07/10/2018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

on the work, was that the land bridge removal was completed in accordance with the design approved under the issued FDEP and ACOE permits. The SCHHA has been advised of staff's findings and does not dispute that the land bridge removal location was excavated to a navigable depth as permitted. Notwithstanding, the SCHHA contends that County committed to "restore a navigable channel for boating access" under a whereas clause in the Agreement, beyond the removed land bridge location and despite .the parameters of the issued permits. While staff acknowledges that the channel adjacent to the removed land bridge is shallow and impedes boater access, particularly for larger boats at low tide, channel dredging (other than the land bridge area) is beyond the scope of the project that was completed as permitted. Staff's position is that the County performed all its responsibilities under the Agreement and that the SCHHA owes the County $45,884.71 under the Agreement. Alternatives The County has a number of alternatives in considering in this matter, including: 1. Accept the SCHHA's offer to receive $30,000 from the SCHHA as full payment under the Agreement. 2. Reject the SCHHA's offer and direct staff to initiate legal action against the SCHHA for default in not paying the full $45,884.71 indicated in the Agreement. 3. Advise the SCHHA that the County will agree to hold a portion of the SCHHA's $45,884.71 payment in escrow (e.g., $15,000) for the SCHHA to use towards maintenance dredging of the channel, under the condition that SCHHA be fully responsible for permitting, dredging and maintenance of such work if forthcoming. Staff recognizes that the cost of legal action to recover the full payment of $45,884.71 from the SCHHA may exceed the difference between the SCHHA's payment offer of $30,000 (which offer may be withdrawn if not accepted as settlement) and the amount due. Regarding the alternative of escrowing a portion of the full $45,884.71 amount toward cost of channel dredging that the SCHHA may choose to pursue, the Head Island land bridge removal/channel restoration project dates back to 2010, and the timeframe for future maintenance dredging permitting and construction is indeterminable for escrow duration and finality purposes. Staff understands that the Board may consider in its decision the practical costs and effort in pursuing enforcement of the SCHHA's full compliance with the Agreement. Nonetheless, staff supports Alternative 2. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board reject the SCHHA's offer of $30,000 as full payment and direct staff to initiate legal action against the SCHHA for default in not paying the full $45,884.71 indicated in the Agreement. ATTACHMENTS 1. Aerial Map of Head Island (Green Salt Marsh Conservation Area). 2. Agreement for Dredging and Improvement. 3. Correspondence between staff and SCHHA representatives. 4. Head Island Sounding Data January 2018 MALAAC\Green Salt Marsh aka Head Island\Head Cove restoration\Head Island St Chris HOA pay staff report for BCC 7-10-18.doc 143