8-28-06 Agenda Packetcity of
at&urtk EBcad't
eitg Ccmmi04lOft
agenda
Qaguat28,2UU6
CITY OF ATLANTIC REACH
CITY COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 28, 2006
AGENDA
Call to order
Invocation and pledge to the flag
Approve minutes of the Regular Commission meeting of A uau.ct 14, 2006.
2. Courtesy of Floor to Visitors
1Tnfinished Business from Previous ]Meetings
A. City Manager's Follow-up Report (City Manager)
4. Consent Agenda
AT .T. MATTERS TTTNDPR THF. CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED
TO RF. R OT TTTNF. RY TNF. CITY COMMTS.STON AND WTT .T . RF FNA CTFf RY
(INF MOTT(IN TN TNF. EORM T .T.STF.TD RFT .OW, TI FRF. WIT T . RF. NO .SF.PAR ATF
DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IF nISCUSSTON TS nPSTRET), THAT TTFM
WILT. BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE
CONSTDFRFT) SEPAR ATET .Y. ST TPPORTTNCT DOLT TMENTATTON ANT) STA HI,
RF.COMMFNT)ATTONS TTAVF. BEEN PRF.VTOT TST .Y ST TRMTTTFT) TO THF. CTIY
COMMT.4.4TON ON IT -TP' F. TTF.M.,
A. Acknowledge receipt of Monthly Building Department Report for June 2006 and
Tilly 2006, Monthly Financial Reports, Public Safety Report and Code Enforcement
Report for July 2nn(S (City Manager)
B. Approve renewal of employee Health Insurance with Aetna effective October 1,
2006 for a one year period and retain the current benefits and City/employee
contrihiition ratios (City Manager)
C'. Approval of a TTse-hy-Exception for T.anrlshark Cafe to allow for the on -premise
consumption of beer and wine in association with a restaurant within the
Commercial General (CG) Zoning nistrict at 1013 Atlantic R_ulevgrd within the
Atlantic Village Shopping Center (City Manager)
Committee Reports
None
6. Action on Resolutions
A. RF.SOT,TJTTON NO. 06-09
Resolution authorizing a Maintenance Contract Renewal with the Florida Department of
Transportation
B. RESOLUTION NO. 06-10
Resolution expressing concern related to the potential for adverse tro ffic impacts. which may
he generated by a proposed Wal-Mart
7. Action on Ordinances
A. ORT)TNANCF NO. 90-06-195, Introduction and Public Hearing
AN ORT)TNANCF. OE TT -TR. CTTY ()E ATT.ANTTC REACH, COTTNTY OE T)TTVAT,
'TATE OE FT OR TTI A. AMFNT)TNCT ORT)TNANCF NTTMRFR ()n_n1_177..4ATT)
ORDINANCE RE -ADOPTING CHAPTER 7d. AND INCLUDING AT L _'ZUBSFQUENT
AMF.NDMF.NTS THERETO, THIS ORDINANCE SPECIFICALLY AMENDING
A RTTCT F. TTT, DTVTSTON 7, STTPPT.EMRNTARY REGTTT.ATTONS, OE THF. CODE OE
ORT)TNANCFS FOR IT -TE C:TTY ()E ATT.ANTTC RFACT-T, ET.ORTT)A TS HF.RFRY
AMFNTIFTI TO AT)TI NF.W .4FCTTON 74_177, RF..STT)FNTTAT . T)FVFT .OPMFNT
'ZTANDARDS. PROVIDTM( EOR RFCORTIATTON ANTI PROVTTITNCT AN FEFFCTTVF.
DATE.
R.
R, ORT)TNANCF NO, '70..06-R0
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF
ATT.ANTTC REACT --T. ET.ORTT)A FOR ET.SCAT. YEAR RF.CTTNNTNCT OCIOREP 1,
2005 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006
Miscellaneous Rusiness
A. TTopkins Creek Regional Retention Eacility — T and Purchase (City Manager)
B. Report of the Annual Actuarial Valuation for Police officers' Retirement .4yctem
and for General Employee Retirement Systems ending September 30. 2005 (City
Manger)
C. Reclassification of the .Recretary position in the City Clerk's Office (City Clerk)
9. City Manager
A. City Manager's Report
1n, Reports and/or requests from City Commissioners and City Attorney
A - Recommendation for appointment to the Corte Enforcement Board (Mayor)
B. Report on the Proposed T of Subdivision Ordinance (City Attorney)
Adjournment
If any person derides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with respect to any
matter considered at any meeting, such person may need a record of the proceedings. and. for such
purpnse, may need tn ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record shall
include the testimony and evidence upnn which the appeal is tn he based.
Any person wishing to speak to the city Commission on any matter at this meeting sh_nld n brit
request to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. For your convenience. forms for this purpose are
available at the entrance to the Commission Chambers.
Fvery effort is made to indicate what action the City Cnmmissinn is expected to take on each
agenda hero. uowPvPr. the city Commission may act upon any agenda subject. regardless of how
the matter is stated on the agenda.
Tn accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 286.26. Florida Statutes,
persnns with disabilities needing special accommodation to participate in this meeting should
contact the City Clerk by S;nn PM, Eriday, August 75, 7nn6.
MIhuTEs
12FGITLAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
August 1 7, NM
CITY NAT .T ., Rfl l SFMTNOT ,F. ROAD
Attendance TN ATTENDANCE:
Mayor Donald Wolfson
Mayor pro Tem T. fezmond Waters TTT
Commissioner Mike Rorno
Commissioner Sylvia N. Simmons
Commissioner Jamie Fletcher
Call to Order/Pledge
Cites Manager Tim Hanson
City Clerk Donna T Bussey
City Attorney Alan C. Jensen
Mayor Wolfson called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance to
the Flag followed the Invocation, given by Commissioner Rorno.
Approval of Minutes 1.
Courtesy of the Eloor
Approve minutes of the Regular Commission meeting of July 24, 20(16 and
two Special Called meetings of August 2, 2006.
Motion: To approve the minutes of the Regular Commission Meeting on July 24,
2(1(16 and two Special Called meetings of August 2, 2006 as presented
Movedby Commissioner Rorno, seconded by Commissioner Simmons
Votes:
Aye: S - Rorno, Eletcher, Simmons, Waters, Wolfson
Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED
Courtesy of the Eloor to Visitors
The Mayor opened the floor to Courtesy of the Eloor to Visitors.
Cam Van Leer, president of Reaches Area Historical Society,
Bill Hillegass, 'Wernher of the Board of Directors for Beaches Area Adstordcad
Society, and Holly Reasley, Executive Director for Reaches Area Historical
Society, announced that the new museum opened in March and won awards during a
Builder's and Contractor's Conference in the category of zero to two million dollar
projects for the construction and the overall award for all projects for the year. They
thanked the city for continuing to support them and the Mayor returned thanks for
their efforts.
Judy Saylor, Rig Rrothers and Rig Sister of Northeast Elorida. explained they
have a partnership with the Beaches Resource Center to increase the awareness and
need for mentors for children and schools. She reported they offer programs that
target children from low income families and children who are at academic risk for
failure. This program is called Beaches Mentoring Initiative and to launch the
A ug,Ist 1 el, 71111t
REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING
Page
program, they will hold a breakfast at the Casa Marina on August 24th at 7:30 am. She
asked for support from the commission and invited them to the Breakfast.
Man Potter, 374 2" Street, addressed the problems +h a±resulted in flooding due to a
metal gate placed in the Aquatic Garden area by the City and reported that since the
gate was removed, no flooding has occurred. He expressed concerns with the plan to
purchase two acres from Sunrise community church for the purpose of a retention
pond. He urged the Commission not to pay top dollar for the church property.
Mary TTpdike, 47 Third Street, favors increased property regulations and the
residential development standard and suggested the EAR he no greater than a point 54
(.54). She thanked the Commission for their work.
Mayor read an announcement from Former Mayor Lyman Fletcher, who could not
make if to the meeting. He announced that there would be a meeting on Thursday,
August 17th a+ Adele Grage cultural Center starting at 7:00 pm regarding the purchase
and preservation of the Marsh / Wetlands and that the meeting is open to the public.
Unfinished Business Tnfinished Business from Previous Meeting
from Previous Meeting A. city Manager's Eollow-up R eport
Consent Agenda
City Manager .Tim Hanson explained that information came in after written reports
were submitted for the agenda packet dealing with the Walmart traffic studies. He
reported Neptune Beach provided him with two different studies and distributed a
copy of the main documents of hoth to them for their review. He offered to make
copies of the appendix if interested. He reported the conclusions of both traffic
studies. The first rated at a grade of "C" with little impact on traffic, but the second
rated at a grade of "E" for "Eailing ' which indicated Walmart would add traffic to
roads that were already failing. He explained the arguments from both studies
regarding their conflicting results.
4. Consent Agenda
A. AArnowledge receipt of Monthly Public Works and Utilities Department
Report, Utility Sales and List of New Occupational Licenses for July 2006
(City Manager)
R. Waive the $10,000 hid limit and accept the lowest quote from Guardian
Eueling Technologies in the amount of $12,093.92 for Upgrading the
City's Euel Management System (City Manager)
C. Extend the annual contracts for environmental laboratory services (REP
#05-6) for one additional year to Advanced Environmental Services, Inc.
and to Columbia Analytical Services at the current contract prices, and
authorize staff to use Water Laboratories for bacteriological testing (City
Manager)
1). Authorize the City Manager to sign contracts with the top two firms,
1)RMP
R T.,1). Rradlev Land Surveyors, for one year, with options to extend the
contracts for two 1 -year periods (RFP # (16-2)(City Manager)
F. Extend the janitorial contract (Bid No. 04h5-1 0) with Coverall Cleaning
Services for one (1) year to expire on August- 11. 7007 (City Manager)
Committee 1? eports
A ction on P esolutions
Action on Ordinances
August 1d, )nn1
PF.r_IfT,AP C(IMMISSION MEETING Page 3
Motion: To approve Consent Agenda as presenters.
Moved by Simmons, seconded by Borno
votes:
Aye: 5 - BOrno, Eletcher, Simmons, Waters, Wolfson
Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED
5. Committee Reports
None.
6. Action nn Resolutions
None.
7. Action on Ordinances
A_ Ordinance No. 90-06-194, Final Reading and Pithily Hearing
AN ORDINANCE OE THE CTTY OE ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA,
CALLING FOR A REFERENDUM To AMFNn RFC= co OE THF CITY
rnARTF,R 10 T,TMTT THF, HF.IGUI OE AI,I, BUILDINGS IN THE
CTTY TO THIRTY-FIVE FEET, PROVIDING FOR FXrF aTfNR, ANn
PROVIDTNG AN FFFF,CIIVF. T)ATF.
Mayor Wolfson read the ordinance by title only and opened the floor to a public
hearing.
Susie Snead, 261 Reach Avenue, expressed the importance of the l5 ft, height limit
but is concerned that the lack of understanding by the citizens in regards to the
exception for the Rea Turtle Tnn could cause the Referendum to fail.
.Tack Robbins, 1435 Linkside Drive, expressed that the Sea Turtle Tnn should he able
to expand if necessary to stay open. He believed that an expansion would not hurt the
city. but could help it.
There being no further comments from the audience, the mayor closed the public
hearing.
Motion: To approve Ordinance No. 90-06-194 on the first reading.
Moved by Borno, seconded by W 'ters
Commissioner Borno reiterated he believed the language is micromanaging in its
phraseology but he could live with it. He wanted to remind everyone even though the
Sea Turtle Inn would be exempted from the 15 ft. limit, they would have to come
before the Commission for any plans to change or eYpand on the property in the
fi,ture.
Commissioner Fletcher indicated the referendum is a critical step forward for the City
to protect the it's character.
August 14, 2006
REGULAR CrnvrMTSCT(INMFF.ITN(_ Page a
Votes:
Aye: _5 - Rorno, Fletcher, Simmons, Waters, Wolfson
Nay: 0
MOTION CAPRTFTI
Miscellaneous Business S. Miscellaneous Business
A. Expansion of -Jordan Community Center to Accommodate After School
Tutoring Program (City Manager)
city Manager Hanson reported that the Beaches Habitat has made a proposal to the
city to expand the Jordan Park Community Center in order to build a hetter facility to
conduct after school homework programs and they want to provide some
management to the program as well. He explained how the center is currently hung
utilized and the plans for the future.
Ralph Marcello, Fxecutive Director of Reaches Habitat, introduced his staff
and explained their roles in the project. T -Te explained that T-Terh Schiedel is
responsible for starting the education program and has agreed to donate up to
$75,nnn to build the addition. He thanked the Commission for their support.
commissioner Waters, Commissioner El etcher and Mayor Wolfson thanked Mr.
Marcello and his staff for their program and Mr. Schiedel for his generous
donations.
commissioner Rorno asked for the expected date of completion. Mr. Paul Finley
indicated this project has been placed at a high priority and that once permits are
issued, completion is expected within four months.
Motion: To approve the request by Reaches Habitat to allow for the
construction of an addition to the -Torun Earl( Community Center and to
allow the use of that center for the after school tutoring program.
Moved by Rorno, Seconded by Waters
Votes:
Aye: 5 - Rorno, Fletcher, Simmons, Waters, Wolfson
Nay: 0 -
MOTION CARRTVD
B. Request from the 15th Street Beach Access CommLtee for matching funds
for improvements at 15th Street Reach Access (City Manager)
Parks and Recreation firector Johnson introduced Ross Bremer, President of 1 5th
Street Access Committee. Mr. Bremer introduced the committee members who were
in the audience. Mr. Johnson explained the Committee's request.
Angnst 1d, 211116
RF({TTT.AR COMMISSION MEETING
Page S
motion: Approval of a request from the Committee for one grant to the 15th
Street Reach Access Committee for matching funds of $4,000 for improvements
at 15th Street Beach Access.
Moved hy Rorno,, seconded hy Fletcher
Commissioner Borno questioned several aspects of the plans and Mr. Bremer
addressed Commissioner Borno's concerns. Commissioner Waters thanked the
committee and reminded Mr. Bremer to go through the city for purchases to avoid
paying sales tax.
Commissioner Simmons asked for clarification that the motion would approve funds
for landscaping but not for the pavers. Mayor Wolfson indicated that the matching
fiinds of 54,000 is the maximum amount allowed and can be used for any of the
improvements. Commissioner Rimmons expressed concern that the pavers east of the
entry io»ld be mistalren_as a private driveway. she inquired how the parking spaces
would be marked. Mr. Bremer explained both sides would have parking signs.
Commissioner Borno asked if the access was handicap designated. Mr. Bremer
answered that it is not. Commissioner Waters questioned the number of parking
spaces and whether help was needed to beautify the area. Mr. Bremer advised there
are eighteen parking spaces and that any help the city could offer would be
appreciated.
Mayor Wolfson expressed safety concerns and noted emergency vehicles may need to
access the beach. He suggested using the appropriate paving to accommodate the
weight of the vehicles.
Votes:
Aye: 5 - Borno, Fletcher, Simmons, Waters, Wolfson
Nay: ()-
MOTION CARRTF1)
C. Bid Award (Bid No. 0506-14) for the Computer Network Fiber Optic
Cabling project (City Manager)
Public safety Director Thompson explained the background and the necessity of the
project as indicated in his staff report. T -Te elrplained the bid results and his
recommendation.
motion! lo award the hid for the Fiber Optic Cahling project to Iruevance
Management, Inc_ in the amount of $(7.,7.(10.011.
Moved hy Simmons, seconded hy Borno
Discussion ensued regarding the conduit. the time frame on the project and the
placement of the lines.
A „2„ct 14, 2006
REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING Page 6
Votes:
Aye: 5 - Rorno, Eletcher, Simmons, Waters, Wolfson
Nay: 0 -
MOTION CARRIED)
n,
Proposed Changes to Chapter 21 Vegetation, Article II. Tree Protection
(City Manager)
Puhlic Works Director Rick Carper explained the background on the Tree Board's
efforts and helieved the proposed 'administrative' changes to be non -controversial
and ready for implementation.
Commissioner Waters initiated a discussion on the language pertaining to the
replacement of protected oaks. He made suggestions on new language. Mayor
Wolfson explained the intent and disagreed with Commissioner Waters' suggestion.
Mr. Carper explained his understanding of the intent of the Tree Board. Commissioner
Fletcher expressed his concerns and offered suggestions on w'w language. City
Attorney advised the Commission that this would come hac>< in the form of an
ordinance and could be reviewed and discussed again at that time. Commissioner
El etcher requested that the language regarding punishment be clear.
City Manager Hanson explained the authority and options for punishment for a
violation of the Tree Ordinance. Commissioner Simmons questioned the fines and
mitigation associated with removing trees without a tree permit. Rick Carmer advised
that the city would m'1re them get a permit and mitigate the trees that were removed.
City Manager Hanson added that the prnit fee would he doubled. Eurther discussion
ensued.
The ennsensus was to send the ordinance hack to staff for coordinating with the
City Attorney to prepare the ordinance for first reading.
F.
Reclassification of the Secretary position in the City Clerk's Office (City
Clerk)
City Clerk Bussey thanked the Commission for considering her request and presented
a hrief summary of the background regarding her request and the recommendation as
stated in the staff report. commissioner Simmons questioned why the request was
being made and whether additional duties have heen assigned to the Clerk's Office or
that position that would make it necessary to increase the salary. Ms. Bussey
explained the current job description is very generic and does not reflect what that
person does. She helieved her Secretary's duties are at least equivalent to or more
than that of an Administrative A ssistant and explained some of the differences
required by her Secretary that the others do not have. She emphasized her Secretary is
second in command and assumes the City Clerk duties when the City Cleric is absent
which is not the case with current Administrative Assistants.
Commissioner Waters expressed his support in moving towards a neputy City Clerk
and pointed out the demands on the City Clerk's Office iQ higher than ever hefore.
A„g„et id lnn(
RF.CaTT.AP CONEnusSTON MEETING
Page 7
He expressed the need to recruit higher quality candidates than the job description
requires.
City Manager Hanson explained he and the City Clerk have a professional difference
of opinion on the issue and understands that, like all department heads, she wants the
best for her department. T -Te explained the pay plan and how it was put together hy a
professional consultant with input from the employees. T -Te reported the joh was rated
then at a Secretary position and that he cannot see a significant amount of change. He
indicated he could argue leaving the position at the current pay grade or raising it one
pay grade but does not agree with reclassifying to a Grade 17. He expressed concerns
if the position is at a higher grade than other employees, they might leave their
departments to take the higher paying job. Mr. Hanson complimented the City Clerk
and was bothered hy having a difference of opinion with her.
Mayor Wolfson complimented the City Manager, City Clerk and their staff for their
excellent job and explained that having differences of opinion is normal, is part of the
process, and does not change the respect for each other.
Commissioner 1lorno explained the lack of latitude with the current pay system and
pointed out areas of the grade scale that may need to he evaluated.
Commissioner Waters expressed concerns with having jobs vacant for long periods of
time. T -Te explained training temporary employees is not an efficient use of staff and
especially during the husiest time of the year. T -Te expressed a request for an
Administrative Assistant is reasonable and that he does not oppose to a Deputy City
Clerk either. 1 -Te explained his observation of the increased demands on City Staff and
the importance of paying attention to details and deadlines.
Mayor Wolfson read the recommendation from the Human P esource Manager George
Foster recommending the position be reclassified to a Grade 17 and asked the City
Manager to clarify the recommendation. Mr. Hanson indicated that he did not
recommend changing the grrade from a 1 S hut could support either leaving it or raising
it one grade. T -Te did not want to comment on Mr. Foster's recommendation hut
expressed that he believed to have looked at the other johs closer than Mr. Foster.
Commissioner Simmons expressed that she needs more time to look over the
information provided and receive additional information in order to get a better
understanding of the issues. She requested comparisons to other cities he part of the
research and information.
Motion: To defer indefinitely.
Moved by Simmon.
MOIT(lN 1)TF1) (Due to lack of a second)
Motion: To defer until the next meeting.
e,.g.r 14, '7006 REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING
Moved by Simmons, seconded by Borno
Page Q
Commission Fletcher expressed support for Ms. Russey's recommendation. He
Pointed out that an examination was done at the appropriate time and that Mr. Eoster
recommended raising the Grade to 17. He believed that rerr»itment wi11 he impacted
but budget impacts are fairly minimal. He explained that the demands on staff in the
City Clerk's Office have increased and that the Commission needs help from that
office in order to keep up. He believed that delaying will put further burden on the
City Clerks Office and will impact the Commission unnecessarily.
Commissioner Romo reiterated the need for further study of the cities pay structure in
conjunction with this. Mayor Wolfson asked if delaying to more weeks would
significantly impact the office. Ms. Bussey explained that every day the joh is vacant
impacts the office. Commissioner Fletcher asked for the timeline on when the
vacancy could he filled. Ms. Bussey explained that delaying the decision would mean
nine more, weeks before a person could start.
Ms. Bussey believed that clarification was necessary regarding the proposed job
description. She indicated that the need to revise the job description was mainly
because the duties were not properly incorporated in the original/current job
description at the time of the pay study and therefore, does not properly reflect the
duties nor the proper pay for that position. Ms. Bussey answered questions from the
Commission regarding the proposed job description. She explained the highlighted
text. the underlined text and the strikeouts. She referred to the other attachments in the
packet as questions were asked.
Mayor Wolfson explained that a motion was on the floor to defer action until the next
meeting in two weeks to allow time for each Commissioner to review the information
and ask questions prior to the meeting.
Commissioner Waters requested a Roll Call vote.
Poll Can votes:
Rorno — aye
Fletcher — nay
cimmfins — aye
Waters — nay
Wolfson — aye
Aye 1; Nay 2
MOTION CARRIED
Cit}' Manager 9. City Manager
A. City Manager's Report
City Manager Tim 1-Tanson referred the Commission to his written report, which is
attached and made part of this official record as Attachment A. His report discussed
August 14, 2006
REGULAR COMMISSION MFF 'Mr=
Paan 0
Grant Offered from Water Management District for Wastewater Rense Project. T - Te
explained that more information will be discussed on this item during the Budget
Workshop on Wednesday, August 1 (, 7006.
Reports/Requests 10. Reports and/nr requests from City Commissioners and City Attorney
city Commissioners A. Opinion on the Proposed Ordinance (City Attorney)
City Attorney
Reported the proposed ordinance has been reviewed by City Attorney Jensen and
Attorney Ijofla+ and that both have expressed concerns with certain provisions of the
ordinance as drafted. Ordinance may be subject to consistency cha11enge relative to
the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Doerr was not at the meeting to address this. Further
input from City Attorney was requested. Attorney Jensen noted a contradiction
between provisions # S and #6, and also that #f may he prohlematical related to
existing platted lots. mayor has discussed with City manager, noting that this is not
an easy subject, but that this needs to be moved forward because of moratorium.
mayor suggested that this matter needs to be brought back to forefront so that the City
can come up with a resolution as to how to address these lot subdivisions. Attorney
Tensen advised the Commission to go hack and consider the original intent of the
change to the ordinance. which was to change administrative approval of two -lot
divisions to the Community Development Board and that this is accomplished within
the proposed ordinance and also to set forth additional criteria, including that there be
no fi,rther division of platted lots. Attorney Jensen stated his concern that this may not
be defensible in court. noting that Attorney Ijoflat agrees with his opinion.
Concerns include consistency Comprehensive Plan and more serious potential for Bert
Harris Act claims, and no data and analysis to determine how many properties might
be affected or to support the need for this may he seen as arhitrary and capricious. Mr.
Jensen stated that #5 (resultant lot may not he small the an original platted lots) is
okay, hut that #F (no further subdivision of lots) may present legal problems. mayor
commented regarding the history of dividing property within the city using his
property as an example. Attorney Tensen explained that this is not consistent with how
city has developed Over The years. Commissioner waters asked what is the point of
approving an original subdivision if it can later be changed. Attorney Tensen
addressed the question, stating that areas change over time. Commissioner Waters
stated that he believes most of the divisions have been illegal divisions, and that the
City should not approve changes to neighborhoods once the City has approved these,
and there should be a mechanism for the City to stop this: that rules should not he used
to allow changes to neighborhoods, but that raw land should be treated differently.
mr. waters continued that built -out neighborhoods should not be allowed to change.
mr. Tensen commented that the City needs to move forward with this draft or some
version so that the moratorium can be lifted. Attorney Tensen and Attorney Tjoflat
have both advised that passing the ordinance with included would not he legally
advisahl e.
Mr. Waters wanted to protect platted lots. Attorney -Tensen noted that many lots have
been chopped -up already. Mayor noted that many platted lots as they were created
have already been changed and divided up for many years.
August 14. 2006
1F('_TTT.eu CnMviMTSQTnNATV FITNC. page in
Discussion of Bert Harris and legal implications continued. Commissioner Eletrher
asked Attorney Jensen to expand on the Bert Harris issue, stating that he wants to find
a way around that issue. Mayor addressed the reasons for not allowing further
diviQions, and Commissioner Dorno stated that the zoning regulations and
requirements already address this. niscussion continued. Mr. Waters stated that he
believes this would just create additional protection to enforce what is already in place
and that he wants absolute protection of residential subdivisions so that subdivisions
of raw land would he allowed, and land that has already been divided and developed
with lots ("wild not he divided. niscussion about combining lots followed. Mayor asks
Commissioner Waters if he believes an area like Royal Palms is an eYample, and
noted that the current ordinance would also prohibit combining three lots to then
divide into two lots. Borno asked Commissioner Water to further explain his intent.
The Mayor commented that they need to move towards action so that moratorium can
be lifted. Attorney Tensen noted that there is a subdivision process in place now.
Commissioner Fletcher stated he has not seen this draft and wants to look at this issue
and ask for a review by Attorneys Jensen and Tjoflat and also to provide options.
Commissioner Borno statM his opposition to the proposed change and opposes to
taking this away from administrative approval and putting this hefore an appointed
board. City should stay with the existing ordinance and get rid of moratorium.
Commissioner Simmons agreed with Commissioner Borno, and does not think Board
volunteers should be put in this position. Mr. Jensen asked to provide further review
of the current draft and alternatives and hring back for next meeting.
Commissioner Borno
➢ Stated that he enjoyed the Florida Teague of Cities Conference and plans to
distribute information he received during the Conference to the other
Commissioners and to staff.
➢ Indicated that the Post Office is lacking signage and marks that could help
drivers understand the flow of traffic. Asked is the Post Office is responsible
for putting in arrows or if the city should step in and see if help is needed. Mr.
Hanson advised that similar comments have been made to him already and
planned to take it up with Rick Carper. Mr. Carper indicated that we might
offer painting the marks or arrows. Mayor Wolfson suggested letter be sent to
the Post Office with our concerns and request.
Commissioner Rimmons
➢ Attended a Neighborhood Chat and reported on items which would require a
budget to be thinking about for the Workshop: 1) Increasing the lights in the
Marsh oaks area at night- suggested that staff drive it to see what is needed
and emphasized that there are high crime areas that need attention; 7..)
Proposed sidewalks- reported that the plan for a sidewalk on west 1 Sf street
may not be warranted due to lack of traffic, and suggested considering a
sidewalk instead of a Ped Path on Main Street since the residents seem content
with riding hikes on the street; 1) Installing a three way stop at Rose Street and
Plaza intersection.
Commissioner Waters
• Stated his opinion on lot subdivision.
• Stated that he also enjoyed attending the Elorida Teague of Cities Conference.
A„g.,st 1d, inn(
PF(_TTT.AP COMMISSION MF.FTTN(_ Paga 11
Mayor Wolfson
➢ Thanked Commissioner Waters for encouraging staff and Commissioners to
attend ET C conferences over the years and believed it to he an incredihle
opporhinity for the Commissioners to have exposure that they normally would
not have. Also thanked the Commissioners for attending.
➢ R eported that he attended the first Florida Teague of Mayors "get together"
and reported that half of the Mayors from the 4(14 cities in Florida attended and
valuahle feedback was given.
• Thanked Commissioner Porno for giving him information regarding Wi-Fi.
He believes that it is coming to municipalities of our size and explained it is an
opportunity, if deemed warranted, to make the entire city wireless. He
indicated that he would follow up with a report for long range planning.
• Reported that Ran Tose, California has heen identified as the city in T Tnited
States having the most successful methodology for approaching affordable
housing. Reported that there are plans to gather information from San Jose to
see if that is something hlpful to us.
• Grantfiul for the opportunity to network with the other mayors to gain valuable
information on issues that are similar to ours.
➢ Thanked the Commissioners for attending the Beachside Chats and explained
that full reports will be given. He believed that attendance can be increased
with changes to the method of informing the neighborhoods and intends to
meet with the City Clerk to discuss ideas.
• Referenced the traffic study received by Neptune Reach. He expressed
concern and believed that it is time to take a position. He indicated his desire
to have the City Manager and City Attorney look over the study and prepare a
resolution expressing the Commissions position on the traffic failure at the
intersection
cif Atlantic Roulevard and ceminole Road.
Adjournment There being no filrther discussion, the Mayor declared the meeting
adjourned at q;57 pm.
Donald M. Wolfson, Mayor/Presiding Officer
Donna T -. Russev
City Clerk
August 71, 7006
MEMORANDUM
TO: The TTnnnrahle Mayor
and Members of the City Commission
FROM: J. Hanson
City Manager
ST TR TF.f T: l l nw-n
epor+
AGENDA #'IA
ATTGUST 28, 7nnr,
Signage at Plaza Street Entrance to Post Office; The City received several cnmplaints and
recommendations from citizens recommending imprnvPmentc to the signage and street markings
for the new public entrance to the Pnst office frnm plaza Street. All of the recommendations
dealt with improvements nn Pnst nfAce property and not on the city right-of-way. Because this
project had heen proposed and promoted by the City of Atlantic Beach, and because the Pnst
Office timetable to get this type of improvements completed was very long, city staff offered to
move one confusing sign and paint some arrows nn the traffic lanes nn Pnst Office property.
This work will be completed by the end of August.
Traffic Cnncurrency: A discussion was held at the last 'commission meeting about what rights
cities have in Elorida under the concurrency provisions of the Growth Management Act to
approve or deny new developments that may impact traffic. The City of Atlantic Reach dnes
have the authority to utilize traffic data in cnnsidering the apprnval of develnpments in nor
community that may significantly impact traffic. A memn nntlining the powers of Atlantic
Reach under state law and pnr local Comprehensive Plan from Sonya Doerr dated August 16,
9006 is attached fnr ynur information.
Request for Three Way Stop at Plaza/Rose Street; At the last commission meeting a
Commissioner passed on a request from residents in the vicinity of Plaza and Rose Street for a
three-way stop to be installed. David Thompson has inspected the intersection and found that the
visibility is fine and that there are sidewallrs nn the west side of Rose Street. There have not
heen many accidents at this location over several years. It does not appear that a three-way stop
is justified. The Police Department will conduct a speed study at this location with the traffic
counter and assign officers to utilize radar equipment to determine if there is a speeding prnhlem.
When the information is complete, it will he repnrted to the city enmmissinn,
Streetlight Pnlicy; Another complaint was passed along at the last meeting concerning a request
fi,r additional streetlights. particularly on the west side of Mayport Road. The city created a
policy for the location of new streetlights several years ago to aid in the evaluation of similar
requests. The City currently pays about $5,000 per month for streetlights to the IPA, and new
ones can he installed nn existing light poles at the city's request. fenerally. the city's policy is
AGENDA # 3A
AUGUST 28. 2006
to install streetlights frnm 150 to 2n0 feet apart in developed areas. Additional street lighting can
also be ins+ailed where thexP has been a crime prnhlem nr a traffic hazard of some sort exists.
Generally, the procedure upon receipt of a eornplaint is to have a pnli'e nffeer to lnnk at the area
in question during the night and consider the crime history and make a recommendation to their
supervisor. Since this policy was established, many additional streetlights have been added in
Atlantic Reach, particularly in the Marsh Oaks area. Please keep in mind that the purpose of
streetlights is to light the streets and not necessarily to light adjoining property. If it is the
citizen's request for lighting is to improve the safety on their own property, they should install a
security light instead. A copy of the city's streetlight policy dated 1/1 1 /09is attached for your
use.
AGENT) a #3A
a-TGUST 98, 2006
City of Atlantic Beach
800 Se*ninole R=ad
Atlantic Beach, Florida 12233
Telephone (904) 247-5800
Fax (904) 247-5805
www.coah.us
MEMO , NINTM
In:
Mayor and City Commission
Tim Hanson, City Manager
FROM: Sonya Doerr, AICP
Community Development Director
WATT; August 16, 2.nn6
SUBJECT: Concurrency
The Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985
(the Growth Management Act) required local governments to develop concurrency
management systems to ensure that public facilities and services, including transportation
facilities, whose purpose is to support new development, would he available concurrent with
the impacts of such development. Most local rnmmrnnities have been implementing
concurrency requirements since their Comprehensive Plans were approved in the early
1990s.
Chapter 1 Fit, Section 1 61.11Rn_, Florida Statutes, established the statutory framework for
ronen rency and required six infrastructure systems nr urban services to be in place prior to
or soon after new development orrrnrs: roads, pot hle water, wastewater, solid waste,
stormwater, and parks and recreation. School concurrency was originally to he part of the
State mandate as well, but the projected cost of this requirement and the issue of how to get
local governments and school districts to work together scuttled this requirement. Rules for
how concurrency management systems were to he implemented and administered were set
forth in Chapter 91_5 of the Florida Administrative Code,
Since 1985, periodic revisions have been made to the State's concurrency provisions.
Significant changes to concurrency law were made by the Legislature in 2005 with the
enactment of SR 160, School rnneurrenccy is now required. The 2005 legislation also
mandateS that development permits cannot he denied if the developer pays a "fair -share
contribution" of the cost to m;tigate development impacts. The 7.005 legislation also
introduced broader criteria for determining financial feasibility of new development allowing
local governments the flexibility to rely on developer contributions and other revenue sources
AGENDA #
AUGUST 9R, 9nnr,
"reasonably anticipated" to be available np tn ten Vears intn the future. As a result,
transportation Concurrency may he mach less of an impediment tn develnpment in the fi'ture,
althnngh development may he more costly for developers who meet npt tn pay the. fair share
cnntrihntinn to nhtain a permit.
While simple in principle, in practice concurrency has proven very difficult to implement.
Opinions as to the success and failure of concurrency are the subject of endless political,
legal and academic dialogue and writings. concurrency review and the implicatinns nf
cnncnrrency are dram tiCally different for large high-growth urban areae, nnnnties and rural
areas as rnmpared to ve.ry small hnilt-Hilt jnriedintinns cue.h as the city nf Atlantis' Reach,
The city of Jacksonville's fair share program to address transportation concurrency is
extremely complex, and typical to the many varied systems used across the State, hiply
criticized.
Tn general, the City of Atlantis Reanh does not have sufficient vacant land innate(' within
llevelnpme.nt Are.as, ac en decimated by the. Comprehensive. Plan, whPxe. de.ve.lnpment of a
size could occur that would have any impact on adopted level of service standards as
established in the Comprehensive Plan. Transportation concurrency legislation also
recognizes and defines some development to have a de minimis impact. Eor example, a
single-family home nn an existing int nnnstitutes a de minimis impact nn all roadways, and a
de minimis e.xceptinn from nnncurre.ncy is made..
Exceptions to transportation concurrency may also be granted by the local government for
areas that are designated in the local Comprehensive Plan for: 1) urban infill development,
2) urban redevelopment, 3) downtown revitalization, or 4) urban infill and redevelopment.
A Cnnenrrency Management System was included within the City's original 1 99
Comprehensive Plan, and update.d T.eVel of Se.riiice (LfS) etandards fnr the. six infrastru"ture.
systems were included in the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. Adequate capacity for
infrastructure systems and urban services has been available for all new development
approved within Atlantic Beach, or new development has been within the de minimis impact
exception as defined by Elnrida Statutes.
The City will soon he.gin Coordination with the City of Tankennville and the -Duval Cnunty
School Board to address the new requirement for school concurrency. The city narrowly
misses being categorically exempt from this requirement, as are municipalities with no public
Schools within their jurisdiction. Atlantic Reach has a single school, Atlantic Beach
l lementary.
7_1 City ArinptPri 1/11 /A7
Streetlight Policy for Atlantic Beach
ArENDA#3A
ATTr-UST 28. 2006
T. Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines and procedures for
the installation of streetlights in the City of Atlantic Reach
II. General Observations:
There would be some advantage to setting a specific distance between streetlights in
residential s„hclivisions. With a few measurements, the City could establish, in a fair and
nnhiased manner, how many streetlights are needed within a specific area. All of the
lighting would by symmetrical in appearance, and it wnrn,ld look very well organized.
However, this is not practical for a variety of reasons:
1. The roads are not straight and consistent relative to distances;
There are existing lights that may not be centered in ideal locations;
There are h„sinesses, parks, apartments, drainage ditches, and properties
which have unique characteristics;
4. There are existing businesses that provide lighting for certain areas; and
5. There are trees that restrict the lighting in certain areas.
Tt should he noted that additional lighting occasionally generates complaints. There are
citizens who do not want additional lighting, and they complain that it keeps them awake
or otherwise disturbs them. Although this sho„ld not he the sole reason for rejecting
lighting, it is a factor that should be considered in the decision making process.
><><> Rackground:
The Police Department has historically evaluated an area based on a visual evaluation of
the lighting. If the area has a heavy tree canopy, it may need more lighting, In a business
area where lighting is already adequate, no streetlight may he needed. This is not the
most '"scientific" method of evaluation, but it has been adequate in the past.
In the past, the pollee department has taken requests from residents. If a citizen requested
an evaluation of a specific area, a police supervisor performed the evaluation and made a
recommendation for lighting. Most of the eYisting streetlights in the city have been a
result of citizen requests and police department approval.
IV. Prncedurec:
Police: Police officers are encouraged to identify locations where lighting is limited and
additional lighting is recommended. Offl'erc may cnhmit their requests through email or
memorandums. Their recommendations should consider crimes committed in that
snecif c area, high probability or high profile targets, vulnerability of targets. and general
safety considerations incl ding high traffic locations (pedestrian and vehicular) and
identifiable hazards. (lfficerc will forward requests for additional lighting to an assigned
supervisor in the Police Department.
7-1 City Adopted 3/11/02
AGENDA #
AUGUST 7R, 7nnr,
The assigned supenzisnr will evaluate the recommendation and communicate the decision
back to the originating officer. The supervisor will coordinate the installation of approved
streetlights with the Jacksonville F1ectric Authority.
Cit»Pns/Cit»en Groups: Citizens are encouraged to submit requests for streetlights to
the police Department. They may:
A. Call in requeCts by telephone to the Police Communications Division;
B. Mail a letter to the 12o1ice DepartmEslt; or
C. T Ttilize email to send their requests.
All requests will he forwarded to an appointed police supervisor to review and
COmm„nicate with the citizen. After review, the supervisor will contact the citizen to
obtain more information and/nr to advise the citizen of the Police Department's
recommendation. The supervisor will Coordinate the installation of approved streetlights
with the Tacksonville Electric Authority.
Community Development: All subdivision and commercial development plans
submitted to the Cnmmnnity Development Director for review, will include an evaluation
of the lighting. This review w111 jnrlude assurances that all codes and ordinances are
being met, and will include safety considerations for people who will be affected by the
development and construction. Generally. the Jacksonville Electric Authority
recommends streetlights approximately 150' to 200' apart or every other pole.
Lighting on the Oceanfront: Lighting on the oceanfront creates a number of problems
relative to balancing the interests of environmentalist with the interests of crime
prevention. It is the Police Department's goal to seek an appropriate balance between
these opposing interests.
ThP City of Atlantic Reach does not have an ordinance regulating lighting on the
oceanfront. uowevcr, when complaints are received relative to bright lights on the beach
that might create a problem for sea tutting, the Police Department will take steps to
resolve the problem amicably with the Citizen at the sonrce of the light. As much as
possible, the Police Department will seek voluntary compliance with homeowners near
the oceanfront.
Complaints should be directed to the supervisor assigned this responsibility. and the
supervisor will handle the Comm„niratinn and interaction with all parties.
V, Costs:
The cost to erect a new pole is approximately 1500.00. This includes setting the pole.
hanging the arm, head and b„lb, Where there is an existing pole, there is no charge for a
new light.
9
AC;FNnA # 3A
AUGT JST ?8. 2006
7-1 ray Arinp±Pa 111 /M.
The monthly fee for power to a streetlight is approximately $4.Sn, depending on the
wattage of the light. As of February 2002, the City of Atlantic. Reach was spending
approximately 5,000 per month on streetlights.
VL inspections:
On a monthly basis, the designated police '»pervisnr will assign midnight shift officers
to identify the locations and pole numbers of all broken streetlights. The s»pervisor will
report this information to the Jacksonville Electric Authority to have the lights repaired.
An ongoing log will he maintained to track the streetlight repairs.
3
AGENDA ITEM # 4A
AUGUST 28, 2006
BUILDING DEPT.MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
REPORTING FOR MONTH OF JUNE 2006
COMPARISION:
YTD 2005 YTD 2006 YTD 2005 YTD 2006 YTD 2005 YTD 2006 1
NO.PERMITS PERMIT COST _ CONSTRUCTION VALUE INSPECTIONS PERFORMED'
0301
ID
ur
Tr
ra
!CODE ENF. 4 _1
MISC
`TOTAL IN j 11
'RESOLVED 11
'OPEN 0
,CONCRETE
ELECTRICAL
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
va
w
m
F-
MISC.
TOTAL
COMP!
BUILDING
Caz
2
0
N
$ 1,905,866.00 $ 2,468,872.001
$ 6,093,884.00
$ 2,211,741.00
a
r°°
r
c4
iR
OS
s a
tv
6s
o0
..—
to
PERMITS ISSUED MONTH OF
1
a
In
vs
co
r*
r!4
.
a
c�a
a
co-
mt
Ni
1
1"-t
co
1-
&i
a
ri
iA
$ 970,420.00
$
0
OD
in
c;TIZ
in
N
to
0
IR
c)
010
a)
tri
LO
N
tog.
0
6"
1=3
C?
it)
17,790,020.00
0
C-
h-
N
14 $ 490.00
_—
211 $ 227,555.00 1
C7
U}
1!7_
(
430)-
H!
1
0
0
16
1--a%
..
0
O
Vi
(0
r
0
O
lei
M
245.00
0
O
Lc)
T
I--
Le
ipci
00
G
(13
N
r
a
4.4
O
to
LA
LO
RAS
44
pa
O
6t�7
,r•
,--
2 $ 720.40
'-
0N
r
�'
r
CO
N
ID
mr
N
r[S0NrN
0
PILO
r
43
w
r
'TOTAL
PERMIT TYPE
SINGLE FAMILY
DUPLEX -
1REMODELIADDITION
COMMERCIAL
OTHERS
TOTAL,
SINGLE FAMILY 1
DUPLEXlT'IHOUSES
IADDITION/REMODEL
COMMERCIAL
DECKS ! DUNE X
LU
lL
r
J
m
[ROOFING
SHEDS
0
WELLS
[SIGNS
ELECTRICAL
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
PORCH
IIRRIGISPRKL
Uj
'TREE REMOVAL
SWIMMING POOL 1
DRIVEWAY/PATIO
WINDOWS/DOORS
DEMO/MOVING/TRA
IREINSPECTION FEE
FOUNDATION
BUILDING DEPT.MON ITHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
REPORTING FOR MONTH OF JULY 2006
COMPARISION:
TOTAL INSPECTIONS
YTD 2005 YTD 2006 YTD 2005 YTD 2006 YTD 2005 YTD 2006 1
PERMITS ISSUED MONTH OF
NO.PERMITS PERMIT COST CONSTRUCTION VALUE INSPECTIONS PERFORMED
1 COMPLAINTS
AUGUST
NrTto
;
G�
09
mi.-.
CO
I
'
d
co
TOTAL 294
--
$ 1,000,000.00 1 CONCRETE
1 ELECTRICAL
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
[BUILDING
0
-
2
N
CODE ENF.
a.2
.
1TOTAL IN
CI
w
0
co
c
;OPEN
—
$ 2,083,538.00 I $ 3,468,872.00
6,134,828.00 $ 6,301,403.00
$ 2,065,900.00 $ - 2,861,741.00
00
N
kF
®Q
too.
$ 42,370,850.00 1
qk
,-§
Wo
:
ea
tw
22
tri
Mo
/
_
2
437
�co
0
0
It
_
.
§
ai
m�
Ce
in
«
.
'
CO
0
0
0 iti
00
00
k
__
ari
e-
$ 4,980.00
00
00
0Q
h..
�k
&a
0
0
00
00
0
to_
14
000
000
.,k�
_w
$ 1,545,001
$
2,385.001
0
to
k
®
@
ri q�
9
.
qGr_
�gNNN
#_
q
DEMO/MOVING/TRA' 2
REINSPECTION FEE` j 5
FOUNDATION
TOTAL 198
.
'et-
§�
ID
DUPLEX
REMODEL/ADDITION 1
COMMERCIAL -1
BOTHERS 1
I PERMIT TYPE
SINGLE FAMILY
1 TOTAL 1
SINGLE FAMILY 1
DUPLEXJT'HOUSES .
(ADDITION/REMODEL'
COMMERCIAL
'DECKS 1 DUNE X
la
0
2
Ili
UTILITY
ROOFING
SHEDS
GARAGE
WELLS
CO
2
0
e
1ELECTRICAL
'PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
1PORCH
IRRIGISPRKL
SIDING
TREE REMOVAL
SWIMMING POOL
DRIVEWAY/PATIO
WINDOWS/DOORS
City of Atlantic Rea ah
FINANCIAL REPO T
July, 2006
Cash Ralancps`—%)
AGENDA TTFM *- a o
AUGUST 72, 2nnr,
Fund(s)
Print Current nollar
June, 2006 July, 21)n6 Chang,'
GPnarai $5,719,010 $5,501,077
Iree Replacement 2n Q1 2n Q q
Cnnvantlnn Development lax 159,895 160,580
Local Option P,ac =ax 47Q,fRQ S4R 41
RattarJax 1/2 Cent Saiec Iax 089,375 1,031,578
Police Training, Forfeit, etc.15
Grants (26,124)
,567 ) (2n,4nR)
(26,124) (22,529)
nebt Service 5R,RQ6
LjtilitV 64,994
3,804,042 x,953,201
Sanitation 529,778
530'227
Storm 1A/
,'ter 2,784,927 2,798,054
Pension - Pnlire ,R,,,61
R6RR
PPnsinn - General 35,860 55,166
Total $14,556,243 514,430,078 ($126,168)
Total Restricted Cash $6,563,466
($217,g3!1)
0
6R5
(1 !ln.548)
42,204
(4.841)
3,595
6.098
149,150
454
13,127
(7,471)
19,306
Total llnr,'ctricted Cash $7,866,612
Cash and Investments
Account
Prior Current Dollar
Rate of
Jung
2006 July, 2006 change R,'turn
Bank of America - nepositorV $68,171 $87,42g
SRA 14,472 14,R4n,ngg
Cash on danr1 2,55n
2,550
suhtotal 14,56,243 14,430,078
Priire Pension Investments 4.91R,684 5,1127,R47
General PenQion Investments 7,365,264 7 397 350
qubtotal 12,2R8,948 12,425.227
$19,2FR
(14s.423)
n
(126.165)
1ng.163
32,116
14J,279
TntaI $26,84n,1 1 $26,855,3M $15,11/1
(1) EYTn rate of return through nR/30/06
4.25
5.35
5.70 (1)
6.2n (1)
flity of Atlantic. Raar.h
FINANCIAL REPORT
July, 2006
Revenues
AGENDA ITEM # dA
AUGUST 95Z. 2nnr,
Fund / (Footnote)
Annual
Estimate
YTD - 83%
_f Fggjmajn
YTD
®rfuaj
Dollar Percent
Variance Variance
renerni (9)
Tree Replacement
Convention Development Tax
Local Option res Tau
Better Jax 1/2 Ct Sales Tax
Ppljre Training Forfeit etr.,
Grants (2)
Hent Service
Utility (3)
Sanitation
Ctnrm \Alater(d)
Pension - Police
2ensinn - general (F)
Total
$9,951,978
0
128,000
864,042
702,336
31,800
508,191
71,100
5,779,543
1.362,300
1,067,868
7n9,RR�
1,015,029
$22,884,462
$8,289,998
n
106,624
469,847
585.046
26,489
a9'1_9FR
59,226
5,647,359
1.134,796
889,534
g8q,nF2
845,519
$19.062.756
$9,093,749
0
58.067
463,013
649,378
13,514
135,417
60,397
5,479,922
1.na9,n9R
630,252
518,562
954,169
$19,JAJ.4n1
$803,751
0
(4R,5I 7)
(6,834)
F7,327
(12,975)
(287,839)
.171
(167,437)
(42.768)
(259.282)
(66,500)
nR,en
$78,707
9.70%
0.00%
-1.45%
9.80%
-48.98%
-68.01 %
1.98%
-2.96%
-3.77%
- 99.1s%
- 11.37%
19.85%
Analysis of Major Variances
(1) The $803,751 positive variance in the General Fund resulted from having received
103% of the year's budgeted property taxes by July, 2006. Typically the majority of
these taxes are received from the City of Jacksonville in December & January.
(2) The $287,839 negative variance in the Grant Funds resulted from either items not
having been purchased or reimbursement requests not hawing neen filed as of July 31,
2006.
(3) The $167,437 negative variance in the Utility Funds resulted from cycles F & e
being billed at the end of July, 2006. They were billed in the first week of August, 2006.
(4) The $259,282 negative variance in the Stormwafer Fund resulted from the award of a
grant in fiscal year 2006 that has not been received.
(5) The $108,650 positive variance in the General Employee Pension Fund resulted from
changes in the market values of the investments.
not
City of Atlantic: Reach
FIbIANIrIAI REPnRT
July, 2006
ExpPnsPc
AC:MN-DA TTFM#dA
ATTC;TTCI 752, 7nnA
Peaartment / (Footnote)
Governing Body
City Administration
General Government (1)
2lanning nod Ru'Idil]a
Pukiir Safety (2)
Parks and Recreation
Public Works (1)
Euhlic Utilities (d)
eaneipn - epljce
Peneion - General
Total
Annual
Estimate
YTD - 83%
of Estimate
vTn
Actual
IlnIlar Porren4
Variance Variance
$53,538
2,177,933
2,256,185
R514,79
4.736,835
1,022,247
6,214,842
7,76R,RM
400,936
405.798
$25,219,501
$44,597
1,814,218
j.R7g,an1
570,254
3,945,783
851,531
5,176, 964
e.nF1,nRn
333,980
338.030
$21,007,8an
$40,765
1,c80,471
ggR,a4R
389,799
3,401,466
781,800
1, 7Ra, 774
c.419,745
325,006
331,145
$17,n'R,R1 g
$3,832
911,79c
RRn,4FR
180,455
544,317
69,731
Aj7,7411
633,115
8.974
6,885
$1,97,4,1177
8.59%
17.89%
46.85%
31.64%
13.79%
8.19%
97,9R%
10.46%
2.69%
2.04%
Resource Allocation
Personal Service (5)
Operating Expenses (2) & (3)
Capital Outlay (1) & (1)
neht Seniire (R)
Trancfere
Total
Annual
Estimate
YTD - 83%
of Estimate
YTD
Actual
Dollar Percent
Variance Variance
$7.860,315
9,622,537
5,269, 336
1,678,216
7RQ.n77
$25,219,501
$6,547,643
8,015,568
4,389,357
1,197,971
RF7.3n 1
$21,007,840
$6,089 665
6,988,153
1,620,262
j.R7R.j7d.
657.564
$17,033,818
$457,978
1,027,415
2,769,095
(7Rn 701)
(263)
$3,974,022
6.99%
12.82%
63.09%
_7n.na%
-0.04%
Analysis of Major Variances
(1) The positive variance in the General Government rteparFmen±c reciter] from not havjnq
begun the various budgeted projects — see the Project Activity Schedule.
(7) The pncl±ive variance in the Public Safety department is due to the payment for the City of
Jacksonville fire contract being paid quarterly, the (jfeguarr1 eYpencec hejng ceacnnal, two
vacant positions in the Patrol division and no expenditures in some of the grants.
(1) The majnrjty _f the prcjtive varjanre in the Piihlir VVnrkc'rteparfmaet reculterl from not
having begun the various budgeted projects — see the Project Activity Schedule. Also, the
waste management contract and First Vehicle are not billed and paid until the month after the
services are provided.
(4) The positive variance in the Utility Fund resulted from not having begun the various
budgeted projects — see the Project Activity Schedule. Also, there are vacant positions in the
Sewer Wastewater division and the professional/contractual services are less than budgeted
amountQ.
(5) The positive variance in Personal Services is due to vacant positions in Information
Technology. Sewer Wastewater. Police nepartment 2atrol n v1Cion and the 1 ifeguarrl
gocjtinnc heing ceacnnaj,
(6) The negative variance in the Debt Service departments resulted from the payment of
principal and interec± nn the Utility Revenue Rneric ie the cennthc of llrtnher R April.
City of Atlantic. Raarh
FINANCIAL REPORT
July, 2006
Proj rt Activity - Current Year Activity Only
AGENDA ITEM # aA
AUGUST 28, 2011( -
Project Nam,.
Project YTD YTD vrn
Number Rudgpt Actual Balance Status
Earks and Recreation:
Reautification
PRn601
Cuhtotal
45,000
0 45.000
45,000
0 45.000
Puhlir Safcfy
2olice Building Renovations PcOcn4 475 nnn 7570 472,430 D
Homeland Security Items PS0601 1'IR,nnn n 138,000
Subtotal 613,000 9,c7n F10,430
Public Works:
PIaya Fotranre/post office PW0305 54,686 54,686 n r
Ho kiuQ (:reek Racin pond PW0309 1,300,000 5,000 1,29';.000 F
Mayport Roarl LGer+!anc PW0401 346,858 55,858 291,000 F
Welcome Sian and I andcraginu PWn4n5 78,000 3,852 74,148 I
Ocean/13th - Coast Drive/12th P\Amang 141,816 141,797 19 C
Five Points Intersection Improvement e\Amcn7 14F,c99 335,136 11,463 I
Sidewalks - New PW1511'1 7F,97q, 26,175 0 C
2I 7a Drive ehase 7 Pedestrian Path PW0504 R7,Fnn 17,1 ng 391 C
Cirtewalkc - Replacements PW0505 5,5:1F4 S,RF4 0 0
Ceminnle nitrh Headwall PW0507 12,974 j9,974 0 0
Pathmiay _ plaza (\A/act of Mayport Road) PW0508 27,144 27.144 n C
Concrete Floor for Rhed PW0601 8.800 8.800 n C
Medians Rehah - 4tlantir Roulexiard PW0602 3,500 0 ';,Fon
Roll Off Concrete Pads PWns03 10,000 10,455 (4t') r
Sidewalks & Curbs P1A/nR114 49,980 38,042 11,938 I
Eaving of City Hall Parking Lot puynAnc 79,130 2,909 76,221 I
pathways PWn'n' j4g,nnn 0 149,000
Cidewnikc _ Sailfish,Roya! ealm & Frances PW0607 an,Rnn 4n,F80 50,220 I
Seiva Tierra flitch Improvements PW0608 25,254 7F,94 0 0
Pathway -Seminole Road phase -IF9 PW0609 63,000 ,97S 27 C_
Pathway - Seminole Road 21:Iace 7 PW0610 47,652 45,496 7,9 F6 C
Traffic Isle - Mandalav park PW0611 17,000 16.068 917 0
2,922,432 956.872 1,9sc.csn
Public Utilities:
Security Upgrade/Water Plants PU0 qnF 7,485 2,485 0
lalead%^!nrk Improvements at WWTP2 PU0310 F7.077 52,027 0 C
water' ine at j nth Street R. Reach Avenue PU0503 R'd.AAR R x,446 0 C
Lift Station Sad PU0505 5.5:19nF QQR 377 C
Fence Replacement at \Nater plant 1 PU0601 70,000 n 70,000 I
Water Main at Sailfish Drive R 2ia7a PU0602 65,703 ARA FF,719 I
Sewer f:rossing Ditch at Palm I andina PUQF03 30,000 0 R0 000
nenset at 1 ift Station B PJJnFn4 26,507 0 7F ,Fn7 I
rlarifler Rehahilitation PUnFnc 132,020 0 1 ��.0�g I
genre Replacement at WWTP 1 PUn6OR 9 7,F37 0 12.637 !
Sludge ronfainer Refurhishment PU0607 R.gnn 0 8,900 I
Beach Habitat suhdixFicion PU0608 214,'04 n 214,604
Suhtota! 704,149 j 4'1,RRF 560,264
Total $4.,2R4.,581 $1,103,327 $3.181.'x4
Status Key
R - Bid Awarded
- Project Completed
n _ nAcign Completed
F - Design Phase
I - Project In -progress
R _ Re-hudget Next Fiscal Year
Department of Public Safety
2006 July
Monthly Report
Police Emergency Res Time Minutes
2.1429
Reported Crimes
2005 July
AGENDA TTEM # 4A
AUGUST 28, 2006
Y -T -D 2006 July Y -T -D
1 0 0
4 0 4
32 8 31
90 10 95
10 82
28 213
28 5 21
388 63 455
Y.T-D 2006 July Y -T -D
Murder/Manslaughter 0
ForcibleRape 0
Robbery 3 19 2 9
Activities 2005 July
Training
Calls for Service
2249
12832
2256
15371
Arrests
80
453
76
571
UniifformTraflicCitations
_
443
3475
583
3668
AggravatedAssault
t3
24
2
14
5impleAssault/T`hreats
9
13
4
30
Citations
Burglary!
- 16
100
9_
27
41
173
Larceny
AutoTheft
5
Total
65
Activities 2005 July
Training
Calls for Service
2249
12832
2256
15371
Arrests
80
453
76
571
UniifformTraflicCitations
_
443
3475
583
3668
DUI STANDARDIZED FIELD SOBRIETY TESTING COURSE
2006 CJIS USERS' CONFERENCE
F.N.O.A. 14th ANNUAL TRAINING CONFERENCE
FLGISA ANNUAL CONFERENCE
POLICE MEDIA RELATIONS SEMINAR
PROPERTY ROOM MANAGEMENT TRAINING SEMINAR
SOUTH ATLANTIC REGIONAL LIFEGUARD CHAMPIONSHIPS
OFFICER DISCIPLINE COURSE
INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES FOR THE TRAFFIC CRASH INVESTIGATOR COURSE
CMS COMPARATIVE COMPLIANCE/LAW ENFORCEMENT REVIEW (80 HOURS)
Jacksonville Fire and Rescue
2005 July
¥1--D 2006 July Y -T -D
# Fire Alarms
22
104
13
98
Response Time (Min)
4.491
13
3.953
20
# EMS Calls
65
480
72
490
Response Time (Mln)
4.106
13
3.59
20
Animal Control
2005 July
Y -T -D 2006 July Y -T -D
PhoneCalls
207
1436
257
1584
Animal Biles Reported
1
13
4
20
AnimelsCa.lured
17
148
33
91
AnimalAdo.ted
2
24
2
14
Animals Returned to Owners
9
_ 44
4
30
Citations
- 16
100
13
146
AGENDA ITEM # 4A
AUGUST 28, 2006
Lifeguard/Ocean Rescue
Monthly Statistics Report
Report Date
Startin Eudin
06/25/06
07/22/06
Approx, I14Aela Altendunc
Totals
25,173
Torsi Rescues
17
Run Outs
15
Surf
1
Other
1
Water Craft Assists
1
Num b erof Passengers
2
'Preventative Actions 1
106
Total Medical Cases
17
Minor
14
Major
3
Drowning
0
{Guarded area
Unguarded arca
{I
0
Marine animal Contacts
;)
Jelly Fish
9
Stingray
0
Shark
0
Other
0 _
t]therAgencies Involved
INumber
3
Lost and Found lemons
Pob11e Warnings
55
Animal Control Issues
9
Use of Improper Equipment
46
Code Enforcement
See Attachment
TION REPORT FOR JULY 2D06
Ct. W ZC]—Z 17
UOi0.«1—<ZOW
Lct
� \-
gµ
1:006
R33,50SN
sOs
n O S7
O 0
0 M
0 0
to i
r N
O N
C`7 0
0 COC
N
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
to
0
CP
{Yj
N
[Yf
SO
SO
N
O
0
0
0
_6
m
LL
0
r
r~
[3) r
0
O
a'
C)
st
SAY
O
0
Ct)
S�7
0
0
0
0
47
0
CO
OP
w
N N N
0 0
0 O
r
C. 0
0 tad
o
V 0
0 0
0 0
Ua
4 J
01 4
0
N
N
et
0
0
W
LL J
z5
Z F
W o
—1—
W
o
CP N
a^ 0
0 1—
a—
r 0
Co
M 0
C+] N
N 0
In es -
O at
N
O r
T 0
Rr r
(h r
S7
C+7
47
OP
0)
V
N
47
0
0
O
Ca
r7
Cry
0)
tT
C}
07
M
8
N
0
4
2
0
CE IDENTIFIED
OD
4)
r
O
J
0
to
•r
4
AGENDA ITEM # 4A
AUGUST 28, 2006
R
0 0
Ca 0
N S9
N'
CA r-
0 r
N 4]
0 0'
r
a S7
0
'0'
O
N
0
C6
V
LtJ
69
Lc! 01-
4
3
A
isa
N
a
G
0
N
CV
N
pima
0
0
41
O
1-
141 4'1
Q
S7
CV
0
•
O)
r')
O
CO
CCi
FMTITO
r r
0
et 0
tO
o7
CO N
�
P
N r
C7
N
corn
CE IDENTIFIED
C0
CL
aZr
CV
4
N
r
M
O
1-
0
H
A (TEND A ITEM:
AGENDA #4B
AUGUST 28. 2nn6
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSIONER MEETING
STAFF REPORT
Approve renewal of employee Health rnc„rancP with Aetna
effective October 1, 2006 for a one year period and re+ain the
current henefitc and City/employee contribution ratios.
SUBMITTED BY: George EoQter, TNnman RPsnrnrrP Manager
DAZE! August 22, 2006
RAC.KCTROTTND: In September 2004, the City changed health insurance from BC/BS
to Aetna after propoca1s from five insurance providers were
received and evaluated, This change resulted in a 44% reduction
in premium rates.
RUDE F.T.
The City also standardized the premium that the City payq for
employee health insurance to be the cost of the HMO Employee
Only coverage plus 55% of the HMO difference for any other
inRnranrP coverage that may be selected by the employee.
This is the City's second renewal with Aetna anrd Aetna has
provided the City with a renewal premium of+1 R,(7% PffPrtive
10/01/06. The October 1, 2005 renewal premiuth was +10.5%.
Eunrdc for this actinn will be included within the proposed 2006-
7nn7 h„rdgPt.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Commission approve renewal of Pmpinyee health
insurance with Aetna effective October 1, 200 for a one year
period and retain the current benefits and City/employee
contribution rating,
ATTACHMENT: Current and prnpnced City and F.mpinyee rnst infnrmatinn.
REVIEWED RV CITY MANAGER:
EMPLOvEE COST OF HEALTH INSURN'E
AETNA GROLJe # 322546
CITY PAYS 100% OF THE COST FOR THE HMO "EMPLOYEE ONLY' COVERA(E
2LUS 55% OF THE DIFFEREN'E IN OTHER HMO COVERAnE AS SELECTED BY
THE EMPLOvEE, THE EMPLOYEE PAYS THE DIFFERENCE IN THE HMO AM!! POS
COSTS IF THEY SELECT THE POS.
2005 2005
HMO CURRENT
TOTAL BILL RATE
CITY PAID
EMeLOYEE MONTHLY
PER PAID PER'n!
2006
HMO OCTOBER 2006
TOTAL BILL RATE
CITY PAID
EMPLOYEE MONTHLY
PER eAID PERIOD
2005
anS CURRENT
TOTAL BILL RATE
CITY PAID
EMPLOvEE MONTHLY
PER PAID PERIOD
2006
POS OCTOBER 2006
TOTAL BILL RATE
CITY PAID
EMPLOYEE MONTHLY
PER PAID PERIOD
EMPLOYEE
ONLY
302.42
302.42
0.00
0.00
2006
EMPLOYEE
ONLY
358.89
358.89
0.00
0.00
20ns
2005
EMPLOYEE
& CHILD
565.73
447.23
118.50
50.9c
2nn6
EMPLnvEE
& CHILD
671.34
530.74
140.60
70.30
2005
EMPLOvEE EMPLOYEE
ONLY & CHILD
329.79
302.41
27.38
13.69
2006
EMPLOYEE
ONLv
391.36
358.89
32.47
16.24
61A.a1
447.23
180.68
84.84
2006
EMPLOYEE
& CHILD
732.08
530.74
201.34
100.67
9nn5
EMeLOYEE
& SPOUSE
672.41
505.91
166.50
83.25
2006
EMPLOYEE
& SPOUSE
707.94
600.36
1a7.58
98.79
2005
EMPLOYEE
& SPOUSE
733.29
505.91
227.38
113.89
2nn6
EMPLOvEE
& SPOUSE
870.18
600.36
269.82
1'4.91
2005
EMPLOYEE
& EAMILY
883.28
621.88
261.40
130.70
2006
EMPLOYEE
& FAMILY
1,048.17
737.00
310.18
2(105
EMPLOYEE
& FAMILY
963.12
621.88
341.24
170.62
2006
EMPLOYEE
& FAMILv
1.142.22
737.99
404.A8
202.47
AGENDA #4B
AUGUST 28. 2006
A (rENDA ITEM:
cTTRMTTTED BY:
DATE:
R A f'KGR ()T TNT)
AGENDA ITEM # dC
AUGUST 28, 20n6-
CITY
005
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Request from Landshark Cafe for a TTse-hy-Exception to allow for the
on -premise consumption of beer and wine in association with a
restaurant within the Commercial General (CG) Zoning Tlistr;ct at 1013
Atlantic Boulevard within the Atlantic Village Shopping Center.
Sonya Doerr, A TCp S.10
Community Development Director
August 18, 2006
This request seeks approval of a Use-by-Fxception (Eile Number T TRF-
700-0/1)
RF700-na) to allow for the on -premise consumption of beer and wine only in association with a
restaurant in an existing commercial space. The space has formerly been occupied by several
restaurants, all of which had a beer and wine (2-00P) license. however, since the space does
not now hold a current Occupational License or 7 -COP DABT license, a new Use-by-
Fxception is required in accordance with chapter 3 (Alcoholic Beverages) of the City Code.
Staff recommends approval of this request, in that on -premise consumption of beer and wine is
typical to the proposed restaurant use, and the use is consistent with other restaurant and retail
uses in the general area. The Community Tlevelopment Board considered this request at their
August 15th meeting and unanimously recommended approval.
RTTDf FT: No budget issues.
RECOMMFNDATTnN: Approval of a T Tse-hy-Exception for Landshark Cafe to allow for the
on -premise consumption of beer and wine in association with a restaurant within the
Commercial General (CG) Zoning District at 1013 Atlantic Boilevard within the Atlantic
Village chopping Center.
ATTACHMENT : nraft Community Development Board Minutes.
REVIEWED BY CTTV MANACF.R:
A„g„ct )S ?ODA regular meeting
Draft lllinntes a{AlQ,Jst 15. 2006. Conmvnity 17Pvelnp pent Board MPPting
AGENDA ITEM # 4C
AUGUST 28. 2006
4a. TTRE-2006-04. Request from Landshark Cafe for a Use -by -Exception to allow for the on -
premise consumption of beer and wine in asQociation with a restaurant within the Commercial
General (CG) 7oning District at 1011 Atlantic Boulevard within the Atlantic Village Shopping
Center.
Corey Fox, owner of the T.andshark Cafe, introduced himCelf and his other business partners who
were present. He gave a brief discussion of the hours of operation, type of food served, and location
of the restaurant. T -Te Qtated that no beverages or ford were going to he served outside. The tables
outside were strictly for smoking patrons to smoke.
A motion was made hy Ms Woods and seconded hy Chairman Jacobson to r' ommend
approval to the City Commission of TTRF-200f-0d, request for a TTse-hy-Exception to allow
for the on -premise 'onsumption of beer and wine in association with a restaurant within the
Commercial General (CG) Zoning >nistri ct at 1013 Atlantic 11oule'ard within the Atlanti'
village Shopping Center. The motion passed unanimously.
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA # 6A
AUGUST 28, 2006
AGENDA ITEM: MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT CONTRACT RENEWAL WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT)
SUBMITTED BY: Rick Carper, P.E., Public Works DirectoyT-f-
DATE: August 16, 2006
BACKGROUND: The FDOT has the Contract Renewal for the Local Maintenance
Agreement to authorize and reimburse Atlantic Beach for maintaining the
following areas:
a) State Road 10 (Atlantic Boulevard) — both sides, from Third
Street to Mayport Road, and the north side only from Mayport
Road to the Intracoastal Waterway Bridge, with the exception of
the FDOT retention pond.
b) State Road 101 /A1 A (Mayport Road) — from Atlantic
Boulevard to Assisi Lane (both sides).
c) Mayport Flyover — areas within Atlantic Beach, including
the retention pond on Mayport Road between West 4th & West 5111
Street, the retention pond at the end of Begonia Street off West 1 8t
Street, and Pond #3 on Mayport Road at the Hess Station.
Sweeping of the flyover ramp will continue to be performed under
FDOT supervision.
d) Ditch between Saratoga Circle North and Forrestal Circle
South — from Mayport Road to Atlantic Boulevard through Aquatic
Drive,
e) Ditch from Fleet Landing — running north-northwest along
Mayport Road, terminating at the salt marsh,
Maintenance work involves street sweeping, mowing, litter removal,
edging, tree trimming and pruning.
This Renewal is for (1) one year beginning October 1, 2006 through
September 30, 2007. The total annual amount the City of Atlantic Beach
will receive from the FDOT for performance of this maintenance will be
$51,299.44.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this Agreement, that the
Commission pass a Resolution approving the new contract as required by
the FDOT, and authorize the City Manager to sign the Renewal
Agreement.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 06 - 09
FDOT - Maintenance Extension Agreement
Maintenance Activities Attachment "A"
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
August 28th Regular Meeting
ArPNT7A # 6A
ATT(TTTST 78, 2006
RF,,SOT,JTT!ON NO. 06-09
A RFSnT.TTTTnN nR TNF C'.TTY nE AIT .ANTTC. REACH ATTTHfRT7TNCT THF.
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A MA TNTFN A NCC rnNTR A CT R FNFW A T .
BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH AND TT -TE FT .nT rn A
DEPARTMENT OE TRANSPORTATTON, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, on May 16, 2001, the City executed an agrepinprTf with the Elorida
Depalhuent of Transportation to provide maintenance on certain streets throughout the city; and
WHFRFA R. the City desires to maintain landscaped areas on Atlantic Boulevard and
portions of Mayp=rt Road and
WHEREAS, the additional areas to be maintained are identified in Attachm of "A" of the
base agreement.
NnW. TTNFRFEnRF. he it resolved hy the City Commission of the City of Atlantic
Beach as follows:
SFCTTCN 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Renewal Agreement
for Maintenance with the Elorida Depaihuent of Transportation on behalf of the City of Atlantic
Reach.
SECTION 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its final passage and
adoption.
PAgSFTI ANTI ATInPTF.TI hy the City of Atlantic Reach, this 7Rth Day of August 7.006.
TInNAT,TI M. WCT.SC)N
Mayor
ATTEST:
DONNA T., RTTCCFY
City Clerk
Approved as to form and correctness:
ALAN C. JENSEN
City Attorney
JVP PTTSH
GOVERNOR
Tuly 75, 7n(Tf
Florida Department of Trans fj®rtatinrk
n4 Sou±h Marion Avenue
Lake City. FIrids 32n25-5874
City of Atlantic Beach
800 Seminole Road,
Atlantic Reach, Elorida 322 5445
RF.: Contract BDB90
Renewal # 1
County: nuval
Gentl emen:
AGENDA # 6A
AUGUST 28. 2006
D'NV' R J. STUTLER, JR.
SECRETARY
Enrlocerl ;Q the Contract R enewal for the T ocal Agreement for Maintenance. Tf you
agree with this proposal, please execute all f x,P S) copies of this contract and attach a
resolution and return it to the above address as soon as possible.
T Tpon receipt of the completed documents, the renewal agreement will be executed on
behalf of the Department and an original will he returned to you.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Since:, ely,
beth A. Vat
nistrict 7 Main'enance Contracts Administrator
lmh
Enclosures
www.dot.state.fL.Us
X47,
RECYCLED PAPER
STATE OF FI DRIDA ❑FPARTMFNT of TRANCQo RTATIQN
cntu-rPAr.'r pEp1EWAL
Contract No.: BDB90
A GEND A i# A
AUGUST 2R. 2006
175.02lL,q
CONTRAr'TC AnI,ANICTRATILNAI
^C - 12/04
Financial Project No(s).: W 1617239
WPI No(s) •
County(ies): Duval
Renewal: (1st, 2nd, etc.) I qt
This Agreement made and entered into this
riay Ofby and between the Mate of
Ft's _,- to to entered by DOT only.1
Florida Department of Transnortatjon, hereinafter railed ''neDrtment", and City of Atlantic Beach
Office of the City Clerkof 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florir+a '199"1"1-445
hereinafter Walled -Contractor
WITNESSETH:
\A/UFRFAS. the Department and the Contractor heretofore on 10/26/2005
entered into an Agreement whereby the Department ratainerl the Contractor to perform
limits of state highways as in Attachment "A"
majnteinina the existing
; and
WHEREAS, said Agreement has a renewer► option'e,hirh provides for a renewal if mutually agreed to by both
parties and subject to the same terms and conrlitions of the original Agreement:
NOW, THEREFORE, this AgreementwitnesQeth that for and in consideration of the mutual benefits to flow each
to the other, the parties agree to a renevial of Faid original Agreement dated 10/26/2006
for a period beginning the 1st day of Novemher , 2006 and ending the �15t
day of October 2007 at a cost of S 51.299.44 Fifty-one thousanri two
hunrlrarl ninety-nine anri forty-four cents.
sperifierl herein.
All terms and conditions of said orIainal Agreement shall remain in force and effect for this renewal.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties have executed this Agreement by their duly authorized officers on the day.
month, and year set forth above.
r'jtv of Atlantic each
Name of Contractor
BY.
Authnrj7erl Rianati Ira
Title.
Name of Surety
Ry•
Date
Florida 1 irenQed Insurance Agent or
Attorney -In -Fact (Signature)
Countersigned.
nate
Florida Licensed Insurance Agent nate
(qFAI) STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANGEnPTATInN
(SEAL) RY:
District Secretary or Designee (Rianti Ire)
Title. Director of Operations
Legal.
(EAI )
Approval as to Availability of Funds
rlty of Atlantic Beach Agreement for Maintenance ( October 2005 )
Maintenance Activities
At'achmen' "A"
Ar;FNl7A # r,A
ATTar TST .9nnr,
IL.',..
noatt
No
Street dame
From
To
Removal
(acre)
Int,rmed,
Machine
141 --Ing
Small
Machine
M9
tzcrere)
Mna'p
secret
Mo"heal^o1
s"'-eping
tmliel
Tree Trimming
(mll�)
Ch -ml -al
Weed &
Control (gal.)
Edging &
Sweeping
(salt./(salt./(aacrecre)
10
Atlantic Rlvrl_
Fast en,' Intracoastal
waterway Bridgearrl
Street
F.R9
7.20
4.91
0.78
10.20
0.50
9.09
101
wypor1 grl.
Mantic Ph,c1.
Assisi PH.
4.59
7.R2
t520.gg
R 7n
0 50
$7 2F9.On
12 FR
101
Aeaypor Pd.
Oltcb @ garaloga rir. qo.
1,',1 ..40.80
1.07
0.50
2.00
4.Rn
1n1
Maypor Rd.
Ditch @ Fleet Landing Blvd.
0.63
0.30
0.30
9.36
AIA
AlA
Ditch ® Fleet Landino Blvd.
1.'9
2."
3.00
4th & 5''' S'.od
RAieo'iou Pond'B' of MavOo"
7.'0
g?a
U.30
o.c.n
m Regonla
Ftetentlon Pond 'C" off Atlantic
RIO
0,R7
0.56
2,75
101
Mayport °d.
eoc'+ 9 a = uvea clEtIe'
0.0n
9.3e
0.26
Totals
Cycles Per Year
Total Qty's. Per Year
Unit most
Total r`ect 2nr yea,'
17.48
0..0
1n?0
0.0'
1clan
1.00
73.1,E
21.77
12
9
9
4
12
2
2n9.76
7.20
96.84
20.12
202.74
47...j
tR.On
t50.n9
c7s,On
c17s,On
ta1,s9
t520.gg
e1 e7a ga
$eay ng
$7 2F9.On
Sq,g911.0
tR e9e.ee
21 0g0 gn
$7 a9n.g0
1,',1 ..40.80
Yearly
Cost
Quarterly
Amount
$51,299.44
512,R24•9&
AGENT-) A # 6B
AUGUST 2R, 2006
RESOLUTION NUMBER 06-10
A Resolution of the City Commission nf the City nf Atlantic Beach,
eYprPccing concern related to the potential for adverse traffic
impacts, which may be generated by a proposed Wal-Mart, within
the City of Neptune Bea eh adjacent to the City of Atlantic Beach.
WHEREAS, a commercial parcel on Atlantic Boulevard within the City of Neptune Reach
and adjacent to the City of Atlantic Beach City has been proposed to be re -developed with a Wal-
Mart Supercenter.
WHEREAS, the Intergovernmental Coordination Element of the adopted 2015
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Atlantic Reach, as stated within the following Objectives and
Policies, directs the City as follows:
Policy G1-1.1 - The City sha1l continue to coordinate with the City of Neptune
Reach and the City of Jacksonville Reach for the purpose of developing
coordinated land use planning. unified development policies and special projects.
OhjePtive G.1.3 - Coordination of Levels of Service for Public Facilities
The City shall coordinate planning and land development activities with adjacent
local governments so as to ensure that the impacts of new development shall not
preclude the attainment of adopted T.evel of Service standards; impair sound
environmental management practices; create land use conflicts. or in any respect
contrihute to inconsistent and incompatible urban development patterns.
WHEREAS, The City of Atlantic Reach has a shared and common interest with the City
of Neptune Reach ;n maintaining Atlantic Boulevard (SR 10), which is a roadway within the State
Highway System, as an efficient and safe roadway; and
WHEREAS, the City of Atlantic Reach discourages redevelopment that may adversely
impact estahlished EDOT T eve] of Service standards for this roadway; and
WHEREAS, the City of Atlantic Reach supports the City of Neptune Reach's efforts to
fully determine and evaluate impacts to transportation T.evel of Service standards.
N(1W THFRF.E+(1RF., RE IT RESOLVED that the City Atlantic Beach expresses concern
related to the potential for adverse traffic impacts, which may he generated by a proposed
Wal-Mart within the City of Neptune Reach adjacent to the City of Atlantic Reach.
ADOPTED RV THF CITY COMMISSION OE ATI ANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA, THIS
'Nth DAV nE August, 7.11116,
Donald M. Wolfson
Mayor and Presiding Officer
Approved as to form and correctness: Attest:
Alan C. Jensen, Esquire
City Attorney
Donna Bussey
city clerk
A (TENT) A # 7A
ATTTTTST 78, 2006
ORDINANCE NUMBER 90-06-195
AN ORDINANCE OF THF, (ITV OF ATT , AND -c AND-cRF. A rH, COUNTY OF
DTTVAI2 STATE (W FT,ORTDA: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
90-01-177: SAID ORDTNANCF. RE -ADOPTING CHAPTER 24, AND
TN(=
Af p..NDA # 7A
ITI;TTST 28. 2006
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that existing Land Development Regulations
allow for development to occur in residential areas of the City, particularly in older established
neighborhoods within the City, which may be incompatible with such neighborhoods because of
excessive size and mass, and proximity to neighboring properties, and which may also result in
the excessive destruction of vegetation and tree canopy and the excessive loss of light, air and
breezes, and
WHEREAS, such Land Development Regulations have also proved inadequate to limit
or preclude new development, which is out of scale and with established traditional residential
buildings within in the City's older established neighborhoods, and such regulations also fail to
discourage the redevelopment of residential lots in ways that may be inconsistent and
incompatihle with the historic and existing built environment as required hy Policy A.1.4.4 of the
Comprehensive P1an, and
WHEREAS, such excessive development negatively changes and impacts such
estahlished neighborhoods through loss of character, open space, views, breezes, tree canopy and
a sense of privacy; and
WHEREAS, it is the stated public policy of the City of Atlantic Beach, as set forth
within Objectives A.1.4 and A.1.5 of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan, which is adopted by
Ordinance Number 31-04-01, to encourage fiiture development and redevelopment, which
retains the exceptiona11y high quality of life and the predominantly residential character of the
City of Atlantic Reach and which provides for the preservation and protection of the dense tree
canopy of the City. Tt is the expressed intent of the City to protect and maintain the unique
neighborhood character of established and traditional residential areas throughout the City, and
WHEREAS, following puhlic hearings, public participation workshops with interested
citizens, the Community fevelopment Roard and the City Commission, puhlic hearings to enact
this Ordinance were held hy the City Commission for the City of Atlantic Reach on August 28,
2006 and geptember 11. "00, Tn consideration of public participation and comments, and in
support of stated policies of the City, including applicable goals, objectives and polices as set
forth within the adopted 2015 Comprehensive Plan, the City Commission hereby finds that
adoption of this Ordinance and these Residential fevelopment Standards shall be in the hest
interests of the citizens of the City of Atlantic Reach and shall serve to implement such goals,
objectives and policies.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION ON
BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH,
FLORIDA:
Page 2 of 7
Ordinance Number 90-06-195
Effective Date:
A CIFNTI A # 7A
ATT(:TT.CT 9R, 0006
SECTION 1. Chapter 24, Zoning, Subdivision and Land Development Regulations
Article TTT, Zoning Regulations, Division 7, Supplementary Regulations, of the Code of
ordinances for the City of Atlantic Reach, Florida is hereby amended to add new Section 74-
172, Residential nevelopment Ctandards, and upon enactment shall read as follows.
SECTION 24-172. Residential Development Standar&
(a) Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of these new regulations is to implement the
goals, objectives and polices as set forth within the adopted 2015 Comprehensive Plan.
restated in part below.
Goal A.1 The City shall manage growth and redevelopment in a manner, which results in
a pattern of land uses that: 1) encourages, creates and maintains a healthy and aesthetically
pleasing built environment, 7) avoids blighting influences, 1) preserves and enhances
coastal, environmental. natural, historic and cultural resources, and 4) maintains the City's
distinct residential community character.
Objective A.1.3 Maintaining Residential character - The City shall encourage future
development and redevelopment, which: 1) retains the exceptionally high quality of life
and the predominantly residential character of the City of Atlantic Beach, and 2) provides
for the preservation and protection of the dense tree canopy.
Policy A.1.4.1 Ry December 11, 7005, the City shall consider amendments to its Land
Development Regulations, which include provisions intended to retain the unique
community identity, the architectural character, and the residential scale of that area of the
City l(nown as nlrl Atlantic Reach.
Policy A.1Ad Within old Atlantic Reach, the City shall consider options to discourage
the redevelopment of residential lots in ways that are inconsistent and incompatible with
the historic and existing built environment.
The diversity of residential types is recognized as an asset to this community's unique
character. The purpose of these regulations is also to regulate the future use and
development of land in a manner that minimizes incompatible relationships within
neighborhoods that may result from new Development, which because of excessive height,
mass or bully may result in new Development that excessively dominates estahlished
development patterns within neighborhoods or excessively restricts light, air. breezes or
privacy on adjacent properties.
The further intent of these regulations is to appropriately limit height and hull( and mass of
residential structures in accordance with the expressed intent of the citizens of Atlantic
Reach, and also to support and implement the Recitals of Ordinance 90-06-195 and as more
specifica1ly enumerated below.
(1) To ensure that buildings are compatihle in mass and scale with those of buildings seen
traditionally within the residential neighborhoods of Atlantic Reach.
(2) To maintain the traditional scale of buildings as seen along the street.
(3) To minimize negative visual impacts of larger new or remodeled buildings upon adjacent
properties.
(d) To promote access to light and air from adjacent properties.
(5) To preserve and enhance the existing mature tree canopy, particularly within front yards.
Page 3 of 7
ordinance Number 9n -m_195
Effective Date:
AGENfA 7A
AUGUST 2R, 2006
(b) Applicability. The Development Standards and provisions set forth within this Section shall
apply to Development of Single-family and Two-family Dwellings within that area of the
City depicted by Attachment A and generally referred to as Old Atlantic Beach, which for the
purposes of this Section shall he hounded by:
• Ahern Street and Sturdivant Avenue, between the beach and Seminole Road on the south:
• Seminole Road, extending north to 1 1 th Street on the west;
▪ l l th Street extending east to East Coast Drive, and also including Lots 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12,
14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30 and 32 within Block 14 located on the north side of llth
Street and west of Fast Coast Drive, and
▪ East Coast Drive extending north to its terminus, then along Seminole Road to 16th
Street, and 16th street extending east to the beach, with the beach being the eastern
boundary of this area.
nevelopment, as used within this Section, sha1l also include total redevelopment of lots and
certain renovations and additions to Single-family and Iwo -family swellings as set forth
herein.
(c) Additional Residential nevelopment Standards. The fo1lowina standards and requirements
shall apply to that area defined in preceding paragraph (h), and as fi,rther and more
specifically described for each particular standard or requirement.
(1) Floor Area Ratio (FAR). Floor Area Ratio limits are estahlished to prevent incompatible
mass and scale where new nevelopment might otherwise excessively dominate The
existing streetscape and existing adjacent residences. FAR shall be defined as the ratio of
total counted above -grade floor areas of certain Buildings on a Lot or Parcel compared to
the total Lot Area.
FAR = Total ennnted Flnnr Area ± Tntal Lnt Area
The fo1lowin2 EAR provisions shall apply to new Single-family and Iwo -family
fwellings and additions. which expand interior Floor Area by more than twenty-five
percent (')S%).
i. T nits or Parcels that contain 6nn0 square feet of Lot Area or less shall be assumed to
contain 6000 square feet of Lot Area, and Floor Area Ratio limits and provisions as
set forth within this Section shall apply. For example, maximum Floor Area Ratio for
a S,200 square foot lot shall he calculated as if the T.ot is tSnnn square feet in size.
ii. A maximum Floor Area Ratio limit of .S4 shall apply.
iii. EAR calculations shall he included on all Single-family swelling and Two-family
swelling Construction 1212ns suhmitted to the City for review and permitting.
Page 4 pf 7
ordinance Number AO -O6-1 AS
Effective nate:
A( NDA#TA
ATTn-uST 28. ')OLS
iv. The following elements of a Single-family or Two-family swelling shall be counted
in the FAR calculation.
Tnterior heated and cooled areas.
• porches. balconies, patios and breezeways with a solid cover or roof when
enclosed by solid walls on more than two sides.
That portion of an attached garage exceeding 500 square feet of Floor Area.
v. The following elements of a Single-family or Two-family Dwelling shall he excluded
from the FAR calculation.
• Porches, balconies, patios, breezeways, and decks (as well as overhangs, eaves,
cantilevers, awnings and similar features) with a solid cover or roof, but not
enclosed by solid walls on more than two sides. Such porches, balconies, patios,
breezeways, and decks shall remain open on at least two sides and shall not later
he enclosed in any manner.
• Detached Private larages that are incidental to the Principal Use on a Lot.
Detached Private farages shall remain subject to established size, height and
placement regulations.
• Carports that are open on two or more sides.
(7) Side wall planes. To avoid stark, exterior side walls from facing the sides of adjacent
residences, particularly on two-story and three-story residences. the following standards
shall apply to new two-story and three-story single-family and Two-family Dwellings; to
renovations involving Structural Alterations or additions to the sides of existing Single-
family and Two-family Dwellings. and where a second or third -story is added to an
existing Single-family and Two-family Dwelling.
i. second and third -story exterior side walls, which exceed 5 -feet in length, shall
provide horizontal offsets of at least four feet, or architectural details. design elements
or other features, which serve to break-up the appearance of the side wall, such that
adjacent properties are not faced on the side by blank two or three-story walls void of
any architectural design other than siding material or windows.
ii. Such design features may also include balconies, bay windows and other types of
projecting windows or architectural details provided that these shall not extend more
than ?4 -inches into the Required Side Yard, and that a minimum separation of 1 0 -feet
is maintained between such extensions into the Required side Ward and any other
existing adjacent residential Buildings.
(3) Height to Wall Plate. For Single-family and Two-family swellings, the maximum
height to the top horizontal framing member of a wall from the first floor finished floor
elevation shall not exceed ??-feet.
(4) Third Floor Footprint. Tn order to reduce the mass of taller Single-family and Two-
family Dwellings, the interior footprint of any third floor area shall not exceed fifty
percent (5(M) ofthe size of the second floor interior footprint.
Page 5 of 7
Ordinance Number 9(1-(1f-195
Fffective Date:
AGENDA # 7A
AUGUST 28. 90(11(
(5) .Shade Trees- Tn order to sustain the city's existing tree canopy and to provide shade
along the city's residential Qtreets and sidewalks, one shade tree shall he provided within
the Required Front Yard and an additional shade tree shall he required on the T.ot in a
location at the property owner's discretion in accordance with the fo1lowing provisions:
This requirement shall apply to the construction of new single-family and Two-
family Dwellings and to Structural Alterations of any single-family and Two-family
Dwelling. Such required Trees shall he installed prior to i'suance of a Certificate of
Occupancy or prior to final inspections. as applicable. (The requirements of Chapter
91 of this Code shall also apply.)
ii. Required shade Trees shall have a minimum size of 4 -inch caliper at the time of
installation. A list of recommended tree species is availahle from the City.
iii. Credit shall be provided for the following, and additional Eront Yard Shade Trees
shall not be required in such cases.
(a) Where healthy canopy trees exist in the Required Eront Yard, which are listed
on the recommended tree list and are at leaQt 4 -inch caliper; or
(h) where oak trees exist in the Required Front Yard, which are at least six (6)
feet tall; or
(c) where healthy street trees exist in the adjacent right-of-way, which are listed
on the City's recommended tree list and are at least 4 -inch caliper. where
installation of a Eront Yard Shade Tree is required. such tree shall not be
planted within right-of-ways or over underground utilities.
iv. Similarly, credit shall he given for the second required Shade Tree where such
tree, as descrihed ahove. exists elsewhere on the Lot.
(l) •special Treatment of Lawfully Existing .4injile-family and Two-family Dwellings, which
would otherwise be made Nonconforming hy enactment of section 24-17!, establishing
these Residential Development .4tandardv. Any lawfi,lly existing single-family or Two-
family Dwelling, which has heen constructed pursuant to properly issued Building Permits
prior to the effective date of these Residential Development Standards, adopted on
Septemher 11, 7nn6 by Ordinance Number 90-06-195, shall be deemed a Vested
Development, and any such Single-family or Two-family Dwelling shall he considered a
lawful permitted Structure within the Lot or Marcel containing the Vested Development, and
shall not be considered as a Nonconforming structure with respect to the regulations
contained within this Section.
It is further the intent of this Section to clarify when these Residential Development
Standards shall apply in the case of reconstruction or redevelopment following:
(1) a natural act such as a hurricane. wind, flood or fire; or
(2) redevelopment initiated hy a property owner or authorized agent for a property owner.
The following provisions shall he limited only to those characteristics, which would
otherwise he made nonconforming from the requirements of this Section, which provides
Residential fevelopment Standards. The provisions of Section 74 -RS shall otherwise apply
to Nonconforming Lots, Uses and Structures.
Page h of 7
Ordinance Numher 90-06-195
>i'ffective bate:
AGENDA #7A
AUGUST 28. )nn(
i. •Structures damaged or destroyed by natural acts or by any means not resulting from
the actions of the property Qwner. Any lawfully existing Single-family or Two-family
Dwelling, which has been constructed pursuant to properly issued Building Permits prior
to the effective date of these Residential Development Standards, adopted on September
11, 2006 by Ordinance Number 90-06-195, shall he deemed a Vested Development, and
any Single-family or Two-family Dwelling shall he considered a lawfiil permitted
Structure within the T .ot or parcel containing the vested Development. Furthermore. an
existing Single-family or Iwo -family Dwelling for that particular Structure, shall not be
considered as a Nonconforming Structure such that it may be fully replaceable in its
existing footprint and of the same size and architectural design, subject to all applicable
building codes and other Land Development Regulations controlling Development and
redevelopment of such Lots or parcels. Any construction that exceeds the existing
footprint shall he in compliance with all applicahle provisions of this chapter including
minimum Yard Requirements.
ii. Structures damaged, devtroyed or demolished or expanded, by any means resulting
from the actions of the property owner or authorized agent for a property owner.
Single-family or Two-family Dwellings, which are rebuilt or renovated, or expanded by
more than twenty-five percent (7S%) in Floor Area, shall be subject to applicable
provisions of these Residential Development standards for that portion of the Structure
that is rebuilt, renovated or expanded.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its final passage and
adoption and shall be recorded in a book- kept and maintained by the clerk of the city of Atlantic
Beach, Duval County, Florida. in accordance with sec±ion 1 '5.JR. Florida Statutes.
Passed upon first reading and public hearing by the City Commission of the City of Atlantic
Beach this 28th day of August, 2006. Passed upon final reading and public hearing this 1 1 tT, day
of September, 7006.
Approved as to form and correctness:
ALAN C. JENSEN, ESQTTTRF.
City Attorney
ATTEST:
DONNA BUSSEY
City Clerk
PaRa7_f7
DONAT.D M. WOT.ESON
Mayor/presiding nfficer
ordinance Number 90-06-195
1Rffective Date:
Ordinance 90-06--195 ATTACHMENT A
City of Atlantic Beach
Area subject to section 24172. Residential Development Standards
AGENDA # 7A
AUGUST 28, 2006
s
500 1,000
2,000 Feet
A (:F.NT 1 A ITEM;
CTTRMTTTFD RV:
DATE:
BACKGROUND:
RITBGET:
RFCOMMF.N11 A TI(1N:
ATTACHMENTS:
AGENDA # 71:1
A TTnUST 2R, )nn�
CITE' OF ATLANTIC RFAH
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
STAFF REPORT
ORDINANCE, No. 211-06-R11 AMENDING THE OPERATING
RITDGET FOR THF CITV ()Ei ATT,ANTIC REACH,
FLORIDA FOR FICC AI. VF.AR RFGINNTNG (1CTORER 1,
2005 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 3n, 2nn6_
Nel son Van T .iere
Finance Director
August 21. 2006
The Building Official retired in February and the City has peen
actively trying to fill the position. Because the qualifications for
this position are in very high in demand, the City is experiencing
unusual difficulty in finding a replacement. The City will need
$1 moon of additional finds to continue contracting nut this
program until the end of the fiscal year.
Also included in this ordinance is tt3,200 of additional funds to
contract out inspections for the Building Department. This is
necessary to keen un with the workload while the department is
temporarily short staffed.
The impact on the budget for this amendment is a S13.200
reduction in General Fund reserves.
Approve Ordinance No. 7n -n6 -Rn
Ordinance No. 20-06-80
REVIEWED RV CITY MANAGER:
AGENDA # 7B
ATTGUST 28. 2006
ORDINANCE NO. 20-06-80
AN 0RT)TNANCF AMFNT)TNG THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THF•
env nF Air ,ANTIC RFAC'H, ET,0RTT)A FOR FISCAL YEAR
RFGTNNTNG nCTnRF.R 1, 2(1O ANT) FNi)TNG SEPTEMBER 30, 2006.
W EIF,RF,AC, the City Charter of the City of Atlantic Beach requires that the city
Commission approve all budgetary increases and transfers at the fund level. and
WHEREAS, the nature of budgetary systems and these day to day decisions affecting
such budgetary systems require adjustments from time to time, and
WITFRF AN, additional funds are needed to fund the contract services for Building code
Administration for the remainder of the year. The services will include plan review and some
inspection services due to a shortage of City staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, RE TT T'NACTF.n RV THF CTTV COM JSSION ON
REHAT.E OF THF. iFniI,F nE THF CITY nE ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA, that:
1_
The Fiscal Year 2005/2006 Final Budget be amended os followq-
Gen ern' Fund
Expenses:
Ruild;ng fepa,-rment
contract Services
$1 3,')nn
Total General Fund $11,2nn
Change in Fund Balance <S13,200�
This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Passed by the City Commission on first reading this day of August. 7nn6.
Passed by the City Commission on second and final reading this day of September,
2006.
Donald M. Wolfson
Mayor / Presiding Officer
Approved as to form and correctness: ATTEST:
Alan C. Jensen, Esquire
City Attorney
Gonna Bussey
city Clerk
AGENDA # R A
AUGUST ?R, 7006
CITU OF ATLANTIC REACH
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
STAFF REPORT
AC�FNIlA ITFM: Linpkins Creek Reginnal Retention Facility — Land Purchase
SIIRMITTFIi RY: Rick Carper, P,E., Public Works Director.
nATF: August 91, 2nn6
RACK(9RCHINIn; At the July 24th Meeting, the Cnmmissinn authorized Staff to
PvPcute an C)ptinn to Buy agreement with Sunrise Community
Chiirrh fnr the twn-acre Darrel required for the Hopkins Creek
RPginnal Retention Facility. Public Notification of the intent to
purchase was accomplished bV ads in the Times Union Shorelines
J�SIV 2gth and August Ind editions. The effective date of the
agrPPment was August qth
BU1lfZFT:
The C)Dtjnn tn Riuy rnmmits the city to purchase the two acres at
the appraised value of $43n,nnn per acre, following completion of
due diligence evaluations of environmental and title considerations
to ensure the land is suitahle fnr the prnpnsed use and has clear
title. I ampe, Rny R Associates, Inc. obtained this value through a
lanrd appraisal Drnvirderd to the city no April 96, 7006.
Since then, a Phase_ C)ne FnvirnnmentaI Site Assessment (ESA)
has heen rnmDleterd nn the Drnpnsed pond site bv Aernstar
Fnvjrnnmental Services Inc. The FSA, which is primarily a records
search, fni incl nn inrdicatinn of dumping nr off-site contamination
that would affPrt using the parcel fnr the desired retention facility.
The FY70n6 Stnrmwater Capital Account (47n -noon -538-6300) has
$j ,3nn,nnn hurtgeterd fnr cnnstructinn of the Hopkins Creek Pond
(PrnjPct PUUn3nq), The purchase price will be transferred to the
4Zn-nnnn-3R-F1nn (I anrd Arquisjtinn) account,
RECCIIIARAFKIIIATION: Authnri7P the City Manager tn cnmplete the purchase of the
land required fnr the Hopkins Creek RPginnal Retention Facility
‘niith Sunrise Community Church,
ATTACHMFIITS: 1. FSA Report FvecutivP Summary
Option AgrPPment FXhihlt A — ParrPl sketch
REVIEWED Ry (ITV MANAZFR:
August 2F1, 200E Regular Meeting
AGENDA # 8A
AUGUST 28. 2006
1.0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Aeroetar Environmental SPrvicPc, Tnr, (AEROSTAR) conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
(ESA) of Hopkins Creek Pond located on Aquatic Drive. Atlantic Beach. Duval County. Florida: hereafter
referred to as the subject site. The purposP of-th;S nSCPe nP.nt wac to identify recognized environmental
rpnditinns assoriaterl with the subject site. A summary of the ESA findings is as follows:
6
Th snbjPct cite rnnsicts of one rectangular -shaped, asphalt -paved parcel and a portion of a
contiguous, irregular-shaped. wooded parcel, totaling approximately �.5� acres Arrnrding to the
Dual County Property Appraiser' Q Office (DCPAO) website, the subject site parcels are identified
by the real estate numbers (RE#s) 177411 0110 and 171818 5010. For the p'lrpoPs of thi c rPp�rt.
RE# 177411 0110 will bp dpeignared parcel #1 and RR# 171818 5010 will be designated Parcel#2.
The current owner of Parcels #1 and #2 is listed as Sunrise Community Evangelical Frei- Church,
Inc.. (Sunrise Cormmnnity Church). AccPsc to the subject sit,- was available from the east via
Aquatic Drive. Stormwater discharges to and from the site were not observed during the site
inspection. According to Mr. Keith Jackson. Sunrise Cnmmnn;ty Chnrrh, water, Plertnrtty, and
sewage dispQQn1 are not provided to the subject site; however, water and gas lines are present in the
right-of-way (ROW) along Aquatic Drive on the eastern boundary of Parcel #P.
During the site inspection. Parcel #1 appeared as wooded propi-rty with the central portion less
wooded than the sp„thern portion. Solid wactP was observed throughout Parcel #1 and included a
mattress, trash associated with food items. articles of clothing. a shopping cart. and a grill with an
associated propane tank. According to Mr. Jancqnn, the go1id waste is a result of the transients living
on the parcel. Parcel #2 was asphalt -paved on the northern and southern portions and grass-coVered
asphalt in the central portion of the paTCe1. A ditch running north -south was observed on the western
boundary of Parcel #2.
APROSTAR pPrformed a review of aerial photographs taken in 1943, 1952. 1960. 1970. 1975.
1988, 1991 2001. 2004 and 2005. Based on the aerial photpgrnphS and c;ty rhrPrtnriPs reviewed
and the cite ou,nPr' ;rire.rvieW, the subject site appears to be wooded in the 1943 aerial photograph:
partially grassy from at least 1953 to at least 1960: partially cli-ared and from nt least 1970
to at least 197: dPVPlnpm with an asphalt -paved area, a small structure, and a sandy area in the
1988 aerial photograph; and wooded and paved since at least 1993.
A search of historic city directories for Jacksonville dating hack to 1940 was performed as a part of
this investigation. The subject site was not listed in rhe city dirertoriec. The vicinity of the snhject
cite along Aquatic Drive. Atlantic Boulevard, and Atlantic Court has been listed as commercially
and residentially developed from at least 1963 to at least 2005.
AEROSTAR interviewed Mr. Keith Jackson. subject site contact. concerning the history of the
subject site. Mr. Jackson stated that SunricP Community Church purchased Parcel #1 from Jahah
Inc.. in 1983. Mr. Jackson indicated that the parcel was wooded while owned by Jahah Inc. and
Sunrise Community Church. Mr. Jackson explained that parcel #2 was purchased from Beaches
Aquatic Pool, Inc., in 1998, who had used the parcel as a tennis court_ but has since been removed
by the Church. According to Mr. Jackson. the parcel is not used fpr anything at the present time,
Mr. Jackson stated he was not aware of any dumping onsite other than what solid waste the
trancipntc bring onsite. Mr. Jackson indicated that he is not aware of any. underground storage tanks
(1 TSTs). aboveground storage tanks (ASTM, environmental concerns, or liens associated with the
Hopkin' Creek PoniL Aquatic Drive, Atlantic B -ash, Duval County, Florida August 15, 2006
Phase I Enviratune.ral Si' a Assessor"n' Reperl, AES Project Number 0106-504-02 Page 1-1
ACYPNA # $A
AiTr TTCT'8. 2006
TI
subjPrt s;te. A rrprdingto Mr. Jackson, no previous environmental assessments have been conducted
at the site.
The subject site is bordered by Sunrise Community Church and residential property to the north;
Aquatic Drive. followed by r=mmPrriAland undeveloped property, to the east: commercial property
rn the south; and commercial and residential property to the west.
Fe.Pra1. stare, and local environmental agency data was reviewed to determine if the potential for
recognized environmental conditions exist at or in the vicinity of the site. An environmental
database repprt wa c prepared by Environmental Data Resources (EDR). No NPL. Florida-Pq„ivalent
CERCLIS Site/State Hazardous Waste Site. CPRCLIS, CORK ACTS, FINDS, RCRA-TSD, SCL,
SPL. ERNS. or AST farilitiPC were identified within the ASTM -specified minimum search radii for
the suhiect site. Six RCRA-SQG and five UST facilities were identified in the database report;
however, these facilities are outside the minimum ASTM -specified search radius of on or adjacent
to the s„bjert site. One Dry Cleaners/Priority Cleaners was identified in the database report within
the ASTM -specified search radius of 0.5 mils. Six LUST facilities were identified in the database
report within the ASTM -specified search radius of 0.5 miles. Based on the information gathered
during this investigation. these facilities are not snsperted of negatively impacting the subject site
at this time.
AEROSTAR has performed a Phase IESA in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM prartire
E 1c27 of a wooded and commercially developed property Lcated on Awl afir Drive, Atlantic Beach, Duval
County. Florida. the subject site. Any PXceDtifan s to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section
2.0 of this report. This assessment has revealed no evidence of rPcogni7ed environmental conditions in
connection with the subject site.
Based on the results of this investigation. np f„rther investIgatipn is warranted at this time.
The remainder of this report is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the scope of work and limitations
for this report; Sertion 3 Presents a site description; Section 4 presents user provided inf' rmaripn: Sertifan
5 presents a records review: Section 6 presents a sun -ninny of the site reconnaissance; Section 7 presents a
summary of interviews: Section 8 Presents a summary of our findings and conclusions: Section 9 presents
any deviations from the ASTM standard: Section 10 provides additional services conducted as part of this
Phase I ESA: Section 11 presents the referenres; Section 12 presents the signatures of environmental
professionals Preparing and reviewing the report: and Section 13 presents the q„alifrations of the
environmental professionals participating in this PhaCe I ESA. Figures are included in Appendix A. The
property record cards of the subject site is included in Appendix B. Site photographs are inrinded in
Appendix C. Pertinent results of a computerized regn1atory agency database search axe included in Appendix
D. Aerial photographs are included in Appendix E. Interview documentation is inrinded in Appendix F.
References are included in Appendix G. The qualifications and resumes of the environmental professionals
performing this investigation are inrinded in Appendix H.
Rapkinv Creek Pond Aquatic Drive. Atlantic Beach, Duval C_unty, Ft,r't"
August 15. 2006
Phase i Enviro"..,o„tal Site Aesesei++e.0 Rep^t+. AES Pmjecf Number 0106-504-02 Page 1-2
I/1
'I( 1.7
is
AGENDA # RA
AUGUST 28, 9nnA-
A(PNT)A if 8B
ATT(:TTST 9R, 9006
PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS ONLY A PLACE HOLDER. A COPY OF THIS
REPORT IS ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.
The Report of the
Annual Actuarial Valuation
'eptember 30. 2005
City of Atlantic Reach
General Fmpinyee Retirement System
Cnntrihi,tinn Amounts are
Ent the plan Year Beginning Ortnher i _ 71106
Tn he C'nntribUted During
The Fiscal Year Beginning Ortnher I. 2006
Siihmjtted to
The Board of Trustees
City of Atlantic Reach
General Fmployee Retirement System
GRS
(abriel Roeder Smith & Company
•
AGND A # 8B
AUGTTST ?R. 20nt
PLEASE NOTE: TATS TC ONT ,Y A PT, Art' am .nFR. A COPY OF THIS
REPORT 15 ON FUN IN TAF. CTIV CT.FRICS OFFICE.
The Report of the
Annual Actuarial Valuation
September 30. 2005
City of Atlantic Beach
Police Qfficerc° Retirement Syctem
Cnntrihutinn Amni ints are
For the plan Year Beginning Qrtoher 1. 2006
To he Cnntrihuted DiiriDg
The Fiscal Year Beginning Octoher I , 2006
Suhmitted to
The Board of Trustees
City of Atlantic Bearh
Police Qffirerc' Retirement Syctem
GRS
Gabriel Roeder Smith & Company
AGENDA if RC
ATTGUST 9R, 9006
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSIONER MEETING
STAFF RF,PORT
Af_FN11A ITEM: Reclassification of the secretary position In the City Clerk's mice
SUBMITTED BY: Donna L. Bussey, City Clerk
DATE; August 21, 2006
RAC'Kf R(ITTNfl: The City CleTk's mice still has a vacant ,_Secretarv' position that has not been
advertised. The position was vacated hy Teanrie Shaw nn Tune 6th• T follnWed
City Procedures by reviewing and updating the joh description, re -scoring the joh.
requesting the reclassification, and providing all supporting documents. nuring
the process, I met with the Human Resource Manager and then with the City
Manager on two occasions.
City Manager TTanson informed me that my request for the reclassification was not
approved as suhmitted. but did agree to reclassify the joh as a Grade 16.
A request was made on the last Commission meeting agenda with the following
attachments: 1) Request to Staff Vacant Position, 2) The current job description
for Secretary (Cnade 15), 1) My revised/proposed job description that accurately
reflects the duties heing performed hy the " Secretary' 4) Human Resource
Manager's Recommendation to the City Manager. Those documents revealed that
I properly followed the City Procedures. that the current joh description needed
revisions, and that the Human Resource Manager scored the job at a Grade 17
(without the CMC certification) and recommended a title change from "Secretary"
to Administrative Assistant".
At the last meeting. the Commission addressed the request and voted to defer
action until August 28. 2nn6. SinCe then, information has heen provided to the
Commission by the City Manager and by the City cleric and separate meetings
with each Commissioner have been offered in order to explain the information and
answer questions.
Since the City Charter allows for the City Manager and the City Clerk to hire a
deputy and the pay rate he set hy the City Commission, T respectfi,lly request
approval of my recommendation below.
RTmG 1 T; An increase to the proposed budget for salaries and benefits
would he necessary. — —
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the reclassification of the "Secretary" from a Grade 1 to a Grade 17,
change the title to "Administrative Assistant to the City Clerk" and place into
the pay scale using normal city procedures. In addition, create a position
called "neputy City Clerk" ata Grade 1R to which the Administrative
Assistant woild airtomatically advance/promote to upon receiving the Certified
Municipal Clerk (CMC) staff,
MTNT TTFS
Board Member Review Committee Meeting
August 17, 2fO6
1. Call to order
AGENDA # I OA
AUGUST 9R.')nn6
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Dezmond Waters at 5:00 pm. Those in attendance
were Mayor Pro Tem Dezmond Waters, City Manager Jim Hanson, Member Glen Fisher, Member Casey
Q»inif, City Clerk Donna Bussey, Code F.nforcement nffcer Alex Sherrer and Community Development
Director Sonya Doerr.
City Manager Hanson reminded the Committee that interviews are being conducted to make a
recommendation for appointment to the Code Enforcement Board as an alternate member at this meeting
and that, since several of the same applicants are interested in the Community Development Board, the
committee invited representation from the Community Development Board to interview those candidates
at the same time. Those candidates will he considered along with the remainder of the applicants for the
Community Development Board in September, Alex Sherrer explained that he was unable to rnnfirm if
all expiring members were interested in serving again and suggested that the committee recommend a
second new applicant for appointment if another vacancy occurs.
fiscucc/review new
applicants for the Code Enforcement Board
A. Ray Martin, Tr.
R. Tuliette uagist
C Toshua Futterman
D. Nicholas Dodaro
E. Curtis Sanders
E. Veda Bernstein
Pity Clerk Bussey explained that Nicholas Dodaro wag unable to keep his appointment due to a
work schedule conflict.
The Committee interviewed each of the applicants except Mr. Dodaro. The purpose ofthe interv1ew and
an overview of the duties and responsibilities of the Code Enforcement Board were provided to each
candidate. The candidates explained their personal accomplishments, their goals and their interest in the
community. The Committee offered each applicant the opportunity to ask questions. The Committee
responded to ±hoCe questions. Ater the interviews were conducted, the committee discussed the
candidates.
The congeng»s was to recommend appointing Juliette Hagist as alternate member to the Code
Enforcement Board to fill the current vacancy.
The consensus was to recommend Ray Martin to fill a future vacancy to the Code Enforcement
Board if a reappointment is not applicable or recommended otherwise_
A d i ournment
There being no other husiness, the meeting adjourned at 6:56 pm.
Donna L. Bussey, City Clerk
Minutes of the Board Member Review Committee Meeting on August 17.7006
Page 1 of 1
ALAN C. JENSEN
Attorney at Law
935 North Third Street
Post Office Bax 50457
Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32240-0457
AGENDA #1013
AUGUST 25, 2006
Telephone (904) 246-2500 Facsimile (904) 246-9960
E -Mail: AJensenLaw@aol.com
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MEMORANDUM
August 17, 2006
Mayor and City Cornnaissioners
City of Atlantic Beach
Alan C. Jensen, Esquire, City Attorney
Lot Subdivision Ordinance
Sec. 24-189, Atlantic Beach Code
You requested at the City Commission meeting held on August 14, 2006, that 1 report to you
regarding the status of the lot subdivision ordinance, which is an amendment to Sec. 24-189 of the
Atlantic Beach Code.
The original purpose of the ordinance was to shift approval of two lot subdivisions from
administrative approval by city staff to approval by the Community Development Board ("CDB"),
after conducting a public hearing. Basically, criteria were to be established for the CDB to consider
in its deter nination of whether to grant or deny a two lot subdivision. if objective criteria are set by
the City Commission in Sec. 24-189, and an applicant who wants to subdivide a lot into two lots
meets all of the objective criteria, then, provided all other applicable City requirements are met, the
application must be granted_
By way of a brief history, l attach the following documents:
1. April 21, 2006, Staff Report from Sonya Doerr with attached proposed changes to
Sec. 24-189. (2 pages)
2. June 5, 2006, memorandum opinion that 1 gave to Jim Manson regarding draft
changes to Sec. 24-189, which included many new criteria, such as protected trees, 24 month limit,
and the like. (3 pages)
3. June 20, 2006, e -trail that I sent to Mayor Wolfson regarding the criteria and
concerns that I had. (1 page)
Mayor and City Commissioners
August 17, 2006
Page 7
A GPNDA # 1 QR
ATTfTTST28, 7QQr,
4. August 9, 2006. memorandum to Tim Hanson with the attached proposed ordinance,
whish T prepared after a meeting with Mayor Wolfson on August 9, 2006. This is the latest version
of the proposed ordinance. (1 pages)
5. August 13 and 14, 7006, e-mails that I sent to Tim >-Tanson regarding concerns
expressed to me by attorney Marra Tjoflat. (2 pages)
6. August 14, 2006, e-mail from Sonya noerT to me confirming her concerns. as
expressed by attorney Tjoflat. (1 page)
Tt is my opinion that proposed paragraph (a)(6) of the latest version of the ordinance would not he
enforceable. That opinion is shared by attorney Tjoflat and Sonya Doerr.
It is my recommendation that you consider the proposed ordinance at the next regularly scheduled
meeting to be held on August 2R, 2006, for first reading. with paragraph (6) deleted. T also want to
check the various plats and subdivisions in Atlantic Bear to make sure that paragraph (5) is not
inconsistent with any other regulations of the City. Eor example, I want to make sure that certain
Selva Marina subdivisions, as originally platted. don't have the smallest lots in the subdivision with
a size greater than 10_000 sq. ft. (1 00 x 100').
I would suggest that this ordinance needs to be acted on fairly quickly because of the moratorium
that is still in place on lot subdivisions. I would also suggest that you seriously consider whether
you want to place the burden of approving two lot subdivisions on the CnR, after a public haring.
when you have in fact established objective criteria to determine whether or not such a subdivision
of property should be allowed.
T will he more than happy to discuss anv of the above matters -Anther with you at any time.
A C.T/sky
Cc: Tames P. Hanson (w/enc)
Sonya Doerr (w/enc)
AGENDA #10B
AUGUST 28. 2006
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACI-T
CITY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
i 1 NnA ITEM: Proposed revision to Chapter 24. Land Development Regulations,
Article TV, Subdivision Regulations, Section 24-189 in accordance with
recommendation of the Community Development Board.
ST TBMITTF.T) BV: Sonya Doerr, A TCP
Community neuelopment Director
-DATE:
April 71, ?nn6
BACKGROUND: The Community Development Board was requested to reconsider their
previous recommendation related a revision to the Subdivision regulations, which has been
pending since November. This proposed recision would remove the administrative approval for
certain types of lot divisions, and estahlish a procedure to cn_nsider and act upon such requests at a
puhlic hearing.
The Community Development Board has recommended that this provision of the Subdivision
regulations be amended so that such two -lot divisions go to public hearing before the Community
Development Rnard for consideration and action, and that a process for appeal to the City
Commission of a final decision made by the Community Development Board be provided. The
attached proposed draft ordinance incorporates thneP recommendations.
BUDGET: No budget issues.
RVCfMMF.NDATION: Direction to staff to schedule and notice for first/second reading of
Ordinance 90-06-192, amending Section 24-1 R9 of Land Development Regulations, Article TV,
Subdivision Regulations, in accordance with recommendation of Community Development Rnar•d,
ATTACHMRNIS: Draft minutes of the April 1R, 7nm Community Development Board
meeting, underlined draft indicating revisions anti draft proposed Ordinance.
RF.VTF.wF.n BY CITV MANAGER:
May OR. 2006 regular mP.Pt;ng
Sec. 24-1S9. Exemptions from
Plat or Replat.
the.
AGENT)A ting
AUGUST 7R, 7006
DRA FT
requirement for approval and recording of a Einal ���bdivision
(a) Building Permits may he issued following divisions of Land without the need for approval of a Final ,
Suhdivision Plat Ora Replat only in accordance with each of following provisions (1) through (6).
(1) Approval at a public hearing by the Cprnmmnnity Development Board of a Certified Survey
depicting the proposed new lots and upon finding_that earh of the following requirement and
Condit;off are demonstrated.
(2) The division results in no more than two (2) contiguous Lots or parnels,
(3) The resultant new Lots, comply with the Minimum Lot Area, Width and Depth, and accegg
requirement of the applicahle Zoning nistriet. the Comprehensive Plan and 211 other applicable
requirements of these Land De.Jelopment Regulations, as may hP amended.
(d) The division and the resultant new Lots shall not create any Nonconforming Structures or any other
Nonconforming characteristic.
(5) Such Certified S„rwey shall he submitted to and approved the Community Development Board prior
to recording of a deed for transfer of ownership of Lands, and shall he recorded as an addendum to
the deed(s). It shall be the responsibility of the property owner(s) to provide evidence of the
approved Certified S11TVPy along with any applination for Building Permits.
(6) Notice of such requests to divide lots under the terms of this Section shall he provided as set forth in
Section 24-52 (c) of this chapter.
(b) Appeals. An Applicant may appeal a decision of the community Development Board *rade pursuant to
this Section to the City Commission. Such appeal shall he fled ;n writing with the City Clerks within
thirty (30) days after rendition of the final order of the Community Development Board, and shall he
heard at p„hlic hearing hefore the C; Commission.
(hc)TTownhonQeg and residential Dwellings held in Fee -Simple Ciwnerchip. Townhouses and Two-family
Dwellings, when divided in ownership, shall not c.anctitute a division of Lands requiring approval of a
Final Suhdivigion Plat or a Replat, provided that such Dwelling are otherwise in compliance with these
Land Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 1 of
A(;FT\TTIA #10R
ATT3TTST 2R. 2006
Subj: Chap.24 changes to administrative approval of 2 lot subdivisions
Date: 6/5/06 6:17:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: AJensenLaw
To: j_hanson aacoab.us
CC: sdoerr@coab.us
Jim:
Yoe] have asked for my opinion regarding the ahove subject and other possible factors to consider in an
ordinance which would codify any such changes to the administrative approval of 2 lot subdivisions. The matter
was last presented to the city commission in Agenda Item RR at the commission meeting held on May 22.2006.
A draft of the proposed changes to Sec.24-1R9 was included in R. and I have serious concerns regarding
some of those changes, as follows:
(a)(1) The last sentence requiring location of all "Ovate protected trees '° seems inappropriate and
unnecessary for the Community Development Boards consideration. Any applicant for a building permit will have
to present the required information and survey to the Tree Board as a prerequisite to obtaining a building permit.
and I believe we should leave all siirh matters to the Tree Board.
(a)(2) This again brings matters for the Tree Board into play for the Community Development Board, which
should not be done. This also appears to add requirements to a lot resulting from a subdivision that are not
requirements to a standard lot. This section should be limited to the minimum yard requirements, which I assume
means that the proposed new lots ran be built on with all setback requirements being met.
(a)(3) I don't know where the 24 months came from, but unless there is some justification for this period of
time, 't could be considered an arbitrary amo' int of time, and we should avoid anything that might be considered
arbitrary.
(a)(4) Omit the last 4 words from this section "...as may be amended." This is unnecessary and may well
lead to other questions that are unnecessary.
(a)(5) This section concerns me greatly. This would allow much discretion %A1ith the Community
Development Board, and our goal should be to set guidelines which, if met by an applicant, would result in
approval of the requested subdivision. I would suggest this section he eliminated.
(b) Appeals: if there is already a provision for appeals to the city commission in Chap.24, perhaps that
could be referenced here. However. if the intent is for the city commission to establish guide!ioes for the 2 lot
subdivisions and then let the Community Development Roard make the derision if the guidelines have been meet,
don't think an apQeal to the city commission would be appropriate. Just as the Community Development Roard
is the final word on granting or denying variances in the city, they an certainly be the final word on 2 lot
subdivisions, especially if the commission sets forth clear and unequivocal guidelines in their legislation.
I also understand that other possible factors have been discussed or brought up to consider adding to the
changes to administrative approval of 2 lot subdivisions, such as lot size. neighborhood input, trees. and the like.
The lot size question is simple: if the proposed lots meet the size requirements of the zoning classification. the
subdivision cannot be denied on a lot size basis. Regarding trees. I have addressed that above, and I don't
helieve the Community Development Board should be concerned with the trees, nor should the city _commission
add conditions to subdivided lots that are not applicable to standard lots (ie., lots NOT resulting from subdivision).
The imput of neighbors is always important, but cannot really be considered by the Community Development
Board unless the neighbors are presenting competent, substantial evidence which is pertinent to the factors to be
considered by the Roard. Pere opposition of neighbors because they don't like the proposed subdivision or
something like that should not be considered by the Bnard in making its decision. I would strongly suggest not
including anything in the proposed changes regarding neighborhood inputwhich could very ‘meli lead to
subjective determinations by the Board, which ‘Aie have to avoid. All decisions by the Board on 2 lot subdivisions
should be based on objective factors established by the city commission io amendments to the ordinance.
I cannot think of anything further to address on this matte, and hopefully the above information is helpful to
you. If you have anv questions at all regarding the above, please let me know and I'll be happy to discuss them
with vou. Alan
Monday, June OS, '206 America Online: AJensenTO.`
935 North Ihird Street
P.O. Box 50457
1acksonville Beach, FL 32940-0457
Page 2 of 2
Ar;ENnA#1QR
AUr;UST 28. 7n06
(904) 246-900
(904) 246-9960 FAX
A.iensenLaw@aol.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTI('F: The information and all afnrhments contained in this electronic communication are
leanlly privileged and confidential. subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strir.t!y prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical form or
otherwise. Thank you.
Monday, June 05, 2006 Amerina Online: AJensenT.aw
Ar;FNI)A rnu
ATTfTTST ?R, 2nnr
DR FT
Sec. 24-1119, Exemptions from the requirement for approval) and recording of a Final Snhiliivision
Plat or Replat.
(a) Building Permits may he issued following divisions of Land without the need fir approval of a Final
Suhdivision Plat or a Replat =nly in accordance with each of foil=wing provisions (1) through (R).
(1) Approval at a publi- hearing by the Crrnmitniry De. elopment Board of a Certified
depicting the proposed new Into acid upon finding that ear -"h of the following requirements and
cpnditions are demonstrated. Te Cert; d. Survey shall also depict the location of all Private
Protected TveeQ, 9s defined by Cha r 21 of . rode of Ordinances.
(2) The Certified Survey shall demonstrate that each proposed new lot, contains sufficient area to meet
all minimum Yard Requirements and that reinoval of no Private Protected Trees, as defined by
Chapter 23-16-,' Shall be -required solely for the purpose of creating sufficient buildable area on the
new lots. The Survey shall also identify the general intended building footprint location in relation
totexisting prima+e Protected Trees.
(3) The division rec„1tQ in no more than two (2) contiguous Lots or Parcels, and no'divisipn-'of any
poiation of thelands subject to a request under this Section shall have hien diuided"during'the
preceding lwe.nty-four (24) months.
(4) The recnitant new Lots, comply with the Minimum Lot Area, Width and Depth, and annecc
requirements of the. applicable Zoning District, the Comprehensive Plan and all other applicable
requirements of these Land Development Regulations, as may be amended.
S The resultant new lots are general) consistent in size, width de,tl, and sha.e with surroundin•
development and established platting pa+terns.
(6) The division and the resultant new L_ts shall not create any Nonconforming Strnrtnrec nr any _cher
NonConfilirming rharcteristic.
(7) Such Certified Survey shall he submitted to and approved thP Community D' "'clopment Board prior
to recording of a deed for transf r .f ownership of Lands, and shall he recorded as an addendum t_
the daed(c), it shall be the responsihility of the prpperty nwner(s) to provide evidence of the
approved Certified Survey along with any application for Building Permits.
(R) Notice of such regi'eQtts to divide lots under the terms of this Ser.tion shall be provided as set forth in
Section (c) of this Chapter.
(b) Appeals. An Applicant may appeal a dericiQr of the Community. Development Board made pnrsilant to
this Section to the City Commission. Surd] appeal shall be filed in ‘i'riting with the City Clerk within
thirty (30) days after rendition of the final order of the Comm unit. Development Board, and shall he
heard at puhlic hearing before the city
Commission.
(khc)Townhouses and residential Dwellings held in Eee-Simple ownership. Townhouses and Two-family
Dwellings, when divided in ownership, shall not constitute a division of Lands requiring approval of a
Einal Suhdivicion Plat or a Replat, provided that such DWellings are otherwise in compliance with the$e
Land Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan.
Subj: Chap.24 chanaes to administrative approval of 2 lot subdivisions
Date: 6/90/06 12:45:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: AJensenLaw
To: dwolfson(c�rcab.us
CC: jhansonAcoab.us, sdoerr(a�coah.us
Don: We need clarification of what exactly you want included in the proposed ordinance on the above. My
notes from the commission meeting on a/i2 reflect that you wanted something to the effect that "...no lots may be
subdivided in a fully platted S«bdivision of record... and Jim has told Sonya you asked for language effectively
prohibiting any replat or future division of platted Tots. Questions and noncerns:
1,do you want Something that would also apply to or more lot subdivisions? �Q J
2. the language from my notes would probably include the entire city and then eliminate subdivisions entirely
3. effectively prohibiting any replat or future division of platted lots would require almost a compete rewrite of
the subdivision regulations to remove any references to replatting procedures
4. there may be conflict with Chap.177 of the Florida Statute, which addressee replatting
5. there may he some Bert Harrik questions if the city passes a law just to prohibit divisions that would
other A1ise comply with a!I other requirement
Page 1 of 1
Af;FNT)A #1OB
ATT(;TTST .8, 2006
We are trying to meet forth criteria for the CDB (or whomever) to use in determining whether to grant or deny a 2
lot subdivision. If you want to prohibit division of certain properties for some legitimate reason, it may be hetter to
put it in govt er section of Chap.24, probably a nem-, section which would set forth reasons kuhy certain propertie
could not be divided.
Language help is needed if you want to include something in the proposed ordinance Sonya and I are working
on at this time, to make sure we accurately reflect your intent. Thanks. Alan
61. 9ee`t. t'4te
235 North Third Street
2.0. Box 50457
Jackcooville Beach, FL 32240-0A57
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
lega'ly privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipientyou are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail acid please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or Qhysical form or
otherwise. Thank you.
Tuecrlay. June 2n, 700t America Online: AJensenl.aw
sky
Page 1 of 1
AGPND A #1 OR
AUGTTST 9R. 20%
From: sky
Sent: Wednesday, August 09. 2006 3:14 PM
To: 'jhanson@coab.us'
Cc: •'tdoerr@coab.us'; 'dwolfson@coab.us'
ubject:.Lot Subdivision Ordinance
Jim:
I met with Mayor Wolfson this morning and we discussed further revisions to the lot subdivision
ordinance. Attached is the new ordinance, which I hope correct) reflects the language
expressed to me y and intent as
P by Mayor Wolfson. I believe he intends to bring it up under his comments at the
meeting on Monday night to discuss with the other Commissinners, and toive us d'
can have the nrrlinance in final form — g erection so that we
for first rending at the meeting on 8/28/06. Please contact me with
any questions, comments or Suggestions. Thanks
Alan C..IPogPn
City AttorDPy
spot hy:
Sandra K. Clemons
Legal Assistant to Alan C. Jensen. Esquire
9`15 North Third Street
e. O. Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-04F7
(904) 24F-2500
(904) 24F-9960 FAX
AJensenl aw@aol.com
skclemonsna.bellsouth, net
CONPIDENTIAI iTY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this Plectronic communir-ntion are
legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. if the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review. use. dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly QrohibitPd. If you have
received this communication in error. please notify us immediately by return e-mail and please permanently
remove any copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or
physical form or otherwise. Thank you.
8/9/06
ORDINANCE NO. -06-
AGENDA # 1 nR
AUGUST 28, 20nr,
AN ORT)INANCE OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING SEC. 24-1R9, FY1 MPTIONS FROM THE RFOTTTRF.MENT
FOR APPROVAT. AND RECORDING OE A ETNAT. STTRT)IVISION PLAT
OR RFPT,AT, OF CHAPTER 24, 7,ONTNf:, SITRT)IVISION AND LAND
T)F.VF.T,OPMF.NT REGULATIONR, TO PRflvIDE FOR APPROVAL OE
ANV STTCH EXEMPTIONS RV THF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BOARD, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
RF. IT ENACTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF THF EFOPT,F.
OE THF. CTTV OF ATLANTIC RF ACTT, FT ,ORTT) A
SECTION 1, Sec. 74-189 of the rode of Ordinances of the rite of Atlantic Beach.
Elorida. is hereby amended to read as follnws:
"sec. 1d-189. Exemptions from requirement for approval and recording of a
final subdivision plat or replat.
(a) Building permits may be issued following divisions of land without the need
for approval of a final subdivision plan or a replat only in accordance with each of
the following provisions (1) through (R)'
(1) Approval by the Community Development Board, after conducting, a public;
hearing, of a certified survey depicting the proposed new lots and upon
finding by the Board that each of the following requirements have been met
The division results in no more than two (9) contiguous lots or parcels.
The resultant new lots rQmply with the minimum lot area. width and depth,
and access requirements of the applicahle zoning district, the
Comprehensive Plan and all other applicable requirements of these land
development regulations.
The division and the resiiltant new lots shall not create any nonconforming
structures or any other nonconforming characteristic.
Any resultant new lot shall not he smaller in lot area than the smallest lot
within the subdivision, as originally platted
•- 1. •- IS • 11- 1
original subdivision of record
• 1 • • • • . • . • - • • • 111 •A
on the
The certified s>>r\Iey shall he suhmitted to and approved by the Community
Development Board prior to recording a deed to transfer ownership of the
ink, and shall be recorded as an addendum to the deed(s). It shall be the
(2)
AGENDA #1M
AUGUcT 28.2206
responsibility of the property owner to provide e""idence of the approved
certified survey along with any application for building permits.
Notice of public hearings before the Community Development Board on
requests to divide lots under the terms of this section shall he provided as set
forth in Sec 24-57 of this chapter.
(b) Townhouses and revidential dwellings held in foa simple ow1iarshz . Townhouses
and two-family dwellings, when divided in ownership, shall not constitute a division of lands
requiring approval of a final subdivision plat or a replat, provided that such dwellings are otherwise
in compliance with these land development regulations and the comprehensive plan.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its final
passage and adoption.
PASSED by the City Commission on first reading this
day of , 9006.
PASSF.il by theCity Commission on second and final reading this day of
, 7006.
A TTFRT:
DONNA RT 1RSFy nnNALD M. wnr FSON
City Clerk Mayor, Presiding Officer
Approved as to form and correctness:
ALAN C. TFNSEN, ESQUIRE
City Attorney
Page 1 of 1
A(;FNDA #10B
ATTPTTST 28. 2006
Subj: lot subdivision n—rrIinance
Date: 8/14/n6.10:04:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: AJensenLaw
Tn jhanson(a�coab.us
CC: sdoerr(a,coab.us, dwelfson@coab.us
Jim: Some further thoughts after I was able to speak u^!ith Marcia Tjoflat this morning:
1. The ordinance as drafted may he subject to a consistency challenge, ie., it is not consistent ‘A/ith the Comp
Plan. Sonya can probably expound on this.
2. Bert Harris Act claims %mmould probably be forthcoming if the ordinance is passer1 as drafted.
1. There is no data analysis to support it (par.(6)), so it could be deemed arbitrary and capricious.
Please let me know if you want to discuss further. Alan
935 North Third Street
P.O. Box 5047
Jacksonville Beach, FL 12240-0457
(904) 94R-2500
(904) 246-996n FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
CONFIDFLITIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments containert in this electronic communication are
legally privileged and confidential. subject to the attorney-client privilege and intenrted only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not ao intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination. distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies. x^Jhether in electronic or physical form or
otherwise. Thank you.
Monday, A„g„q 14, 2006 America Online: AJensenLaw
Subj: lot subdivision ordinance'
Date: 8/13/06 11:11:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: AJensenLaw
To: jhansoncoab.us
CC: sdoerr(c�coah.us, dwolfson@coab.us
Page 1 of 1
AGENDA #i nu
AUGUST 7R, 9nnr,
Jim: I exchanged several e-mails with Marcia Tjoflat on Friday and her thoughts were as follows:
�. paragraphs (5) and (R) on the first page of the ordinance are inconsistent
2. sive there are many houses built on multiple lots. this ordinance would Qtili not get some people what
they want
3. paragraph (R) is probably not enforceable, as is my thought, and Marcia thinks it is a groblem from a
policy point of view (tying the hands of future commissions)
Hopefully you get this in time for your meeting with Don Monday morning. I have sent a copy of this e-mail
to him as well. Please contact me if you wish to discuss further. Hopefully this commission can sort this out
Monday night and give us direction to finalize this ordinance and proceed with getting it passed and then lifting the
moratorium. Alan
4 as jpeade9t,��ctute
935 North Third Street
P.D. Box 50457
Jacksonville Beach, FL 32240-0457
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
CONFIDENTIAi ITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
legally privileged and confidential, subject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of thiscommunication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and please permanently remove any
copies of this message from your system and do not retain any copies, whether in electronic or physical tirm or
otherwise. Thank you.
A1 -6- 4i h �� c is J io ,
(2-) .
(..?).7t4y
_��k2%`�/• / CCcfJ�Y�.i�a d
Monday, August 14, '006 America Online: A TensenLaw
Subj: RE: lot subdivision ordinance
nate: 8/14/DR 9 9:20:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: sdoerr@ci.atlantic-beach.fl.us
To: AJensenLaw(c a=!.com, jhanson(chc=ab.us
CC: dkA/c)Ifson@coab.us
Page 1 of 2
AGENT-) A #10R
AUGUST 9R. 9006
1. I suppose there could be a consistency question at least raised possibly related to a number of pr!icies,
including the below Policy A.1.5.9. Administretive review (per F.S. 163.3213) with Administrative Hearing hefore
an ALJ could then be sought by any "Substantially affected person." consistency challenges can be so broad
and subjective. generally for every Miiry that might be claimed to be inconsistent. there are other ^nes to argue
for c_nsistency, but as \tie know this process can be costly and time-consuming.
As an example, if a lot division was denied that would result in a lot that met or exceeded all Zoning District
requirements and also met the lowest density rage in the COAB, this one might be hard to defend.
Policy A.9.c.9 The City shall permit residential development only in compliance with the residential density
limitations as set fc,rth within the Land Development Regulations, and as designated on the Future Land Use Map
in accordance with the f=flowing table.
2. The Bed Harris issue is one 1 have been concerned about, and there are lots of anxious efforts across the state
to make law on the RArt Harris Act.
From: AJensenI awaaol.com [maflt=:AJensenLaw@ad.com]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2001S 10:05 AM
To: Hanson, Jim
Cr: Doerr, Sonya; Wolfson, Don
Subject: lot subdivision ordinance
Jim: Some further thoughts after I was able to speak with Marcia Tjaat this morning:
1. The ordinance as drafted may be subject to a consistency challenge. ie., it is not consistent with the ComD
Plan. Sonya can probably expound c,n this. 2. Bert Harris Art claims would probably be forthcoming if the ordinance is passed as drafted.
There is no data analysis to support it (par.(6)), so it could be deemed arhitrery and capricious.
Please let me know if you want tc, discuss further. Alan
4eci e. � ems. �QG�cLUte
935 North Third street
an. Pox 50457
Jacksonville Reach, FL 32246-n47
(904) 246-2500
(904) 246-9960 FAX
AJensenLaw@aol.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and all attachments contained in this electronic communication are
legally privileged and confidential, si 'bject to the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the
intended recipients. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient. you are hereby notified that any
review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this ommunicat!on in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and please permanently remove any
copies c,f this message from y_ur system and do not retain any copies. whether in electronic or physical form rr
otherwise. Thank you.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed. If yc,"" have received this email in error please notify the system manager.
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the
named addressee you should not disseminate. distribute or copy this e-mail. This email and any files transmitted
with it are "C'nfidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If
Monday, August 14, ?006 America online: A.TensenT aw