07/10/2018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In March 2017, one year after the SCHHA executed the Agreement, staff notified the SCHHA that the $45,884.71 cost -share payment was due. Rather than submit the $45,884.71 payment, however, the SCHHA advised staff of SCHHA's position that "the project was not completed to the full extent of the terms and conditions agreed to when the SCHHA entered into the agreement" (see email correspondence, Attachment 3 to this report). The crux of the SCHHA's position is that, beyond the footprint of the removed land bridge where the channel was excavated to a navigable depth, the adjacent channel has not been dredged and remains shallow, impeding boater navigation for boats that require a deeper draft, especially during low tide. A "whereas" clause in the Agreement provides that "the Association has offered to enter into this written agreement (Agreement) with the County for the dredging and removal of the Land Bridge to restore tidal flow and to restore a navigable channel for boating access east of Head Island to benefit the homeowners in the subdivision" (emphasis added). The SCHHA contends that, since the County did not dredge the channel beyond the footprint of the land bridge removal, the channel remains shallow and thus the County did not "restore a navigable channel for boating access." Since the initial payment request, staff has corresponded with the SCHHA several times and has met with SCHHA representatives and with the SCHHA's attorneys to discuss the matter. In a June 2017 meeting, SCHHA representatives indicated they would look into the costs and permitting to maintenance dredge a portion of the channel beyond the area of the land bridge removal, under the premise that county staff might support escrow of a portion of received payment from the SCHHA (e.g., $10,000) that the SCHHA could potentially use for that purpose. In researching the cost of such work, however, the SCHHA was not able to find a contractor that would do channel maintenance dredging within a $10,000 price range. In an effort to settle the matter, in February 2018 the SCHHA transmitted a $30,000 check to the County to serve as full payment ($15,884.71 less than the $45,884.71 amount indicated in the Agreement) based on the SCHHA's position that the channel has not been restored to navigable access. The check was not processed by staff due to a disclaimer handwritten on the check that "endorsement of this check acknowledges payment in full" under the Agreement. County staff then obtained information that re- confirmed compliance of the construction project with the project permits obtained by the SCHHA. Any County acceptance of full payment from the SCHHA in an amount less than the $45,884.71 specified in the Agreement is subject to approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Staff is now bringing this matter to the Board for the Board to consider the SCHHA's settlement proposal and to provide direction to staff. ANALYSIS As indicated in the Agreement, the SCHHA committed to pay $45,884.71 towards $159,770.41 in contractor costs for the project, with the remainder of the cost to be paid with FIND grant funds ($25,376.00) and with County use of Florida Boating Improvement Funds ($88,509.70). The work has been completed, the County has received the FIND grant funds and the contractor has been paid by the County. Reimbursement from the SCHHA to the County is still pending. In considering the SCHHA's allegation that the County did not complete the project as it should have under the Agreement, staff reviewed the FDEP and ACOE permits that the SCHHA obtained and the County implemented for completion of the project. As a part of its review, on April 13, 2018 staff obtained water depth sounding information from Scott McGuire, the County's pro bono project engineer, to re -confirm that the land bridge removal location was excavated to a depth as approved in the permits (see Attachment 4). Staff's finding, as evidenced by the soundings and by FDEP's and ACOE's sign -off 142