Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutRe Easements Renee Basel From:Bill Peery <BillPeeryII@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, June 16, 2013 10:33 PM To:Danny Brannon Subject:Re: Easements Danny, see responses below. I will be traveling back tomorrow afternoon and will plan to see you Tuesday morning. At 555 Pelican Lane, the anchor easement is about 10 feet by 25 feet. You are calling for a 10 ft by 10 ft transformer easement. IT would seem that the dimensions should be 10’ x 15.5’ where the easement does not abut to the road right of way. This transformer looks like it will face north. A ten foot easement will provide no more than 2.5 feet of easement in front of the transformer. IT appears there would be no problem in extending the north-south dimension to 16 feet by adding 6 feet on the north side. That would provide protection in case the owner decided he wanted columns, gates, walls, etc. The 10 foot width would be consistent with the width of the anchor easement and would not encroach on the driveway much, at least not more than the anchor easement. The 10 x 10 overlaps the driveway a bit as it is, so it seems unlikely that they would install columns, gates or a wall in the driveway though I suppose anything is possible. That said, FPL only asked for 10’ x 10’ and in any case and I see no reason for them to reject it as proposed. I noticed you could have described this as the north 10 feet of the east 10 feet of the south 103.3 feet of parcel A. Was there a reason to use the projection of the north right-of-way line of Pelican Lane? Yes, the south line is not parallel with Pelican Lane and describing it relative to that just doesn’t seem to work very well. The easement would not run consistently with the anchor easement or with Pelican Lane and would angle more northwesterly into the driveway. Did you create an excel or word merge list of names – address – state- zip property address – etc Yes, I have created an excel list as data source to work with the Word merge function. I am in process of checking the mailing addresses from Property Appraiser’s web site against the Tax Collector’s web site and should have that done soon. I would like the package to contain the cover letter, an instruction sheet, the easement form, and the exhibit “A” I revised the cover letter to one page. I have done the easement forms and sent them to Skip for review. I will put together an execution instruction sheet. The list of owners includes individuals, some married couples, one Partnership for which the General Partner is an LLC, and one Trust. For Jupiter Island, I think we usually made the signature page a separate page and had a different version for each case. For trusts we had a separate signature page for each Trustee. Fortunately in this case the trust has a single trustee. The Tennis club is a corporation and I believe 1 the Golf Club is a non-profit corporation. Regarding married couples, it seems like FPL has accepted one or the other person’s signature in the past - not sure. I believe we also included a picture of a padmounted transformer as applicable in the packages for Jupiter Island. What have you done with the owners and addresses. I will see if Rita has a current roster. I have a list of all the parcels in Phase 1, but I am only checking mailing addresses for those requiring an easement, i.e. those in the merge list. I need these to get mailed out next week. Yes that is my intent except for Golf Club and Tennis Club which require special handling as we have discussed. 1330 N Ocean will also require special handling (west end of South Road) – I can go by and knock on the door this week after I return. Note that currently, the Exhibit “A” in many cases shows the easement as “Easement Area” a opposed to a tract of land, etc…Some say the “Easement Land”…. Maybe we need to say The Area extending over a tract of land …… or The Area encompasing a tract of land The language, “A tract of land...” is what Betsy suggested previously, and I have seen the same on other existing easements on the Public Record.I believe Betsy indicated that “parcel of land” is also acceptable and I have seen that as well. For example, the 3 foot easements at the tunnel are referred to in the Exhibit A as “Being two parcels of land...). From what I have read, the key is to have clear boundaries. Perhaps “An easement tract of land...” should be clear and cover it I think. I will change to that, or otherwise let me know your thoughts. Danny P. Brannon, P.E. Brannon & Gillespie, LLC Consulting Engineers 12798 West Forest Hill Blvd, Ste 102 Wellington, FL 33414-4704 Off: (561)795-0833 - Cell: (561) 307-9454 Website: www.BnGEngineers.com 2