County's website lists individuals on the gravity sewer line that have five years to connect (until May 22, 2024) with what needs to be paid by the property owner. She noted the impact fee savings would reduce to 601% in April 2021. Vice Mayor Hill asked if the County required the $2,700 ERU upfront or was is in the resident's payments. The City Manager explained that the County allowed residents to make payments on the infrastructure; but impact fees are required at time of connection. Council Member McPartlan asked if there was a way to make an ordinance that if one sells the property, the next owner has to be on sewer then introduce the grant program. He commented that over ten years; a lot of those properties will change hands that will instigate a change. Mayor Dodd called for a recess at 7:30 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 7:37 p.m. All members were present. The City Manager said to put a condition on the sale of a property might not be a proper methodology but there is an ordinance requiring hookup at 60 days after it is available so one thing the City can do is record a notice of violation that they have to correct when sell the property. Mayor Dodd said if Council agrees, he would like to see to the City Manager go forward with putting together a plan to get approval from all of the other partners. He said the Sebastian Highlands is in the top ten of the polluting septic systems for the Indian River Lagoon. He said a major step would be to migrate Sebastian to a central, collective system which the City can't do on our own and if they can't come up with the political will to get it done for 140 CRA properties, they will never get it done in the Highlands. He said it would help them find out what cooperation they have and show we want 'to take the responsibility of connecting properties; which will allow the City to receive more grant money. This means the City must take the financial responsibility of contracting this, making it happen and then working out the financial details with the property owner knowing the City will be reimbursed. He said it was important to move forward with this. Council Member Nunn said the City of Vero Beach has an ordinance that 500 property owners on the barrier island had to either give proof their systems were pumped and inspected or connected to the step system by January 1'. If they didn't address a failed system they would have to face code enforcement. He said this might be something to look at. Vice Mayor Hill said there are already government agencies that have mandatory hookup in place, all it would take is to say the City is going to enforce it but he didn't support this because it would be a major financial burden on the businesses. MOTION by Vice Mayor Hill and SECOND by Council Member Nunn to have the City Manager to come up with a plan, bring the plan back to them for approval, hire an engineer and then identify a way to pay for it followed by reimbursement in the future. Regular City Council & CRA Meeting January 27, 2021 Page 7 The Community Development Director said there has been a Septic to Sewer Program in the CRA since 2016. Council Member Jones noted the program was there before COVID pandemic, the property owners don't want to do it; it was time to push the issue. He said they need to protect the lagoon. Council Member McPartlan said if they decide to create a plan and the property owners were still not connecting to sewer, they should go towards enforcement. Mayor Dodd agreed he would not want to spend money for a plan if they don't intend to enforce it; and he would not want to notify the businesses that they must convert unless the City works out a process by which we can mitigate the expense as much as possible. Vice Mayor Hill said he would like to notify the businesses now before the grant money goes away, maybe a flyer. The City Manager offered to put out another flyer. Council Member Jones asked if the enforcement side should be in the motion. Vice Mayor Hill suggested that will be part of the plan. He asked that the flyer should indicate the City is serious about getting it done. The City Attorney agreed, enforcement should be part of the plan. There was no public comment on this issue. Vice Mayor Hill's motion passed unanimously with a voice vote. 5-0. 12. Mayor Dodd adjourned the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting and reconvened the City Council meeting at 7:50 p.m. 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None 14. NEW BUSINESS 21.018 A. Resolution No. R-21-03 — Opposinq the Elimination of Statutory Authorization for Regional Planninq Councils in Florida (R-21-03) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE TREASURE COAST REGIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES, INC. POSITION; OPPOSING THE ELIMINATION OF STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION FOR REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILS IN FLORIDA AS PROPOSED IN SENATE BILL 62 OR SIMILAR PROPOSED LEGISLATION; PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERROR; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF RESOLUTIONS OR PARTS OF RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mayor Dodd said there is a bill in Tallahassee to do away with regional planning councils but he sees a benefit of having the councils and asked Council for their support of the resolution. There was no public input on this item CM 11 SEAT_ HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING TRANSMITTAL Council Meeting Date: February 24, 2021 Aaenda Item Title: Harbor Lights Motel property Recommendation: Consideration of workshop discussion items for the future use of the Harbor Lights Motel property. Background: The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Board met on February 10, 2021 to discuss the former Harbor Lights Motel site. The CRA Board considered various options based on the cost analysis and condition of the current structures. The Board consensus was that the sale and re- development of the property with conditions was in the city's best interest. There was also discussion what might be the highest and best use for future development, as well as uses allowed in the CWR zoning district. A Request for Proposal (RFP) (See Attachment 1.) is an effective tool that the city may wish to utilize as it would give the city an opportunity to outline the bidding process for the property and consider by contractual agreement what future development may occur on the site. The original hotel was constructed in 1951 as a motel and residence. The site is part of a historic district however it is not registered as a historic structure. The property was purchased in March 2018 for $750,000 to assist the City in preserving the Indian River Lagoon view shed and access east of Indian River Drive by prohibiting any future development along the water's edge. After the initial purchase the east side of the property was unified to the public boat launch property to the north. An appraisal was conducted in March 2020 estimating a value of $295,000 for the remaining hotel property. An Environmental Transaction Screening report was conducted prior to purchase (See Attached Excerpt). The property is zoned CWR, Commercial Waterfront Residential (See Attached) and must also follow the performance criteria found in the Riverfront Overlay district. A survey and aerial (See Attached) have been provided along with several renderings for consideration. Examples of a similar Request for Proposal ,scope have also been provided for your consideration. If Aaenda Item Reauires Exoenditure of Funds: Budgeted Amount: n/a Total Cost: n/a Funds to Be Utilized for Appropriation: n/a Attachments: 1. Request For Proposal outline 2. Environmental Transaction Screening (Feb 2018) 3. CWR zoning district regulations 4. Aerial 5. Survey 6. Example Schematics/Renderings/Photos 7. Examples of a similar scope Request for Proposals (City of Sebring, FL) Administrative Service City Attorney Review: Procurement Division s Departm Rev! 1 U Review, if applicabl . City Manager Authorization: / Date: ���% Request for proposal (RFP) 1. A request for a proposal is a method customers will use to get specific information from vendors, including the price of a solution. Prospects seeking a new product will send RFPs to offer more detail regarding the problem they're facing in the hopes that the vendor will respond with some suggested resolutions. A key purpose of sending an RFP is to gain insight regarding solutions specific to your problem that maybe you didn't think of during your research. People within the company have more experience with their product, and should be used as a resource to configure the best solution and action plan possible. When sending an RFP, you need to be as specific as possible. Give the vendor details regarding your processes, needs, and end goals for the investment. At this point, you should be ready to make a purchase. This isn't so much of an exploration phase, but more of a "let's build a concrete action plan for my business" phase. RFPs will also include questions regarding the workflow of the collaboration, should a purchase be made. For example, the buyer will ask about implementation processes, methods for keeping cost under control, and any foreseeable concerns the vendor might have regarding the timeline. 2. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening For: 1215 Indian River Drive Prepared for: The City of Sebastian C/o Joe Griffin 1225 Main Street Sebastian, FL 32958 i7 /2018 mothy E. Maslin, C.E.S./ C.E.C. ` Certification #77283 1835 261h Street - Vero Bench, Florida 32960 Phone! 772.299-4791 • raw 772-778-3617 • E-mail flenv*fl-env com r7W FEC-18-106 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 1.1 FINDINGS 1.2 CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY 1.3 SITE FACTS 1.4 EXCEPTIONS AND/OR DELETIONS TO ASTM E 1527 L5 NON -SCOPE ISSUES SECTION 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 PURPOSE OF A PHASE I 2.2 SCOPE OF WORK 2.2.1 Site Description 2.2.2 Site Reconnaissance 2.2.3 Review of Historical Information 2.2.4 Interviews 2.2.5 Conclusions and Recommendations 2.3 INTERPRETATION OF THE REPORT SECTION 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND RECONNAISSANCE 3.1 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 3.2 GEOLOGIC AND HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 3.3 EXISTING STORAGE TANKS 3.4 PREVIOUSLY EXISTING STORAGE TANKS 3.5 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE STORAGE AND HANDLING 3.6 SPECIFIC HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES RECONNAISSANCE 3.6.1 Summary of Specific Hazardous Substances Reconnaissance (Beyond ASTM Scope) 3.6.2 Details of Specific Hazardous Substances Sampling/Observations 3.7 POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBS) 3.8 CLARIFIERS, SUMPS, TRENCHES, AND INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE SOURCES 3.9 SURFACE CONDITIONS 3.10 STRESSED VEGETATION 3.11 PRIOR OR CURRENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE 3.12 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 3.13 VISUAL OBSERVATIONS, ADJOINING SITES SECTION 4.0 REVIEW OF HISTORICAL INFORMATION AND REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS 4.1 HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH AND U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC MAP REVIEW 4.2 HISTORICAL MAP REVIEW 4.3 HISTORICAL CITY OR STREET DIRECTORY REVIEW 4.4 AGENCY CONTACTS (RECORDS SEARCH) 4.4.1 Building Department Records CnnniWn C, 2018 Florida CnPimmnOmll Cnnvth, A,r All,hwn v,,,d 1-1 rl.,idn Emirunmeumf C.n ..11ig. Inc P.jW No. FEC-18-106 4.4.2 Fire Department Records 4.4.3 Health or Environmental Agency Records 4.4.4 Sanitation Agency Records 4.4.5 Water Quality Agency Records 4.4.6 Oil and Gas Agency Records or Maps 4.4.7 Pipeline Agency Records or Maps 4.4.8 Other Pertinent Records/File Reviews 4.5 REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS SEARCH 4.6 CHAIN -OF -TITLE ABSTRACT AND/OR REVIEW 4.7 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS 4.8 HISTORICAL SITE USE 4.9 IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORICAL DATA GAPS 4.10 REVIEW OF TITLE AND/OR JUDICIAL RECORDS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND LAND USE LIMITATIONS (E.G., ENGINEERING AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS) SECTION 5.0 INTERVIEWS 5.1 INTERVIEWS WITH OWNER, PROPERTY MANAGER, USER, AND OTHERS 5.2 PURCHASE PRICE VERSUS FAIR MARKET VALUE INTERVIEW SECTION 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 6.2 DE MINIMIS CONDITIONS, HISTORICAL RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, AND CONTROLLED RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS SECTION 7.0 LIMITATIONS SECTION 8.0 FIGURES SECTION 9.0 APPENDICES Appendix A Site Photographs Appendix B Summary of Agency Contacts Appendix C Copies of Records Appendix D One -Mile Radius Regulatory Database Report Appendix E Sampling and Analysis Documents Appendix F interview Notes Appendix G Miscellaneous Infomiation Appendix H References Appendix 1 Qualifications Appendix J Environmental Acronyms and Definitions Ca,ynFhl C 2019 Flnndn Gnrimnumrnl CnrusWh,, Inc All n,W rcsereed 1-2 FIoWEmJh..... mul Canminng, fnc?,,. No. FLCGI4d04 SECTION 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 1.1 FINDINGS This report presents the results of the Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening conducted by Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. at 1215 Indian River Drive, Sebastian, FL 32958 (see Figure 2, Site Location Map). The Phase I was undertaken at the request of the City of Sebastian in accordance with Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc.'s Standard Terms and Conditions. The findings and conclusions of this investigation are based upon a review of historic site -use activities, contact with and records from governmental regulatory agencies, regulatory database searches, as well as a site reconnaissance and interviews with the client, site personnel, and possibly others who may have knowledge of various aspects of the subject site. At the time of this assessment, the site consisted of approximately 0.76 acres of commercially developed land. Information gathered in the course of this assessment indicates that the subject site is currently owned by Ruth Sullivan. The principal findings of Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc.'s Phase I Transaction Screening :For this site are as follows: The subject site is currently affected by • No recognized environmental condition (REC); and • I de mininds conditions, historical recognized environmental conditions (HREC), or controlled recognized environmental conditions (CREC). • The potential for soil or groundwater contamination of the subject property from either on or off -site sources appears to be low. • Given the findings and conclusions of Florida Environmental Consulting, Ins.'s Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening, further investigation is not recommended at this time. • Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. has performed this Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening of the subject site in conformance with the scope and limitations of the standard practice set forth in the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Designation: E1528-14, "Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence, Transaction Screen Process." Any exceptions to, or deletions from, these practices are described in Section 1.4 of this report. CoPYrighl � 2018 Florida Laelmamemal Careen/ring, Inc. Alinghls served 1-1 fae Pmlen No. MC-1gM 1.2 CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY Based on the findings of this Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. has identified the following recognized environmental condition(s): RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION(S) Condition # Location Description of Condition None N/A No evidence of recognized environmental conditions was found during this investigation. Based on the findings of this Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc has identified the following de minimis conditions, historical recognized environmental conditions, and/or controlled recognized environmental conditions: DE MINIMIS CONDITIONS HISTORICAL RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, OR CONTROLLED RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Condition # Location 1 Existing Buildings Description of Condition The subject site contains Asbestos Condition De minimi.v C,,,,hl 12019 Fmid. E irvn ,n l Cmrsuhin6, ]n. M1.,Ins remnsJ 1-2 Florid. 6nimmnenml C..v&Mg, foe Pm,. N.. FEC-I 8d06 1.3 SITE FACTS Current Owner(s): Ruth Sullivan Current Use: Motel Total # of Existing Buildings: 3 Total Sq. Ft. of Buildings: 2360 Date Oldest Building was Built: 1951 The subject site obtains its potable water from private underground wells. The subject site disposes of its sewage through use of an on -site septic system. The subject building is heated and/or cooled by individual heating and air-conditioning systems. Parcel #: 31390600000005000010.0 Address Provided by Client: 1215 Indian River Drive, Sebastian, FL 32958 Total Acreage of Land: 0.76 Date of Site Reconnaissance: 2/7/2018 Total # of Wells (water, oil, gas, other) identified onsite: None, shared water well offsite, hose bibs only Areas/Units that were inaccessible to the Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. field assessor: None Were enough (units/offices/buildings/acres) inspected to ensure that the inspection was homogenous? Yes Did the field assessor notice any unusual odors on or from the subject site or adjoining sites during the site reconnaissance? No 1.4 EXCEPTIONS AND/OR DELETIONS TO ASTM E 1528 There are no exceptions to ASTM E 1528. 1.5 NON -SCOPE ISSUES Asbestos -containing materials were assessed. Copw& C 2018 Florida Envimn mwl Cansn@lj g Inc All n hls rc nM 1-3 Flarida Emrmnnrenwl Caruufdng. Ina. P,.I No. FEC.18406 SECTION 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 PURPOSE OF A PHASE I The purpose of this Phase 1 Environmental Transaction Screening is to assess (1) the likelihood of contamination of the subject site as a result of either past or present land -use practices; and (2) the potential for future environmental contamination which may occur as a result of current conditions or operations and maintenance activities at either the subject site or properties adjoining the subject site, thereby identifying real or potential environmental or economic impact to the subject site. In this way, the client may satisfy a requirement to qualify for the innocent landowner defense to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) liability by completing "all appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership and uses of the property consistent with good commercial and customary practice." To meet these objectives, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. attempted to complete the tasks outlined in this section except as noted in Section 1.4. 2.2 SCOPE OF WORK The Scope of Work that has been followed for this assessment is identified in Section 1.1, Page 1-1. 2.2.1 Site Description Site photographs were taken during the site reconnaissance. The photographs and their summary descriptions can be found in Appendix A. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. reviewed pertinent, reasonably ascertainable information on the soil types and groundwater conditions in the vicinity of the subject site. For the purposes of this assessment, the depth from the ground surface and the direction (or gradient) of the groundwater flow are of particular significance. Such findings are used by Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. report writers, in conjunction with additional information about environmental conditions on nearby sites, to assess the risk that is faced by the subject site from off -site sources of contamination. It should be noted that Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc.'s geological and hydrological research does not include investigation of seismological concerns that may affect the area of the subject site. Although the existence of faults in an area may be of concern to property owners and residents in that area, it is not considered to be an environmental contamination concern, and so is not usually a component of a Phase I Enviromnental Transaction Screening. coPr�ghi s 2018 en,rmnEinvm.m."muo,m„efiax. Ina All rigmsiv�r.w 2-1 rcc-ie-ioa 2.2.2 Site Reconnaissance A Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. field assessor conducted a visual reconnaissance of the subject property to identify observable signs of environmental impairments, including on -site operations and maintenance activities which may lead to possible environmental impairment. As a part of the site reconnaissance, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. visually inspected the site for obvious indications of. • Existing and previously existing storage tanks (aboveground and underground) • Hazardous substances storage and handling • Clarifiers, sumps, trenches, and industrial discharge sources • Equipment which may contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) (fluorescent light ballasts are not inspected) • Indications of spillage of hazardous substances, and the general condition of concrete, asphalt, soil, and other surfaces • Indications of stressed vegetation as a result of on -site contamination During the site reconnaissance, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. field assessors may make note of basic compliance issues which, may be environmental in nature, however are not issues directly associated with the potential for site contamination (i.e., the specific objective of our assessment). However, as a service to our clients, and because these compliance issues may contribute to our overall understanding of site operations, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. may comment on the site's basic compliance status. The review of the site's compliance status is not intended to be complete or comprehensive and may or may not include all items identified during the site reconnaissance. Again, the compliance review is not intended as a comprehensive compliance audit. Rather, the compliance review is only intended to aid Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. in determining the likelihood that the subject site may have been impacted by releases of hazardous substances. When the storage or use of hazardous substances are encountered on a site, the Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. field assessor will look for or inquire about the on -site presence of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs). MSDSs are prepared by the manufacturers of hazardous substances (pursuant to OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard), and they detail the components, dangers, and proper handling procedures for the hazardous substance for which they have been prepared. The presence or absence of MSDSs for on -site hazardous substances will be noted in 3.5, Hazardous Substances Storage and Handling. However, some sites may use or store hundreds of various chemical compounds. In such cases, it is practically impossible for the field assessor to match -up each substance with its corresponding MSDS. Still, the field assessor will inquire about MSDSs and copies of representative MSDSs that were made available will be included in Appendix G. COVw,ghl C, 2018 FkddarmLvnrnrnml Canvdd., Ind. Alln,hls reserved 2-2 Florid,r ;..maea..d Carlsu0%.re, ln. P'wl No. FEC-18-106 Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. may have (based on contract) inspected and reviewed information for the subject site regarding the presence of specific hazardous substances which are relatively common sources of environmental concern. The substances in question include: • Common building materials that may contain or are suspected of containing asbestos • Radon (at elevated levels) • Lead -contaminated drinking water • Lead -based paints Based on ASTM E1527-05 AND E1527-13, federal, state, and other regulatory agency guidelines, the following presumptions were in force if and when Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. inspected the subject site for specific hazardous substances: • Structures built after 1980 are considered asbestos -free. • Structures built after 1979 are considered lead-free (with respect to both water and painted surfaces). • Fluorescent light ballasts will be considered PCB -free and will not be noted in the report regardless of their date of manufacture, unless Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. is instructed to do otherwise in writing by the client. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. also inspected the properties that adjoin the subject site. In general, this inspection included a "drive -by" survey to note the operations which may pose an imminent or potential environmental threat to the subject site. 2.2.3 Review of Historical Information For this assessment, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. may have reviewed reasonably ascertainable historical aerial photographs and United States Geologic Survey (U.S.G.S.) topographic maps of the subject site and vicinity. This review consisted of examining the reasonably ascertainable available photographs and topographic maps for evidence of activities on or development of the subject site and adjoining sites that may show an environmental condition or concern which may currently affect the subject site. The specific aerial photographs and U.S.G.S. maps that were reviewed for this assessment are identified and their environmentally relevant features are described in Section 4.1. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. may have also reviewed any reasonably ascertainable Historic Maps of the subject site and vicinity. Such maps have been prepared by fire insurance companies in order to determine the potential risk of fire damage to buildings in metropolitan areas. These maps have been produced since the mid-1850s and, for some areas, they are still produced today. For the purposes of a Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening, these maps may contain helpful information on the ages and past uses of buildings, as well as information about on the Copyright r'2019 Florida Gnrimnmmml Comiddeg, Ina M] nyIII s rescued 2-3 R.W.&ria..m.al Camddcr,. fne Pm,m No. HC-IM-IM storage of hazardous and flammable substances. However, because it was only worthwhile for fire insurance companies to map metropolitan areas, the scope of coverage of these maps is somewhat limited. If Historic Maps have provided coverage of the subject site, and if the specific maps were reasonably ascertainable, then the specific maps that were reviewed for this assessment are identified, and their environmentally relevant features described, in Section 4.2. One of the least known yet most complete and comprehensive historical sources are historical city or street directories. These texts may have been reviewed by Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. to the extent that they have provided coverage of the subject site and were reasonably ascertainable. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. reviews historical city or street directories (also known as criss cross or reverse indexed directories) for information on the past occupants of and activities on the subject site and adjoining sites. These directories were prepared by companies that catered to the needs of salespeople by providing the names of the occupants at a given address (that is, unlike a traditional telephone book, the entries of a reverse directory are arranged by address, not by name). However, like Historical Maps, the scope of coverage of these directories is limited to mostly metropolitan areas. If they were reasonably ascertainable, they were reviewed and Section 4.3 contains listings of historical city or street directories. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. has contacted various state, county, and municipal agencies having current or past jurisdiction over the subject site, in an attempt to review reasonably ascertainable records that contain specific information about environmental conditions on the subject site that these agencies may have on file, or to establish that no environmentally relevant records are on file for the subject site. The client should be aware that most regulatory agencies file their records by address or corporate name (as opposed to parcel number or site name). If no specific address has been assigned to a site, then, typically, no environmental records related to the site will be forthcoming from the state, county, or municipal regulatory agencies. The findings of this records search are reported in Section 4.4, Agency Contacts. The addresses, phone numbers, names of the persons contacted within the various agencies are listed on the Regulatory Contacts Sheet, which is included in Appendix B. Copies of any records obtained from regulatory agencies can be found in Appendix C. In some instances, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. may not yet have received a reply from one or more of the agencies that were contacted. (Some agencies will take six weeks or longer to reply to a verbal or written request.) In the event of such delays in response, rather than delaying the issuance of the report, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. has indicated in the report that a response to the request for records is pending, and a copy of the regulatory request form has been included in Appendix B. Any pertinent information that is subsequently received from the pending agency will be addressed and forwarded to the client in the form of an addendum to this report. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. has also reviewed an ERS RecCheck Report, a computer - generated federal, state, and regional one -mile regulatory database search in an effort to determine whether the subject site is listed on an agency environmental database and to identify possible regulatory -listed sites of concern within a one -mile radius of the subject site. In general, these documents list known or suspected hazardous -waste generators, release sites, landfills, unauthorized disposal sites, sites with registered underground storage tanks, and sites currently under investigation for known or suspected environmental violations or releases. In conjunction with the findings on the geological and hydrological conditions, information obtained from the database search can be used to assess the environmental risk faced by the subject site from past or present off - site sources of contamination. Additionally, the ERS RecCheck Report may provide infonnation C.,,i,hl C 2018 Flondo Erudrvnmrnm/ CvnsnGinF, /ne All Mhls rcsenxJ 2-4 FhWdn Lnrirnnnrrnml C.,,.I K.lm P,w Nn FEC.18.106 about on -site sources of contamination. The ERS RecCheck Report review can be found in Section 4.5; a copy of the complete ERS RecCheck Report document and a detailed description of the databases that were searched are included in Appendix D. When requested, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. will compile and review a chain -of -title abstract for the subject property. The chain -of -title abstract can help the client and Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc to better understand the history of the use of the subject site. The chain -of -title abstract is typically compiled from documents obtained from the County Recorder's Office or Tax Assessor's Office. The chain -of -title abstract review, if completed for this report, can be found in Section 4.6. The County Assessor also may be contacted to determine whether the subject site has been assigned addresses in the past which are different from its current address. It is the client's responsibility to supply Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. with any records of environmental liens or other such documents. On occasion, the client, the client's representatives, or on -site personnel will make available environmental documents pertaining to the subject site. These documents may be prior Phase I Reports, environmental site remediation reports, foundation soil reports, or occupancy records, among others. if these are made available prior to the issuance of the report, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc, will review the conclusions of these documents, which may help to confirm or disprove any tentative findings that Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. has developed independently. If the client has supplied environmental documents for review as part of this assessment, the findings are included in Section 4.7. After the above information from existing historical records, regulatory agencies, interviews, and other additional environmental documents has been reviewed and evaluated, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. presents the site uses for the subject property as well as adjoining site uses in a chronological table. This historic site use summary assists the client, as well as the field assessors and reviewers to have a perspective of the historical uses of the subject site. The Historical Site Use is presented in Section 4.8. 2.2.4 Interviews Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. attempts to interview various individuals who may have knowledge of various aspects of the subject site. Typically, the interviewees might include: • Current and previous owners • Site and operations managers • Tenants • Local regulatory personnel The interviews are summarized in Section 5.0 and interview notes are included in Appendix F. C.Mi, hl 12018 ....mm, In. nn.,[A, re 2-5 rlMda crn;� m1.1 m. P.,., No. FEC.In 1W 2.2.5 Conclusions and Recommendations Section 6.0, Conclusions and Recommendations, provides detailed descriptions of the recognized environmental conditions, the de Ininimis conditions, historical recognized environmental conditions, and controlled recognized environmental conditions that, in the professional opinion of Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc., currently affect the subject site. Section 6.0 also recommends or suggests the next -step actions that may be required to begin addressing the conditions. The essential information on a condition at a given location is contained in the 'Description of Condition" and the "Action Suggested" boxes of the table for that location. The section numbers refer to those sections in the report that describe the research tasks and findings behind the conclusions. This reporting method allows the reader to quickly go to those sections that are pertinent to the condition. 2.3 INTERPRETATION OF THE REPORT Following the completion of the tasks outlined above, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. prepared this report to present our findings and conclusions clearly and consistently. In an attempt to aid the reader and bring organization to pieces of seemingly unrelated information, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. has developed a report format that is both innovative and concise. Each piece of information is described in the context of the research or assessment task under which it was found. Typically, an environmental condition will incorporate a number of specific findings. So, in Section 6.0, Conclusions and Recommendations, the various particular findings are grouped together and collectively presented with the description of the environmental condition that is corroborated by those findings. Cnpyn,hlC?OItl FInriJn Lrn•irvumenml CmmWlw, G¢. All nylns reserve) 2-6 Flmhh, E 1r ..... ... W Cnnarv4igp, fne ProJecr N.. FCC-18.M SECTION 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND RECONNAISSANCE The subject site is surrounded by an area of predominantly commercial and residential properties. On the date of the site reconnaissance, the subject site consisted of 0.76 acres of commercial motel usage. The following subsections describe the physical characteristics of the subject site and are a compilation of the observations made during the visual site inspection. 3.1 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS A Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. field assessor completed a reconnaissance of the subject site, at which time a number of photographs were taken to document the current condition and use of the site. The photographs can be found in Appendix A. 3.2 GEOLOGIC AND HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS According to United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database data, the native soil type is Immokalee fine sand Map Unit Type: Consociation Hydric: No Drainage Class: Poorly drained General Information: Sandy, siliceous, hyperthermic, ortstein Alfic Alaquods. Fill material was not used. The elevation of the subject site appears to be 7 feet above mean sea level. Groundwater in the site vicinity is known to occur very close to the surface and flow towards the east and the Indian River Lagoon. However, the specific flow direction is unknown. It should be noted that the flow direction and depth of groundwater may be influenced by rainfall, tidal activity, shore properties, and local groundwater piunping operations. Storm water discharge across the site appears to sheet flow east to the municipal stormwater system. The direction and destination of storm water discharge does not appear to be a source of environmental concern to the subject site. 3.3 EXISTING STORAGE TANKS No evidence of any existing aboveground or underground storage tanks was observed on the subject site during the site reconnaissance nor noted in the research conducted for this assessment. C,m,hl*201N FloNJa Emvronmenlnl ConsnitLrg, Gru. All nghls reeeneA 3-1 rlo&Jd &,i..... rrul Cmvullh,, Ine. P,J ,No. FEC- IS- 106 3.4 PREVIOUSLY EXISTING STORAGE TANKS No evidence of previously existing aboveground or underground storage tanks was observed on the subject site during the site reconnaissance nor noted in the research conducted for this assessment. 3.5 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE STORAGE AND HANDLING No storage or handling of hazardous substances was observed in the areas inspected during the site reconnaissance. 3.6 SPECIFIC HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES RECONNAISSANCE 3.6.1 Summary of Specific Hazardous Substances Reconnaissance (Beyond ASTM Scope) In addition to a general inspection of the subject site for evidence of the presence of hazardous substances or environmental concerns, the field assessor also conducted a reconnaissance for a set of specific hazardous substances that are not addressed in the scope of the ASTM Standard. The results of this specific reconnaissance are given in the following table(s). If a specific suspected hazardous substance was sampled or otherwise tested, this will be indicated in the table and the results of the laboratory analysis or other tests will be given in Section 3.6.2. ID # 2 SPECIFIC HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES (BEYOND ASTM SCOPE) Substance Asbestos Radon Sampled? Yes No Description ACM were found EPA Radon Zone: 3 (Predicted avg for county: < 2 pCi/L)For zip code 32958: Number of tests per zip code: 7 Number of tests where radon is > 4 pCi/L: 0 Percentage of test where radon is > 4 pCi/L: 0% The subject property is located in an area that is considered to have a low occurrence of radon. However, the occurrence of radon is site -specific; only testing can determine the actual radon level at the site. Condition De minimis N./A CaP,gbI 3+2018 FI,,Hd &E Jrvnmenml CnnsWfh,]n. Nl.,hls reserved 3-2 FlnrlArt Cnrirunmerrml Cnndlh, Lm P,w No. FEC-18406 ID # Substance Sampled? Description Condition 3 Lead Paint No Based on the date of construction, it is N/A possible that there islead-containing paint on -site, however the buildings are proposed for demolition and this condition would not affect susceptible individuals. Lead Water No Based on the date of construction, there N/A is the potential for the presence of lead in the plumbing fixtures and/or pipes on - site, however the buildings are proposed for demolition and this condition would not affect susceptible individuals. Note: If the table indicates that a given subs ance has been sampled, then a related table can be found in Section 3.15.2, which will give the results of the laboratory analysis of the sample or samples 3.6.2 Details of Specific Hazardous Substances Sampling/Observations Please see Appendix 9.0.E for the Asbestos Survey Report. 3.7 POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBS) The Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. site reconnaissance does not include checking on -site fluorescent light fixtures for potential PCB content. Although fluorescent light ballasts may contain PCBs, the amount contained is considered to be so inconsequential that the ASTM (Standard Practice, E 1527) has stated: "Fluorescent light ballast likely to contain PCBs does not need to be noted." in a Phase I Environmental Report. No known or suspected PCB -containing equipment or materials were observed on -site during the site 3.8 CLARIFIERS, SUMPS, TRENCHES, AND INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE SOURCES No clarifiers, sumps, trenches, industrial floor drains, or industrial discharge points were noted during the site reconnaissance, historical, and/or regulatory research. 3.9 SURFACE CONDITIONS No significant areas of staining or other unusual surface conditions were observed during the site reconnaissance. C.,,i,[nC2019 rmrmn E„,r.,,,,~,d C.,,,ftin, m.. An 3-3 rh,,,me ,"v,.io hu, M. Na ree-u-iae 3.10 STRESSED VEGETATION No disfigured, discolored, dying, or otherwise stressed vegetation was observed on -site during the site reconnaissance. 3.11 PRIOR OR CURRENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE The site reconnaissance, historical, and/or regulatory research conducted for this assessment indicates that the site has not been used for agricultural purposes in the past. 3.12 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS No evidence of further environmental conditions and/or impairments was observed during the site reconnaissance, beyond that evidence that has already been noted in this section. 3.13 VISUAL OBSERVATIONS, ADJOINING SITES During the site reconnaissance, the Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. field assessor also visually inspected and documented the use of those properties which immediately adjoin the subject property. The observations of the adjoining properties were made by the Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. field assessor on the date of the site reconnaissance. No sources of environmental concern were noted. Capwol n2018 FWUl Erniron.Wd Cnn:nkh, bn. All nghrs.,d 3-4 rk'w. Cmdrvnnrmml Conmbiny, Inc P.'WN. MC48.100 SECTION 4.0 REVIEW OF HISTORICAL INFORMATION AND REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS 4.1 HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH AND U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC MAP REVIEW Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. reviewed readily available and reasonably ascertainable aerial photographs and U.S.G.S. topographic maps of the area of the subject site. (A copy of a U.S.G.S. map, if available, has been included as Figure 1.) These aerial photographs and maps may have been obtained from Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc.'s library and/or another source (all sources identified in Appendix B). Each aerial photograph was reviewed for the subject property and, where applicable, adjacent property use. In addition, each photograph was reviewed to identify the presence of areas of dumping, staining, buildings, and/or aboveground storage tanks. Aerial photographs for the years of 1943 — 2016 and U.S.G.S. topographic maps for the year(s) of 2103 were reviewed and no recognized environmental conditions, de nzinimis conditions, historical or controlled recognized environmental conditions were identified. 4.2 HISTORICAL MAP REVIEW Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. did not review historical maps for one or more of the following reasons: 1. Based on a reasonable amount of research, the information was not readily available, as defined in the ASTM Standard. 2. Sufficient historical information was available from other sources to identify the past property uses. 4.3 HISTORICAL CITY OR STREET DIRECTORY REVIEW Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. did not review historical city or street directories for one or more of the following reasons: 3. Based on a reasonable amount of research, the information was not readily available, as defined in the ASTM Standard. 4. Sufficient historical information was available from other sources to identify the past property uses. C-,,,ihl r'2018 FldduE.J4--ml Cnn.vrIring,/nc All .,hls—s 4-I FA,Hdu/intirvnmrmal 0,rvWM,In,.. Pnj. N. PEG I R 106 4.4 AGENCY CONTACTS (RECORDS SEARCH) 4.4.1 Building Department Records Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. submitted a request to the local Building agency for the purpose of reviewing reasonably ascertainable, relevant building permits, original plumbing and finish schedules, building plans, or other readily available, relevant documents pertaining to the subject site that are on file with this agency (all sources are identified in Appendix B). The following table presents the results of this review. (Copies of the reviewed documents, when available and/or necessary are included in Appendix C.) SUMMARY OF BUILDING DEPARTMENT RECORDS Description of Permit/Plan I Condition Built in 1951 may contain Asbestos I De minimis 4.4.2 Fire Department Records Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. did not review fire department records for one or more of the following reasons: I. Based on a reasonable amount of research, the information was not readily available, as defined in the ASTM Standard. 2. Sufficient historical information was available from other sources to identify the past property uses. 4.4.3 Health or Environmental Agency Records Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. submitted a request to the local Health Department and/or Environmental agency for the purpose of reviewing reasonably ascertainable environmental records that may be on file with this agency for the subject site. The following table gives the results of this review. (Copies of the reviewed documents, when available, are included in Appendix C and the source is identified in Appendix B.) SUMMARY OF HEALTH OR ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY RECORDS Description Condition No records for environmental contamination found N/A 4.4.4 Sanitation Agency Records Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. did not review sanitation records for one or more of the following reasons: C.,,ighr f 2018 FfnrLlu Ervlronmrma1 Cnna'nMng, Inn All nyhl, 11e.,W 4-2 Flnrlda F.nvlroumrcnml Cmrsnlring, Inn Plnjnr Na. F C-IN-IOh 1. Based on a reasonable amount of research, the information was not readily available, as defined in the ASTM Standard. 2. Sufficient historical information was available from other sources to identify the past property uses. 4.4.5 Water Quality Agency Records Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. did not review water quality records for one or more of the following reasons: 1. Based on a reasonable amount of research, the information was not readily available, as defined in the ASTM Standard. 2. Sufficient historical information was available from other sources to identify the past property uses. 4.4.6 Oil and Gas Agency Records or Maps Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. did not review oil and gas records for one or more of the following reasons: 1. Based on a reasonable amount of research, the information was not readily available, as defined in the ASTM Standard. 2. Sufficient historical information was available from other sources to identify the past property uses. 4.4.7 Pipeline Agency Records or Maps Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. did not review pipeline for one or more of the following reasons: 1. Based on a reasonable amount of research, the information was not readily available, as defined in the ASTM Standard. 2. Sufficient historical information was available from other sources to identify the past property uses. 4.4.8 Other Pertinent Records/File Reviews There are no additional regulatory agencies known to Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. that are likely to have further relevant environmental information pertaining to the subject site. No agency rile reviews were conducted for the subject site or the adjacent sites for this investigation. CO ,Toll f 201X FluXdo F.'miwnmmtal Conml.lnp, Ixc All n Wh —x W 4-3 FI-W. E Wn ...1.1 Iva Pmjwt Nu me-[Mm 4.5 REVIEW OF ERS RECCHECK REPORT The Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. review of the ERS RecCheck Report (the complete ERS RecCheck Report is included in Appendix D) found the subject site is not a regulatory -listed site. In addition, there were no sites found that were (1) located within '/< mile of the subject site (that is, close enough, under certain conditions, to possibly constitute an environmental risk to the subject site), or (2) are sites that are further than ''/a mile but still pose a concern to the subject site (that is, listed sites which may have experienced a release of hazardous substances of sufficient magnitude to constitute a regional threat or to have impacted the subject site). Listings of unmapped sites were reviewed to identify the subject site or any sites that are obviously adjacent to the subject property. Other unmapped sites are listed only in Appendix D. No environmental concerns were identified. 4.6 CHAIN -OF -TITLE ABSTRACT AND/OR REVIEW At the request of the client, a chain -of -title abstract was not requested or completed for this project. 4.7 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS In the course of this assessment, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. was not provided with any additional environmental documents for review regarding the environmental condition of the subject site by the client or the client's representatives. 4.8 HISTORICAL SITE USE The chronological historical site use summary is based on reviewed aerial photographs, maps, regulatory agency files, interviews, and additional environmental documents. The historical site use summary for the subject site and the adjoin sites is presented in the following table. The rows of this table are organized in chronological order, according to the date range of a specific site use. Date Range -1951 1951-Present HISTORICAL SITE USE Subject Site Vacant Natural Motel Adjoining Sites Residential Commercial / Residential cupy b r 2018 r/mi u Ern•inmmmfal r..'W n , M. All riylus rcaarvM 44 Hand. Fbrironmenml fmvulRnk. inr. P.j�, Nn FEGIA-106 4.9 IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORICAL DATA GAPS During the course of this assessment, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. identified no data gaps within the chain of historic documents regarding the environmental condition of the subject site. 4.10 REVIEW OF TITLE AND/OR JUDICIAL RECORDS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND LAND USE LIMITATIONS (E.G., ENGINEERING AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS) Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc contacted the County Recorder's Office for the purpose of reviewing readily available and reasonably ascertainable title and/or judicial records for environmental liens or activity and land use limitations (e.g., engineering and institutional controls) that this agency may have on file for the subject site. Upon review of the readily available title and/or judicial records that typically pertain to environmental liens and/or land use limitations at this agency, no environmental liens, records of environmental activity and/or environmental land use limitations were identified. Not all records available and/or listed for this site at this agency were reviewed. Only those documents that typically contain those types of records (environmental liens and/or environmental land use limitations) were reviewed. Co,,i& 12010. Flandu EnNmnm<mal CnnauhlnA, Inc All nyoi. nscnvd 4-5 Florida Enrimm.mna( Consuldn, hfe Pm*l Nn MC-I8-106 SECTION 5.0 INTERVIEWS 5.1 INTERVIEWS WITH OWNER, PROPERTY MANAGER, USER, AND OTHERS As part of the Phase I, Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. attempts to interview varieus individuals who may have knowledge of different aspects of the subject site as it pertains to environmental conditions. The comments of the interviewees are noted by the Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. interviewer on Interview Note Forms, which are included in Appendix F. The following table summarizes the relevant portions of these notes. SUMMARY OF INTERVIEWS ID # Date of Name of Interviewee Title Relevant Discussions Interview 1 2/7/201 S Ruth Sullivan Owner The owner is not aware of any activity or land use limitations, engineering or institutional controls, environmental liens, or other restrictions that have been placed on the property relating to hazardous materials or petroleum products. He does not have any specialized knowledge of the subject property and surrounding areas material to recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. 2 2/7/2015 Various City City employees did not have any records relating to environmental contamination 5.2 PURCHASE PRICE VERSUS FAIR MARKET VALUE INTERVIEW Condition N/A N/A Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc uses data supplied by the client to determine if a difference between the purchase price of the property and the fair market value of the property is due to the effect of any releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances or petroleum products. In this case the purchase price and/or fair market value are not being disclosed as part of this investigation. However, no current or past hazardous substance or petroleum product use was documented in this investigation. Therefore, any difference cannot be due to the effect of any releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on the purchase price of the property. Papynghl r =k Flwldu F.nMwnrnmml C-1.1111p, M. All dghll1—IM 5-1 Ylntlda ErnMrvnmvnml Cnnmlrinq, Inc Pmj. N. MC- IFI06 SECTION 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS This section contains full descriptions of any recognized environmental conditions (REC) that have been identified as a result of the Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening for the subject site. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. classifies a condition as a REC (as opposed to a de minimis condition) when it is one that involves a condition for which, in the opinion of Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc., further investigation and/or remediation is recommended. In addition to the descriptions of condition, this section also contains a statement of the recommended next -step actions for any conditions that are described in the following tables. Each identified condition receives its own table, and that table will collect together the particular findings from the body of the report that have been used to support Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc.'s conclusion as to the presence of a recognized environmental condition. For the benefit of the reader, the tables also contain the section numbers of the findings cited in support of the condition. (CONDITION # N/A IDENTIFIED CONDITION APPEARS TO BE A LOCATION:N/A ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION SECTION # COMMENTS N/A I No recognized environmental conditions appear to currently affect the subject site. DESCRIPTION OF CONDITION: N/A ACTION SUGGESTED: N/A TOTAL ESTIMATED COST TO COMPLETE SUGGESTED NEXT STEP ACTIONt N/A 6.2 DEMINIMIS CONDITION, HISTORICAL RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, AND CONTROLLED RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS This section contains descriptions of de minimis conditions, historical RECs, or controlled RECs that have been identified in the Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. Phase I Environmental Transaction Screening for the subject site. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. classifies an issue as a de minimis condition (as opposed to a REC) when (1) it involves issues that appear to pose no immediate or imminent threat to the subject site, but which over time (with the occurrence of groundwater movement, demolition, disturbance, etc.) may come to pose an actual or present REC for the subject site and/or when (2) it involves areas that currently appear to have a negligible impact on the Co,wi&to 2019 FMida F.lrvlmnmmml Cv,.fthig, Mn All MIN,.xa d 6-1 Fl-&u En9nrmn..... n.�ulrin,�. lnc Pngmi Nn FW-18-106 subject property and which do not, therefore, require additional investigation at this time, but of which Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. feels the client should be made aware. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. classifies a historical recognized environmental condition (HREC) as a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls. An HREC is limited to include only past releases that have been addressed to unrestricted residential use. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. classifies a controlled recognized environmental condition (CREC) as a recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable agency, with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls. Each identified condition receives its own table, and that table will collect together the particular findings from the body of the report that have been used to support Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc's conclusion as to the presence of that condition. For the benefit of the reader, the table also contains the section numbers of the findings cited in support of the condition. CONDITION # 1 LOCATION: Buildings IDENTIFIED CONDITION APPEARS TO BE A DE MINIMIS ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION DESCRlPT1ON OF CONDITION: Asbestos ACTION SUGGESTED: Disposal of applicable material by a qualified ACM remediator TOTAL ESTIMATED COST TO COMPLETE THE SUGGESTED NEXT STEP ACTION] $8,000410,000 fnp,riyhl L 2019 Fladd. Endmnmrnm/Conn/Qng, /ne All ngh%.5 d 6-2 ffvrWa Fmimnw.rnm/ [nnsulrinK, Imv Pmjm Nn PEBIFIM SECTION 7.0 LIMITATIONS To achieve the study objectives stated in this report, we were required to base Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc.'s conclusions and recommendations on the best information available during the period the investigation was conducted and within the limits prescribed by Florida Environmental Consulting, Ina's client in the contract/authorization agreement and standard terms and conditions. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc.'s professional services were performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by environmental consultants practicing in this or similar fields. The findings were mainly based upon examination of historic records, maps, aerial photographs, and governmental agencies lists. The hazardous waste site lists represented in this report represent only a search of the specific government records as listed above. It should be noted that governmental agencies often do not list all sites with environmental contamination; the lists could be inaccurate and/or incomplete. Recommendations are based on the historic land use of the subject property, as well as features noted during the site walk and examined records. The absence of potential gross contamination sources, historic or present, does riot necessarily imply that the subject property is free of any contamination. This report only represents a "due diligence" effort as to the integrity of the subject property. No warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional conclusions or recommendations contained in this report. The limitations contained within this report supersede all other contracts or scopes of work, implied or otherwise, except those stated or acknowledged herewith. This report is not a legal opinion. It does not necessarily comply with requirements defined in any environmental law such as the "innocent landowner defense" or "due diligence inquiry." Only legal counsel retained by the client is competent to determine die legal implications of any information, conclusions, or recommendations in this report. The compliance status, discussed in Section 3,0, is not intended for use as a guide to compliance for the present owner. Its intended use is to identify environmental impairments to the subject property and is not to be used as a guide to the legal compliance to any regulations of any kind. The findings, conclusions, recommendations, and professional opinions contained in this report have been prepared by the staff of Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. , in accordance with generally accepted professional practices. All cost estimates in Section 6.0, are purely estimates only, and may not represent the actual costs. Without further investigative assessment, exact, actual costs cannot be fixed. The costs associated with Florida Environmental Consulting, Ina's recommendations are for budgetary purposes only. This report does not address, in any way, septic systems, leach fields, septic tanks, or related health hazards. All asbestos, lead, or any other sampling is sampled in a good faith effort by Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. assessors. Sample results should not be construed as conclusive and binding in any way. All sampling conducted is only for the purposes of general screening and does not imply that all materials, locations, or hazardous materials have been identified nor was the sampling intended to identify every instance of the materials sampled. No interpretation of the sample results is made or implied. Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc only relays the information supplied by the laboratory conducting the analysis. THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED FOR THE SOLE USE AND BENEFIT OF OUR CLIENT, AND IS BASED, IN PART, UPON DOCUMENTS, WRITINGS, AND INFORMATION OWNED AND POSSESSED BY OUR CLIENT. NEITHER THIS REPORT, NOR ANY OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN, SHALL BE USED OR RELIED UPON FOR ANY PURPOSE BY ANY PERSON OR ENTITY OTHER THAN OUR CLIENT. ALL STANDARD TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND LIMITATIONS BY Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. APPLY AT ALL TIMES FOR THIS REPORT AND ALL REPORTS ISSUED BY Florida Environmental Consulting, Inc. C"p,ei,hl G 2018 r/nr/du Enrfrvnmmm/ (bnmbfng, Gee All ngLs memwl 7-1 Ff d& enrfrvnmmmi Unxu4fnA. 1". P,.*, N. F C-18-106 SECTION 8.0 FIGURES C.,,*W a 2018 Flarido Emvrvnmrnml Conwliing. Ir¢ All n011111 acd 8-1 H-W. FnWrvnmmrml fnmulring, lnc Pmpa Nn me-MlU0 SITE LOCATION TOPOGRAPHIC MAP U.S. Geological Survey. Sebastian (2015-08-10) Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series Florida Environmental Consulting,1215 Indian River Drive FIGURE: 1 JOB: FEG16-106 Inc. Sebastian, FL 32958 DATE: 2/22/2018 C.,righl 12018FlnridoF.nrirvnmrnml ConrulOng, lnr. All eigluxnsmwl 8-2 F'lurWU /nc`,l Nn KC- IR106 SITE LOCATION MAP Florida Environmental Consulting, 1215 Indian River Drive FIGURE: 2JOB: FEC-18-106 Inc. Sebastian, FL 32958 DATE: 2/2'212018 CopyryJn C 301R F/nrlrin 6rroirnnxrrnm/ CnrtndlinA• Mm All, glhlx rt..... 9-3 I'lnrldu F.mlrvrnnrenlal Cmrulllnq, /+n Prnj.0 Nn FEC-I F106 SECTION 9.0 APPENDICES CoplvllllF 2018 Florida Envimnrnrnml Grnsnl2rg,dne NI eights rcsmed Flurida L'n 4mn,n n W 0,.&M, Lro P,-1 N., FEG N406 APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF AGENCY CONTACTS I Frank Wantanabe 2 Charles Voght 3 Indian River County 4 Cathy Testa 5 Florida Department of Environmental Protection 6 Dori Bosworth City of Sebastian, Engineering Department of Environmental Health Property Appraiser City of Sebastian, Records Clerk ERA City Of Sebastian Planning Copyright[ 2918 Flontlo Gnriwrmmrvl CunaJtin}. fne AU rightsms 4 FlunPO Enrvmnmenrol Conndnw/;, /ne PraJm No FEC-1"06 Attachment 3. Commercial Waterfront Residential Zoning District, �. Sec. 54-2-5.5. - Commercial Waterfront Residential District (CWR) (a) Intent. The purpose and intent of the CWR District is to provide a management framework for implementing comprehensive plan objectives and policies for the Riverfront Mixed Use designation illustrated on the future land use map. All development in the Commercial Waterfront Residential District shall comply with the comprehensive plan, performance criteria in chapter III, as well as other applicable land development regulations. The CWR District is intended to preserve the existing character of the Riverfront area. The existing assets, including historical structures shall be protected, preserved and enhanced. The zoning district is intended to provide for a mixture of uses and a variety of opportunities for recreational, residential and commercial uses while protecting the environment. (b) Permitted uses: Single-family dwellings Duplex dwellings Multiple -family dwellings up to 8 units per acre Timeshare facilities Cultural or civic facilities Clubs and lodges, public and private Commercial retail <5,000 sq. ft. Foster care/group homes with <_ 6 residents Boat sales or rental Bait and tackle shops Fish markets/packing facilities Yacht clubs Restaurants excluding drive -through facilities Bars and lounges Trade and skilled services, marine -related only Marinas Marina fuel sales Marine power sales and service Home occupations Accessory uses to permitted uses (c) Conditional uses: Model homes Educational institutions, marine related Commercial retail > 5,000 sq. ft. Business & professional offices, excluding drive -through facilities Utilities, public and private Foster carelgroup homes with > 6 residents Parks and recreation, public Hotels and motels Parking lots without a building on the lot Protective and emergency services, public Bed and breakfast Wet or dry storage of boats Accessory uses to conditional uses (d) Size and dimension criteria: (1) Maximum density: 8 units per acre. (2) Maximum FAR: 50%. (3) Maximum height: West of Indian River Drive: 35 feet. East of Indian River Drive: 25 feet. (4) Lot coverage: Maximum building coverage: 30%. Maximum impervious surface: 80%. Minimum open space: Nonresidential: 25%. Residential: 50%. (5) Lot dimensions: Minimum lot size: 10,000 square feet. Minimum lot width: 80 feet. Minimum lot depth: 125 feet. (6) Minimum setbacks: Front yard: Nonresidential, with sidewalk, curb and gutter: None required. Nonresidential, without sidewalk, curb and gutter: 10 feet. Residential: 25 feet. Side yard: Nonresidential: 5 feet, except 10 feet when abutting a residential district or use. Residential: 15 feet plus one foot per each additional 2 feet in height above 25 feet. Rear yard: Nonresidential: 10 feet, except 30 feet when abutting a residential district or use. Residential: 20 feet. Minimum distance between residential structures on the same lot: 20 feet. (7) Minimum living area: Single-family dwellings: The minimum floor area required, exclusive of porches, terraces, attached garages, carport or unroofed areas, shall be 1,200 square feet. Duplex: 750 square feet per unit. Multiple family dwellings: Required Minimum Living Area in Multiple Family Dwellings Type Dwelling/4 Bedrooms Required # of Square Feet Efficiencies 600 One bedroom units 700 Required Minimum Living Area in Multiple Family Dwellings Type Dwelling/# Bedrooms Two bedroom units Three bedroom units Each additional bedroom after three bedrooms Required # of Square Feet 850 1,000 100 sq. ft. per additional bedroom (8) Required accessory structures: Every single-family and duplex dwelling unit shall be required to provide a garage or carport. If a carport or similar unenclosed structure is provided then each unit within the principal structure shall contain a fully enclosed utility storage area of at least 60 square feet which shall be designed as an integral part of the principal structure. If a fully enclosed garage is provided, then no utility structure shall be mandated. The garage or carport shall have a minimum interior clear dimension of ten feet by 20 feet. (e) Regulation of sales promotional activity: Sales activities for commercial resort residential units shall comply with all of the following criteria: (1) The original sale of the vacation time sharing plans may be conducted on premises in a sales office and in up to a maximum of two model units; (2) The on -site sales activity shall be limited to original developer sales; (3) The sales activity shall be conducted inside the sales office and model units so as not to be noticeable from the outside, except for permitted graphics; (4) On -site sales activities shall be terminated upon completion of original sales; and (5) A minimum of one parking space for each two proposed units shall be provided on site for the sales staff and potential purchasers' use during the (marketing) sales promotional and construction phases. (f) Conversions to time-share units: No development involving the conversion of an existing dwelling unit to a time-share unit may take place unless the applicant attaches to his application for zoning or site plan approval either: (1) A copy of any information required by the state, including as may be appropriate, a condominium declaration, sales prospectus, and/or other documents required by the state in regulating the use. Such material shall include a statement in prominent type declaring that time- share units will or may be created with respect to units proposed; and/or (2) An amendment to a prior existing condominium declaration that permits time-share estates to be created, which amendment has been executed by each record owner of each unit of the condominium and each record owner of each lien on each unit of the condominium. (g)Other required information. Applicants for a time-share use shall file with the city all public documents required by the state in regulating such use. The purpose of this requirement is to provide assurance that the applicant has been found in compliance with all requisite state regulations governing the use, including method of sales, operations, and other issues of public health, safety and welfare. (Ord. No. 0-12-10, § 3, 10-10-2012 K rt i ry 5 i 1 HARBOR LIGHTS -1215INDIAN RIVER DRIVE . 6 Qlwi fl88 q f t p 9� / , , , n � P \ P �• E MW I u - IN Site and Code Conditions: FLUM: Riverfront Mixed Use Parcel Size: 0.75 acres Current zoning: Commercial Waterfront Residential District (CWR) Permitted Uses: Multiple -Family Dwellings up to 8 units per acre Commercial retail less than or equal to 5,000 sq ft Potential Development Scenario: Density: 0.75 acres x 8 Dwelling Units per acre = 6 Dwelling Units 6 townhouses with 2-car garage, typical unit size 1,500 sq ft OR Dwelling Units above Retail Units Height: 2-3 stories Former "Harbor Lights Motel" Site Make this city -owned site a redevelopment project by envisioning a small-scale, mixed -use development such as, townhomes and three (3) story mixed -use with ground floor commercial retail, second floor live/ hotel/ work, third floor live/hotel with balconies providing water views along Indian River Drive. This redevelopment should capitalize on the site's location along the waterfront, the Indian River Drive "waterfront promenade', and the addition of a public waterfront park.Guarantee that the site is ready to be developed by conducting all the necessary surveys, tests, environmental review, and other procedures. Develop a specific strategy for the potential redevelopment which may include; 1. Prepare and issue a request for proposals solicitations for the site redevelopment; 2. Specify the intent and aspirations of the City with development incentives with items such as; public benefit bonuses and utility improvements; 3. Create "brochure" type real estate marketing material and promote site on website and at events where real estate, developers, bankers, and others meet. a [§I[IgM Wflll 19 [�I.fRhLh 1 i ♦��t � 5 Itt MwMx •u�lrlvn RI!!19Rr� swo, ar�.a rwr an�lsr.� r � m rwa.twa�.z, r rasa r J J.fI.11FYW � v+c-w+n,tm Concepfunf pfan of fOrmar "ff0.W Lighfs" mofsf with pofenUol smon•sCOV rralOC—Oe devefopmenf fwest of Jndian Rfver Drive), and warftnt Mark feosf of Indian RNer Dfr'vej. Aff€errv)ive I •J� X�.W;4dg TAr IY/ t A. tf1411YG pr Z i i Y h a Y4R0 S r1RlT1_l�_` Vi�YW� �' yyf1Y ' n 1a- .. mangy - -- - -----� �,.. ...,.tom° ConcepfuafsIreeI section of former "t-rorb(v Iighf5" mofef with poten ficiyra(7R-sCOfe rNxed use oevefcapir&nr twos of kidion River Drive), and waferrrorlf park (eosf of Indfan RiverWveJ Afterno five r Ej 9t Q ll 6. Attachment 6 Photoaraohs of vrooerty: PRO 2/17/2021 Sealed Solicitation I Vendor Registry R0EBRING 19 on -me cipct.e City of Sebring Sealed Solicitation Title: Development of the Sebring CRA Property 301 Circle Park Drive Deadline: 3/12/2021 3:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) Status: Open Solicitation Number: 21-008 Description: i/ndorRegistry powered by mal am"ree 7. The CRA is seeking proposals from qualified and experienced real estate developers interested in undertaking the development of the site located at 301 Circle Park Drive within the Sebring CRA District. The purpose of this solicitation is to continue implementation of the Community Redevelopment Plan by providing for the conveyance of the property owned by the CRA to the developer selected for redevelopment to remove conditions of slum and blight, increase the tax base, enhance the quality of life, improve the aesthetics and useful enjoyment of the redevelopment area, and promote the health, safety, morals and welfare of the residents of the CRA and the City. Due to the importance of this particular downtown development site, it is the intention of the CRA to consider certain development "incentives" to assist in making the project feasible which might include, but not be limited to, conveyance of the property at no cost, the payment of certain impact fees, housing incentives, tax increment rebates, etc. If the developer wishes to request incentives, they must outline their request as part of the proposal. This subject property is located at 301 Circle Park Drive and is a (1) story building totaling more than 3,300 square feet. The property has a prime location in the Historic District of Downtown Sebring, and is currently zoned C1 Commercial. The property has large display windows that wrap around the front of the building that would be well suited for retail or a restaurant. The property is situated on a corner parcel with high visibility from both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The property also comes with 3.0 https://vrapp.vendorregistry.com/BidsNiew/Bid/50fO6ofe-ffda-4734-ab9c-98dc2dad598e 112 2/17/2021 Sealed Solicitation I Vendor Registry dedicated parking spaces in the rear of the building. The building was constructed in 1950 and is cement block with metal trusses. The roof over the back storage area was replaced by the previous owner in December 2019, and the main building's roof was replaced in June 2020. A key objective as part of the CRA's redevelopment strategy for Downtown Sebring is the creation of eateries in and around the downtown area to create a recreational and entertainment environment. Only businesses that are located outside of the CRA district and looking to relocate or establish an additional location downtown will be considered. Scoring preference will be given to proposals including multi -family housing and businesses that are food and entertainment centered such as lunch/dinner eateries, bakery, coffee shop, sports bar, pub, brewery or tap room etc. The purpose of the property's redevelopment is to promote revitalization and to serve as a catalyst for the continued progression of the downtown. The CRA's preference is for a future use to include restaurants, retail, and/or entertainment with the goal of creating a destination for the community and surrounding areas to live, work, shop, and play in an effort to increase foot traffic in the area. The proposed structure's facade design will be reviewed for approval by the CRA board, and the City's Historic Preservation Commission. ****SITE VISIT REQUIRED**** Pre -Bid Meeting Details: ****SITE VISIT REQUIRED**** Documents: • 21-008 Development of the CRA Property 301 Circle Park Drive.pdf • CRA Redevelopment Master Plan - 2004.pdf https://vrapp.vendorregistry.com/BidsIView/Bid/50fO60fe-ffda-4734-ab9c-98de2dad59Be 2/2 2/17/2021 Sealed Solicitation I Vendor Registry EBRINCS C9 on T-pe CIRCLE City of Sebring Sealed Solicitation F/endorRe13istry powere by mtlf commerce Title: City of Sebring CRA - Development of the North Ridgwood Drive Site and Former Nancesowee Hotel Deadline: 3/12/2021 3:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) Status: Open Solicitation Number: 21-006 Description: The CRA is seeking proposals from qualified and experienced real estate developers interested in undertaking the development of the site located at 139 North Ridgewood Drive within the Sebring CRA District. The purpose of this solicitation is to continue implementation of the Community Redevelopment Plan by providing for the conveyance of the property owned by the CRA to the Developer selected for redevelopment to remove conditions of slum and blight, increase the tax base, enhance the quality of life, improve the aesthetics and useful enjoyment of the redevelopment area, and promote the health, safety, morals and welfare of the residents of the CRA and the City. Due to the importance of this particular downtown development site, it is the intention of the CRA to consider certain development "incentives" to assist in making the project feasible which might include, but not be limited to, conveyance of the property at no cost, the payment of certain impact fees, housing incentives, tax increment rebates, etc. If the developer wishes to request incentives, they must outline their request as part of the proposal. The now vacant parcel was home to the Nan-Cess-O-Wee Hotel, a 50-room historic hotel built in 1923 by Sebring's founder, George E. Sebring. The hotel was one of the original buildings in the historical downtown area, but had been closed since 2004. Over the years, the building fell into disrepair and was eventually condemned. The building was recently acquired by the CRA and out of necessity, was demolished. The property is zoned C-1 commercial, and an existing planned development agreement is applicable to the property from the previous owner. The CRA would support a reasonable change in the zoning if requested as part of the proposal to maximize the development opportunity. The proposed structure's fagade design will be reviewed for approval by the CRA board, and the City's Historic Preservation Commission. A key objective as part of the CRA's redevelopment strategy for Downtown Sebring is the creation of a residential concentration in and around the downtown area to create the support for a day -into -evening retail, office, recreational and entertainment environment. https:/lvrapp.vendorregistry.com/BidsNiew/Bid/b6a2ee97-ce5547ca-b5Of-06989598282b 112 2/17/2021 Sealed Solicitation I Vendor Registry There is a desire to provide market rate and workforce rental units to meet the county's unmet housing demand. The CRA envisions this parcel as a major opportunity to facilitate this strategy. Additional goals include revitalization within the broader downtown area, promotion of pedestrian traffic use throughout the day and evening, as well as enhanced linkages to compatible development with current and planned commercial, retail, and recreational centers within the downtown area. Highlands county recently conducted a housing study to analyze the housing market and provide recommendations for addressing the need for more market -rate rental options. The study demonstrated that multi -family inventory has been stagnant the past five years with no new units or developments delivered in the county in recent years. The results of the study indicated a pent up demand for multi -family housing and the need for over 600 multi -family units. The full study will be provided as an addendum for reference. Documents: • 21-006 Development of the North Ridgewood Drive Site and Former Nancesowee Hotel.pdf • Finai_-_Housing_Study_5.23.2019.pdf • CRA Redevelopment Master Plan - 2004.pdf https://vrapp.vendorregisLry.com/Bids/View/Bid/b6a2ee97-ce55-47ca-b50f-06989598282b 2/2