Law Offices 311S South Second Street Suite 200 FortPierce, FL34950  NEILL GRIFFIN MARQUIS OSKING, PLLC  Richard' V.I Neill (1934-2023) Richard V.I Neill,]r.+* Renéel Marquis-Abrams lan! Eielson Osking Brandon) M.I Hale Matthew C.I London  Mailing Address: Post Officel Box: 1270 Fort Pierce, FL34954-1270 Telephone: (772) 464-8200 Fax: (772)464-2566  *Board Certified Wills, Trusts, andl Estates Lawyer Certified Circuit Civil/County Court Mediator +] Board Certified CivilTriall Lawyer Mayor William G. Thiess 2512 Lightlewood Lane Fort Pierce, Florida 34946 Mr. James Grimes 3203 North Indian River Drive Fort Pierce, FL 34946 Ms. Ingrid M. Van Hekken 304 Anchor' Way Fort Pierce, FL 34946  July 10, 2024  Mr. Dale Reed 2811 North Indian River Drive Fort Pierce, FL 34946 Mr. John Langel 2511 North Indian River Drive Fort Pierce, FL 34946 Mr. Timothy Ritter 2513 Lightlewood Lane Fort Pierce, Florida 34946  RE: Town of St. Lucie Village - July meeting  Gentlemen and Ms. Van Hekken:  Please accept the following as our attorney's report for the. July 16th meeting.  1. Swearing-In Elected Officials. Michelle Miller, our Clerk of Court, will be at the meeting 2. Proposed 2024 - 2025 Millage Rate and Budget Hearing Schedule. The Budget Committee met and recommends that the millage rate be set based on the maximum amount that can be approved by 2/3 majority (in our case four members) which, rounded, would be 1.8500. That results in a 16.15% increase over the rolled-back rate of 1.5928 and the revenue on that basis would be $201,625.00 with a minimum of $191,543.75 to be included in thel budget. The committee also considered scheduling of thet tentative millage  to swear in our newly "elected" officials.    Mayor and Board of Aldermen  Page 2 July 10, 2024  and budget hearing and recommends that take place on Wednesday, September 4, 2024, with the plan being, subject to Board approval and availability of at least four members, for thei final hearing tol be held at the Board's regular meeting on September17,: 2024. 3. Appointment of Board of Adjustment Members. The terms of Scott McLam and Stan Grontkowski on the Board of Adjustment have expired. Stan has asked to be replaced and Scott is willing to serve another three-year term. lask that you reappoint Scott and that we 4. Desktop PC for Village Business. We need to replace the laptop PC we are currently conducting' Village business on; and, at this point, we have out- grown a laptop for this 5. Landscape Proposal. Enclosed is a proposal received from Gary Roberts Nursery and 6. Capital City ConsutingAddendum. If we receive a scope of services, we'll ask your 7. Informational items. The following are for your information and will only carry forward ini my report ift they remain pending for my further atenton/nvolvement. . Zoning queries. None other than pertaining to Oney (see below). ii. Lien queries. 3680 N. Milton Rd. = no issues reported.  plan to determine a replacement for Stan next month.  purpose. Landscape, Inc.  consideration of an addendum to the existing contract.  iii. Blaine and Ladonna Oney Building Permit/Variance Issues. I've been involved in discussions and a meeting on this matter. Arecent email exchange and the  referenced variance are enclosed.  iv. Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Interlocal agreement. I've been asked to review the enclosed form of Memorandum of Understanding for FPUA to walve/contribute) Capital Improvement Charges for connections to the future V. Property South oft the St. Lucie School (Parcel 1433-113-0030.0102. Bill andI have met with Mr. Caldwell and engineers and expect them to bring forward vi. St. Lucie School Property Boundary. I've asked Dave to follow up and set a  Village wastewater system.  Land Development Code amendments in August.  meeting with the surveyor.    Mayor and Board of Aldermen  Page 3 July 10, 2024  vii. Public Records Request. No further action has been taken.  Do feel free to call ift there's anything you want to discuss with me before the meeting.  With best regards.  ysvef MAR 1  Richard V. Neill,r.  RVNjr/dw Enclosures  CC: Paulette T. Burgess, Acting Clerk (w/encls.) Carl Peterson, Building Official (w/encls.)  Cathy Townsend (w/encls.) Wesley Taylor (w/encls.)  Leon Ghougasian, Marshall (w/encls.)        Richard V. Neill, Jr. From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments:  blaine oney Dancone/Poutcoccom Tuesday, July 9, 20249:33AM Carl Peterson; Richard V. Neill, Jr. Michael Menard; LaDonna Oney*, Re: Plan review  Existing southern overhang 2.jpg; Existing southern overhang 1.jpg  Mr. Peterson & Mr. Neill,  Carl, thank you fort the veryt timely review response and comments to our Building Permit Application. know that the Septic Pérmit Permit was lacking from our submittal but have been assured iti is ini review Ihave considered the potential lack of opportunity for all of us to be able to get together before Friday of this week on such short notice and decided to address Review Comments to our Building Permit Application. Responses are inserted into the Carl's Comments emaillreceived and is copied below. See  and Reliable Septic has responded to the questions from the Health Department.  belowwith comments and references to photos as appropriate;  Oney Building Plans Hide message history Subject: Oney Building Plans Date: July 7, 2024a at2:01:27 PME EDT To: Dlaineoney@gmai.com  3  From: Carl Peterson carupetersonestuCleviagenusov  Cc: "Richard V. Neill, auronalemncm, David Whitney DWhitney@nelgriffin.com>,  William Thiess wlam.thiess@stuclevilagenugov2  Good afternoon Mr. Oney  Ihave noticed some issued withy your plans that do not meet what was outlined ini the variance order. The variance clearly states the only thing that can encroach into the north setbacki is the stairs, landings and al balcony on the North east corner. The South side is allowed to encroach into the setback not  Listed below are issues Ifound not covered int the Variance.  closer that 17.5feet.  1)The north wall shows being taken down and rebuilt in the north setback.  Only the brickveneer thati is onthe Northern most portion of the wall willbe removed as reflected on Plan SheetA-1/Demoltion Plan). The masonrywalls behindi istoremainand: will be brought upto current code to meet building requirements The walli finish atthat location will be approximately/4:  1    further awayt from the North Boundaryline than where itcurrently sits since the brickwillber removed  from the existing wall.  2) A dumb waiter is shown in the north set back. existing brick veneer ofthe wallsection: discussedin1) above. 3) The pantry extendsi in to the north set back.  The dumbv waiterwillocated approximately 2 7'further toward the North Boundary beyondthe Items1),2)&3 3) are allinn reference to the North side oft the property, The North wall of the second floor Pantry will be 10fromthe existing Northern most existing brick veneer wall line and with the brick removali from the existing chimneywall,; the Northwall ofthe structure abovewill be approximately 10.01 from the North Boundary Line oft the property.The Variance permitted ourimprovements: to ber no closert than 8.25! from the North Boundary of our propertyn This finished locationwill be approx. 1.75' less Thad stated during ourmeetingforthis Variance Approval that ouri intent forthe mprovements.to our property was torelocate: the stairs and landing as well as 3 pumps which impededaçcess toour electric meter, and extend the balcony Northa and East. Additionaly, provide space for equipment that that will be placed under the new balcony, A dumb waiteri is equipment: as are the 3 water pumps and otherassorted equipment) that functions with the pumps. Alloft this equipment has been designed to be contained: within structure and out ofsight under the balcony areas above. The Pantry shownon our plan isanextension oft ther restof our balcony bydefinition of Balcony, Thave copiedandpasted: thedetinition  than whatwas approved.  of"Balcony' fromOxford Dictionaryand itfollows; Definitions from Oxford Languages a Leamnmore  Dictionary balco-ny /balkene noun 1.  laplatormenclosed bya wall or balustrade on the outside of a building, with access  from an upper-floorwindow, ordoor  'the glass doors opened onto a balcony with a View oft the park"  2.the upstairs seats inat theater, concert hall, orauditorium. the 17.5 set back from the bulkhead allowed int the variance  4) The second flooris overhanging the first floor by 1.7ft and appears the second floor is encroaching into  order.  This ison the south side, along the canal. The existing 2nd floor structure overhangs the first  floor by 17 att this location as well as at4 4 other 2nd floor locations on the existing property. Ineffort of keeping with the current Architecturau design n place since the mid: 170'sweopted to retaint the slight second floor overhang onthe Southside and one other area as is currently in place, Theoverhang of the new structure is designedto overhang 14in2oft the originallocations. Fyingbuttressesa are designed to  2    support this slightlyo overhanging masonry structure. Acouple photos are attached of one ofthe existing Hopefully my explanation to the Permit Application Comments are appropriate and will be satisfactory.  PHorpehme.alwihne to click onthe second photo attachment.  Regards, Blaine Oney From: blaine oney  Sent: Monday, July 8,20243:48PM To: Richard Neill. Jr. melyenelgrrincom" Oneye adomaoneyegmal.com Subject: Plan review  Cc: Carl Peterson car.peterson@stluclevalagen.gov>, Michael Menard mmenard@archtectonkcinecomp,laDoma  Mr. Neill,  Ireceived Building Permit Comments from Carl Peterson this afternoon. Iseet that you were copied on the email. The Can we all meet to discuss our plans, the Variance and what was discussed at our Variance Meeting? Iwilll be out ofthe Country! leaving earlyt this Friday morning returning on the 16th for the Town Hall/Alderman Meeting. Ican be available As you are aware, we are trying to make the. July Town Hall Meeting for approval since our Variance expires Aug. 15 and  comments all are having to do with setback encroachment and what was stated int the Variance.  anytime Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursdaya afternoon this week aty your office.  the August meeting is on1 the 20th. Please reply all to this email. Thank you, Blaine Oney Sent from my iPhone  3            INRE: PETITION FOR VARIANCE OF BLAINE AND LADONNA ONEY  ORDER  This matter came before the Board of Adjustment oft the Town of St. Lucie Village, Florida, on July 19,2023 at 6:30 p.m. Blaine Oney and LaDonna Oney had: requested a variance from Section 3.5.6 oft the St. Lucie Village Land Development Code: for their property located at  495 Peninsula Drive.  The Board of Adjustment, having heard the petition ofMr. and Mrs. Oney, having heard from petitioners, having offered opportunity for public comment and heard objections from the attorney for ai neighbor, and having given the matter full consideration, finds as follows:  1. This hearing was properly noticed by publication and mailed notices, as required by  the St. Lucie Village Land' Development Code.  2. The subject property is ai residence located at 495 Peninsula Drive, Fort Pierce, Florida 34946 and has tax I.D. number 1421-601-0020-000-7. The legal description oft this  property in St. Lucie County, Florida is:  Lot 10 and the East 60: feet ofLot 9, Block 3, Riverside Harbor Subdivision, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 5 ofthe Public Records ofSt. Lucie County, Florida. Said East 60 feet ofLot 9 being measured by running from the Northwest comer ofLot 10, run Westerly 60 feet along the boundary ofLot 9; thence run Southerly to the South boundary ofLot 9 paralleling the lot line; thence: run Basterly to thel line dividing Lots 9 and 10; thence run Northerly to the Point of Beginning, together with all interest in lands and accretion from the East boundary ofLot 10, Block: 3, aforesaid, said extension being approximately 100: feet inl length (north and south) and extending easterly to the mean high water mark oft the Western shore oft the Indian River and/or Easterly boundary ofe existing bulk head, whichever: is further, together with riparian rights. 3. The Oneys requested a variance for relief to give them relief from the 25-foot  setback requirement on the: north, south and east sides of their property.    4. The Oneys request is based on unusual circumstances, including that the setbacks are 251 feet on three sides oft their lot, that there is a undeveloped right of way immediately north of their property which is 501 feet wide (north to south), that the existing structure is already within the south set back, being approximately 17: feet from the seawall, and that the north side ofthe existing structure is also in the setback, with the stairs being approximately 14.6: feet from the  north boundary line oft the property.  5. Literal enforcement oft the Ordinance would deprive the Oneys of rights commonly  enjoyed by other property owners ini the same zoning district. injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood.  6.  Granting the variance as specified herein will not be materially detrimental or  7. Granting the variance will not confer any special privilege tol Mr. and Mrs. Oney  which is denied to owners ofs similar properties.  8. this reasonable use.  The variance set forth below is the minimum variance which will make possible  9. The spirit and intent oft the St. Lucie Village Land Development Code and Town  Comprehensive Plan are not opposed to the variance.  Itist thereupon, ORDERED as follows:  1. The requested variance is granted tol Blaine Oney and LaDonna Oney sO that they are relieved from the setback limitations in the St. Lucie Village Land Development Code on the north, south, and east sides oft their property, to the specific extent described below:  a) The Oneys may encroach into the 25 foot setback on the south side oft the  property to within, but not closer than, 17.5 feet from the bulkhead on the east side oftheir structure and to 16.75 feet on the west side, with any structure to be located north ofal line  connecting those points.    b) The Oneys may construct a swimming pool within the setback on the east  side oft their property, provided, however, that the swimming pool shall bel located at least 10  feet from the bulkhead on the east side oft the property.  c) The Oneys may encroach into the north setback to construct stairs, landings  and al balcony at the: northeast corner oft the existing structure, which improvements may extend into the setback on the north side oft the property to within, but not closer than, 8.25 feet 2. The Oneys are not otherwise granted relief from the provisions oft the Ordinance, 3. This variance expires automatically ini twelve (12) months unless al building permit DONE. AND ORDERED by the Board of Adjustment oft the Town of St. Lucie Village,  oft the north boundary oft their property.  the applicable building code(s), or any: permit requirement(s).  has been issued.  Florida, this 595a day of August, 2023.  BOARD OF ADUSIMENTTOWN9 ST. LUCIE VILLAGE,; FLORIDA  By:  JIMVANHEKKEN Chairman  Z  Copies furnished to:  Blaine and LaDonna Oney Board of Aldermen Mary Fowler, Acting Clerk  Board of Adjustment William G. Thiess, Mayor Carl Peterson, Building Official    INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT MURA MSBU  THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this  day of  2020, by and between St. Lucie County, a political  subdivision of the State of Florida (the "County"), the Fort Pierce Utility Authority, an authority created and established by the City Commission of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida, ("FPUA") and the City of Fort Pierce, a municipality organized under the laws of the State  of Florida (the "City").  WHEREAS, FPUA is the governing body authorized to enter into agreements relating to providing service from the potable water  supply of the City; and,  WHEREAS, the County intends to create the Mura municipal services benefit unit (the "Mura MSBU") to fund the cost of providing potable water to the Mura area in unincorporated St. Lucie County. A description of the boundaries of the real property within the proposed MSBU is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A". A list of the current parcel numbers within the proposed MSBU is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit  "B"; and,  WHEREAS, The Mura MSBU is located within the boundaries of WHEREAS, the parties believe that it is in their mutual best interest to cooperate in providing potable water to Mura. NOW, THEREFORE, FPUA, the City, and the County hereby agree and covenant on the terms and conditions hereinafter stated: 1. GENERAL. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to Section 163.01, Florida Statutes, the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act. This Agreement embodies the whole understanding of the parties. There are no promises, terms, conditions, or obligations other than those contained therein, and this Agreement shall supersede all previous elecommunications, representations, or - agreements, either verbal or written, between the parties  FPUA's Utility Service Area; and,  hereto.  2. FPUA RESPONSIBILIES. this Agreement are as follows:  FPUA's responsiDilities under    a. FPUA shall design and install or cause to be designed  and installed a system including all pipes, services, mains and appurtenances thereto (the "System") necessary to provide potable water to the Mura area. The design and installation of the System shall be done in accordance with all applicable, standard FPUA policies and procedures. The County reserves the right to review and approve the utilities plans and bid documents before inclusion in  the bid package.  b. If easements are required, FPUA shall attempt to  obtain all necessary easements for installation and maintenance of the System. FPUA shall not be required, however, to condemn any such easements or expend funds for acquisition of same. If appropriate easements satisfactory to FPUA are not obtained, FPUA shall have no further obligation under this Agreement.  C. FPUA shall administer a project to install the  System to include but not limited to awarding the contract for design, construction, and inspection during construction, shop drawing approvals, change order approvals, project certification, and  production of record drawings.  d. Upon completion of the System and acceptance of  ownership of the System by FPUA, FPUA shall be responsible for the  operation and maintenance of the System.  e. Prior to the public hearing to be held by the  St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners pursuant to Section 40 - 100 of the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances to adopt a preliminary assessment roll for the Mura MSBU, FPUA shall provide an itemized final estimated cost (the "Final Estimated Cost") for the installation of the System to the County. The Final Estimated Cost shall include the cost of testing, permits, surveying, legal, design, construction, contingencies allowance, construction administration, certification, record drawings, and acquisition of easements for the installation of the System and shall be subject to the approval of the County. Any unexpected costs incurred during the construction and installation of the System beyond the Final Estimated Cost shall  be the responsibility of FPUA.  f. If the County does not levy a special non-ad valorem  assessment as described below, FPUA shall be responsible for the cost of all design or other work done by FPUA related to the System. The County shall use its best efforts to notify FPUA as soon as possible of any decision not to levy an assessment.  2    g. FPUA shall make a monetary contribution up to  $186,665, or the cost necessary to offset any Capital Improvement charges, towards the construction cost of the project.  3.  COUNTY RESPONSIBILITIES.  In the event the County  determines at a public hearing to create a MSBU and to levy a non- ad valorem special assessment, the County's responsibilities under  this Agreement are as follows:  a. The Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie  County, Florida shall act. as the governing body of the Mura MSBU and shall levy a non-ad valorem special assessment (the Assessment"? on the landowners within the limits of the MSBU to fund the cost of the installation of the System as required for  connection to the FPUA water system.  b. The County shall pay to FPUA an amount not to exceed  the Final Estimated Cost for the installation of the System. All other applicable fees and charges for connection to the FPUA water system will be the responsibility of the landowners. The amount of the capital improvement charge shall reflect the current FPUA charges on the date of the submission of the Final Estimated Cost to the County. Payment by the County to FPUA shall be within 30 working days after the County has obtained funds from the issuance of bonds to finance the project and after the approval of the costs by the St. Lucie County Director  of Engineering or his designee.  C. Upon the request of FPUA, the County's Property  Acquisition Division shall provide staff assistance to FPUA for the acquisition of easements necessary for the installation and  maintenance of the System.  4. TERMINATION. Unless terminated by the mutual written agreement of all parties, this agreement shall remain in full force and effect until all of its terms and conditions have been met.  5.  NOTICE OF CITY ANNEXATION REQUIREMENT. The following  notice is required by the City and should not be construed in any way as an endorsement of the City's annexation policies by the  County.  As a condition precedent for connection to the FPUA water system, FPUA requires all users to sign an annexation agreement whereby the user consents to and requests that his or her property be annexed into the city limits of Fort Pierce whenever such annexation may legally occur and that the FPUA will refuse to allow  3    connection to its water system unless and until the referenced annexation agreement is signed. This annexation agreement shall be in the form utilized by FPUA, shall be irrevocable and shall be binding on the heirs, successors and assigns of all such users. 6. CONSENT TO COUNTY MSBU UPON ANNEXATION. The parties acknowledge that if the Mura MSBU is annexed into the City this will result in the existence of a St. Lucie County Municipal Services Benefit Unit within the jurisdictional boundary of the City. Accordingly, the City agrees that if it intends to annex the Mura MSBU into the City, it will include within the appropriate annexation ordinance a statement that the City consents to the existence of the Mura MSBU within the boundaries of the City pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.01(q), Florida Statutes or other applicable law.  7. VALIDATION OF BOND AND ASSESSMENT ROLL. A condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement is the entry of a Final Judgment (and the expiration of the appropriate appeal period) by a court of competent jurisdiction validating the issuance of bonds to finance the System along with the assessment roll adopted by the Board (the "Bond Validation Proceeding"). In the event that either a Final Judgment validating the bonds and assessment roll is not entered or an appellate court reverses the Final Judgment, the Agreement shall automatically terminate and the parties shall have no further responsibilities under the Agreement including but not limited to any payments due to FPUA by the County. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if either a Final Judgment validating the bonds and assessment roll is not entered or an appellate court reverses the Final Judgment, the County reserves the right to be reimbursed by FPUA for all outside counsel legal fees and costs incurred by the County in the Bond Validation Proceeding as well as in any related appeal. The County agrees to consult with FPUA concerning the expenditure of money for outside bond counsel services related to the Bond Validation Proceeding and further agrees that such expenditure shall not exceed five thousand and no/100 dollars ($5000.00) without the express written consent of FPUA. The County's right to reimbursement shall survive the termination of this Agreement as described in this  paragraph.  8. ADDITIONAL CONNECTIONS.  For sO long as any bonds issued  by the County to finance the System are outstanding, FPUA shall inform the County in advance of any additional connections to the System proposed for real property not previously included on the assessment roll for the Mura MSBU. The County shall then determine whether such additional property should be assessed a pro rata share of the costs associated with the System and the terms and conditions pursuant to which the Assessment will be collected. At the County's  4    request, FPUA shall obtain a written consent, in a form approved by the County Attorney, from the owners of such property which acknowledges that the property will be assessed and included on the assessment roll for the Mura MSBU. Proceeds of the Assessment imposed against such property shall be used to pay debt service on bonds issued by the County to finance construction and acquisition of the  System.  9. SYSTEM RELOCATION.  If within five (5) years after  installation of the pipes, mains and appurtenances comprising the System, the County shall require FPUA to relocate any portion thereof, then the County shall be responsible for the costs and expenses, and for obtaining any easements, associated with such relocation so long as the system was installed per County Right-of-  Way permit conditions.  10. NOTICE. All notices or other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly given if delivered in person or sent by certified mail return receipt requested and  addressed as follows: If to County:  With a copy to:  St. Lucie County Administrator 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982  St. Lucie County Attorney 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 With a copy to: Director  St. Lucie County Public Works 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982  If to FPUA:  With a copy to: FPUA Attorney P.O. Box 3191  Director of Utilities Fort Pierce Utilities Authority P.O. Box 3191 Fort Pierce, Florida 34948  Fort Pierce, Florida 34948  5    If to the City: City Manager City of Fort Pierce 100 North U.S. One Fort Pierce, Florida 34950  With a copy to:  Fort Pierce City Attorney P.O. Box 3779 Fort Pierce, Florida 33448 This Agreement constitutes the entire  11. ENTIRE AGREEMENT.  Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter and supersedes all prior verbal or written agreement between the parties with respect hereto. This Agreement may only be amended by written document, property authorized, executed and delivered by the parties hereto. This Agreement shall be interpreted as a whole unit. All interpretations shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida. thereto shall be filed with the Clerk of Court of St. Lucie County  12. FILING.  This Agreement and any subsequent amendments  pursuant to Section 163.01(11), Florida Statutes.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused the execution by  their duly authorized officials.  ATTEST:  BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA  BY:  DEPUTY CLERK  CHAIRPERSON  APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:  County Attorney  ATTEST:  FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY  BY:  Chairperson APPROVED AS TO FORM AND  6    CORRECTNESS:  Attorney for FPUA CITY OF FORT PIERCE  ATTEST: City Clerk  BY:  Mayor  APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:  City Attorney  7