Laserfiche WebLink
H. Grand Harbor Estuary System - Maintenance Agreement <br />The Board reviewed memo from Assistant County Attorney <br />Barkett: <br />TO: The Board of County Commissioners <br />DATE: December 29, 1986 <br />SUBJECT: Maintenance Agreement Regarding Grand Harbor <br />Estuary System <br />FROM: Bruce Barkett <br />I - -- <br />Assistant County Attorney <br />On October 23, 1985 the Board of County Commissioners of <br />Indian River County adopted Resolution 85-128 as the <br />Development Order approving the Grand Harbor Development of <br />Regional Impact. Condition Number 8 of the Development <br />Order required the developer to submit a plan detailing the <br />design of the estuarine waterway and basin system. On <br />October 20, 1986 this Board approved the Estuarine Plan in <br />accordance with Condition Number 8 of the Development Order, <br />but a condition of said approval was that Grand Harbor <br />submit an Operation Plan for future maintenance of the <br />estuarine waterway and basin system. <br />The developer has submitted the requisite Operation and <br />Maintenance Plan and it has been approved by the Treasure <br />Coast Regional Planning Council. One of the conditions of <br />the Plan is that the Grand Harbor Property Owners <br />Association and Grand Harbor, Inc., the developer, must <br />agree together and separately that each will perform <br />necessary maintenance and operation activities as may become <br />necessary at no expense to the County. This provision is <br />considered necessary to bind the property owners after the <br />developer sells its interest in the project. <br />This item is put before the Board for approval of the <br />Operation Plan and -Maintenance Agreement. <br />Commissioner Bowman expressed concern that, while the agree- <br />ment looks great she saw no provision at ail that says what <br />agency is going to permit this maintenance process; who is going <br />to oversee the process; or who is responsible; and there is no <br />provision for bonding. <br />Attorney Barkett noted that there is nothing in the <br />Development Order that requires anyone to oversee the process. <br />It was simply a question of submitting a maintenance plan and <br />naming a responsible entity to ensure continuation of that <br />maintenance plan, and that's what this does. The Grand Harbor <br />13 <br />JAN 6 1987 BOOK 66 u[)E81 <br />