Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/13/1986Tuesday, May 13, 1986 JOINT CITY/COUNTY MEETING The Board of County Commissioners of Ind! -an River_ County, Florida, and the City Council of the City of Vero Beach, Florida, met in Special Joint Session, in Council Chambers, City Hall, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, May 13, 1986, at 7:00 o'clock P.M. Present from the County Commissioners were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Patrick B. Lyons, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and William C. Wodtke, Jr. Also present were Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk. Present from the City Council of Vero Beach were William Cochrane, Mayor; John Acor, Vice -Mayor; Hoyt Howard, Michael Wodtke and Kenneth Macht. Also present were John Little, City Manager; Terrence O'Brien, City Attorney; and Phyllis Neuberger, City Clerk. Mayor Cochrane opened the meeting and turned it over to Mr. Little, who stated that each Councilman and Commissioner has been provided with a copy of the following memo dated April 29, 1986, which lists the items to be discussed tonight. He recommended that we go down the list point by point. BOOK " mE 3 MAY 13 1988 � J MAY I BOOK 64 DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE DATE Apri 1 29:*' 1986 TO Thp H_n_ rahIp Maynr and ri -v Cnunr; FROM - .1 V I i tt l p DEPT t ri SUBJECT A9pnda Matpri a 1 lni nt Mppti nn - f +„ /r.,,„+� eta f f� �nimri 1 I`nuntr City Council Chambers, Tuesday, May 13, 1986 at 7:Q0 P. M; i1 on Gentlemen: I wish to express the appreciation of both Michael Wright, County Administrator, and myself for your cooperation in attending the subject meeting. I am enclosing some pertinent, general backup material. The general subjects we will be covering are as follows: Wastewater 1. County use of existing capacity in the Vero Beach Wastewater Treatment Plant, plus possible expansion of said plant to provide for long term accommodation of the City/County/Indian River Shores needs. 2. Joint action, City/County, to deal with Wastewater Treatment Plant sludge disposal. 3. Joint action to deal with handling of septage (septic tank pumpout effluent). 4. Redefine service territory boundaries. Special attention to be given to the hospital node area. 5._. Rescind all previous archaic agreements and replace with one, -all encom- passing master agreement. Eliminate all previous capacity allocations. 6. Redraft wholesale rate"•schedule to include a proper charge. capacity and commodity 7• County to undertake whatever action is necessary to cause the Seminole Shores and Anglers Cove package treatment plants to be removed from service. and connected to the City collection system. These are the last small plants on the barrier island south. of Winter Beach Road. 8. City to provide laboratory services to County on a fully costed, competitive a basis, when new City lab is in service. Water 1. Possible City use of existing capacity in the South County Water Treatment Plant in order to defer City construction of addition -a] City Water Treat- ment Plant capacity. This will involve a study of County water quality..,', means of disinfection and system water compatibility. 2. Possible joint venture for future Water Treatment Plant expansion (a) County build a North County Water Treatment Plant and wholesale to City. (b) City expand at the present Water Treatment Plant site to supply City needs and an -increased level of service to the North County area.; � y 2. Joint action to deal with Water Treatment Plant (lime) sludge disposal. 3. Redefine service territory boundaries. Generally- where possible, both water and wastewater service to a•given area should be supplied by one entity. Special attention to be given to the hospital node area and Grand Harbor. 4 4. Rescind all previous archaic agreements and replace with one, all encom- ..passing master agreement. Eliminate all previous capacity allocations. 5. Redraft wholesale rate schedules to reflect any new agreements and include proper capacity and commodity charges. 6. City to provide laboratory services to County on a fully costed, competi- tive basis, when new City lab is in service. -Solid Waste 1. The County will pursue a "per parcel assessment" approach to funding the cost of the landfill, rather than the present tipping charge. This will eliminate the "free ride" now being afforded County residents using the transfer stations at the expense of central haulers, such as the City. 2.1. City/County joint efforts for a resource recovery facility, instead of landfilling, if such a course of action is feasible. Planning 1. Closer cooperation, City/County, in land use planning. 2. Redefine City limit lines. Special attention to be given to the North and South US Highway -#1 areas. 3. Joint cooperation in securing needed rights-of=way for thoroughfare planning. 4. Special joint efforts in the -area of the County Administration Building. Possible County acquisition of existing City property, including the existing City Public Works Facility and resultant street abandonments to consolidate County property holdings. Miscellaneous 1. Reinstitute the OCL (Outside City Limitsl surcharge.for electrical customers outside the City limits. Such charge would exactly track the ICL (Inside City Limits) utility tax, thus equating the bills. Revenues, thus derived, could either stay in the electric operating fund or be used to fund the County's proper contribution to the City Recreation Department, thus providing equity and relieving both the City and County general fund of this burden. 2� Expedite resolution of ownership of certain lots (ROW). Eagle Drive and Flamingo. 3. Possible County assumption of certain DER regulatory activities. 4. Joint assessment programs for paving dirt streets located on the City/County line, such as 14th Street. By copy of this memo, I am requesting effected parties' attendance, preparation and participation. _ J. V. Li ttl.e ;J VL : emo MAY 13 1986 2a BOOK 64 FA -F387 L— BOOK 64 F"Gr 3-S8 WASTEWATER Under item 1, Mr. Little advised that -the City's wastewater plant is not being utilized to its fullest capacity and the City has determined that 1 -million gallons of capacity can be made available to the County as quickly as they can take it. He believed this move will certainly forestall any rate increases for a long time to come. The service costs will not change and those costs would be spread out over a larger customer base. Terry Pinto, Director of County Utilities, noted that there has been a moratorium in place for a long time on the capacity on the 6th Avenue corridor waiting to see what capacity would become available from the City. The 1 -million gallon capacity allocation will enable the County to determine the future needs for building additional facilties and adjusting our master plan, which calls for a soutI. wastewater believed the main problem probably would be effluent disposal. Chairman Scurlock felt that one of the main issues to be discussed is the need for the County and the City to fully utilize all of their plants in order to provide efficient delivery for water and wastewater. The idea is to stop thinking in terms of political boundaries and develop an interconnecting system that will serve this entire area. He emphasized the need to combine our efforts in using our limited resources in the most effective way possible. Mr. Little advised that he needs conceptual approval that the County will plan to direct one million gallons of flow to the City's plant, but Commissioner Lyons had great concern about increasing the capacity of the Vero Beach sewage plant which discharges directly into the river. He felt that we have to do everything we can to keep the nitrogen out of the river to protect the seagrass beds. Commissioner Bowman was concerned about the effect of both nitrogen and phosphorous on the grass beds, but Mr. Little 3 r responded that the discharge from the City's plant compared to what is coming out of the drainage canals is like a drop of water in the Sahara Desert. County Administrator Wright felt that with the 1 -million gallon allocation the County would be able to open the 6th Avenue flow immediately. Chairman Scurlock felt that the County's plans for a north county wastewater treatment plant would be the answer to many joint County/City problems. Administrator Wright noted the SR -60 water and wastewater project and also the planned Gifford project. Mr. Little felt that when the Gifford plant comes on line, the City could stop the capacity to that area. Councilman Macht did not feel there was -any difference between this and other utility agreements. Discussion ensued regarding the frequent odor coming from the wastewater treatment plant, and Mr. Little intended to keep a daily log on every time he went over the bridge and got wind of that odor and then check to see why it occurred. He wondered if it was due to an operations error. Director Pinto noted that people tend to relate odors to the specific wastewater plant, but the odor actually can be designed out of the operation. Mr. Little preferred to have the City/County engineers discuss solutions to these problems. ON MOTION by Councilman Acor, SECONDED by Councilman Howard, the Council unanimously approved the allocation of one million gallons of wastewater capacity to the County. 4 MAY 13 1986 Boa 64 FAu,389 V MAY 13 1966 BOOK �� f'a, - 3,9O ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously accepted the one -million gallon wastewater capacity allocation from the City of Vero Beach wastewater treatment plant. Under items_2 and 3, joint action on wastewater treatment plant sludge disposal and handling of septage (septic tank pumpout effluent), Director Pinto advised that we are presently involved in a study for sludge and septage and have asked the consultants to include the City of Vero Beach in that study. The results of the study are expected in 30-40 days, and Mr. Little noted that would be around the same time the City expects their study to be completed, and the consultant will be looking at the financial feasibi I ity of piping toc _ander the 17th Street Bridge over to the golf courses in the Moorings and Indian River Shores. The wetlands area is also being considered. Chairman Scurlock felt that one of the biggest problems is that the DER and the St. Johns Water Management District need to work together, and Mr. Little felt the best way to handle them is to simply. -tell them what we are going to do and then do it. Chairman Scurlock emphasized that many ways of disposing of these things are not legal any longer and the new ways are extremely costly. Commissioner Bird felt assured that we are working together to come up with a solution to this problem and that we should no -t have to hire all kinds of consultants in order to reinvent the wheel, and Mr. Little stressed that the consultants are working together -also. Under item number -4, which is the redefining of service territory boundaries, Director Pinto provided a map with the City and County boundaries outlined. He noted that the City has done a considerable amount of work on this already and felt that we are just about there except for some fine details. He pointed 5 out the areas where sewer and water should track, and Commissioner Wodtke suggested that the City take over the barrier island as they already have lines over the river. Chairman Scurlock advised that the County is already looking at this area, and since it seems that developers want to have their own systems, the County would eventually consolidate those systems. Mr. Little ,agreed with Chairman Scurlock on this matter. He felt the talks with the County staff have been just great with respect to cooperating in different areas. However, in regard to the Rockridge area, the City would be willing to talk only if and when the County gets sewers built in that area. Director Pinto noted that the planned wastewater treatment plant for the north county would be able to service the hospital node and the Geoffrey Subdivision. Mr. Little emphasized that over the years he has always said that water and sewer should not be separated. He advised that it would be acceptable to the City if the County serves the Vero Beach Mall for now as we can always go back and revisit the issue. As far as the hospital node is concerned, the City is presently serving some facilities there, and Mr. Little felt that although it may be a touchy subject, the County should service that area when the north county plant is built. Under item -5, the City and County agreed that all previous agreements are archaic and should be replaced. ON MOTION by Councilman Acor, SECONDED by Councilman Howard, the City Council unanimously agreed to replace all previous utility agreements between the City and the County. 6 MAY 13 BOOK 64 PAGE 39.1 s S MAY 13 1986 BOOK 64 f'A -;E.3 Y 2 ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously agreed to replace all previous utility agreements between the City and the County. Under items 6_and_7, the City Council and County Commissioner agreed to work together. Under item 8, Mr. Little advised the County that the City soon will have a completely equipped and manned laboratory and would be interested in providing laboratory services to the County on a fully costed, competitive basis. The County Commissioners agreed they would be interested in this service. WATER Under item 1, Director Pinto explained that the County is looking at the possibility of serving some of the City's needs from our reverse osmosis plant, but could run into a problem with respect to the compatibility of different means of disinfection. Mr. Little agreed that our waters may not be compatible and advised that the City is considering expanding its potable water service. He noted that the County has offered to give the City a few years of service, and thought that would be advantageous for both, providing the engineers can come up with a solution to the compatibility of treatment. Mr. Little recommended that the County stay with the use of chlorines for as long as possible. The City and County agreed that there were no problems with item 1. 7 E_--] Under item 2, Director Pinto felt this was more important than expansion because we are definitely going to have to do something in the north county because the service area is constantly growing from 1-95 to Sebastian. A $63 -million water improvement program is being established which will fund a mid -county water plant capable of treating 20 million gallons of water a day. This plant probably will be built around Hobart Road. If the City would have some need there, they might want to consider combining it with one regional plant. Administrator Wright recommended a joint venture on a plant as he felt it would be beneficial to both and model it after the electrical agreement. If the City Council and County Commission have no objection, he advised that staff would like to proceed with that and come back when they have something a little more concrete. Mr. Little noted that the City has had water impact fees for a long time and has accrued quite a bit of money through that means. He felt all these ideas are wonderful so long as they can compete with the City's water schedule rates. Of course, the consultants will be looking at all of this. Administrator Wright felt that the reverse osmosis costs are getting pretty competitive with the lime costs, and Director Pinto stated that when the mid -county plant is built, it will be interconnected with the south county system and then as the south county plant reaches capacity, we will expand the mid -county plant. Our systems will be connected at all times and we will have water all around the City. Mr. Little asked specifically when the County would be able to give some relief to the City with respect to providing water, and the years 1991 and 1992 were mentioned. 8 MAY 13 1986 BOOK 6 F,�,c ,93 I 64 BOOK F,1,F,30) 4 Mr. Little asked for some direction from the Council, and Mayor Cochrane believed everyone had indicated their agreement to working together on items 2 through 6. SOLID WASTE Under _item _1, Director Pinto noted that the County is 30 days away from receiving the studies on the solid waste master plan, which includes the City of Vero Beach and the other munici- palities in the county since all solid waste should end up at the County Landfill. The consultants have been looking for some alternative methods to landfilling, but in the long run, we will have to look at when it will become cost feasible to move on to something else. He emphasized that there will always be a landfill because there will always be some kind of waste that cannot be treated or dissolved. The consultants, in conjunction with an accounting firm, also are looking at a rate methodology that would be fair and equitable and are considering a per parcel assessment approach. Director Pinto felt that tipping fees will be constantly increasing due to the cost of the equipment required.. He pointed out the unfairness in having people in some parts of the county using the transfer stations without paying any tipping fees while others are paying franchised haulers on a monthly basis to take their trash to the County Landfill. Director Pinto believed everyone should pay their fair share, and that our attorneys have to come up with a way for the cities to come up with a way to charge a per parcel charge. The Landfill is only going to become more and more expensive and we are going to have to look at alternatives, especially with regard to hazardous wastes. Commissioner Bowman and Councilman Acor reported that these problems are being discussed by the newly formed Tri -County Committee. Mr. Little agreed that the tipping fee system was inequitable, but had some reservations about the per parcel 9 assessment. He felt, however, that these are things which can be discussed as we move along. It was agreed that a resource recovery facility could be a joint effort by the City and County if such a course of action is , found to be cost feasible. PLANNING Under items 1 and 2, it was agreed that the City and County would cooperate more fully in land use planning and redefining City limit lines, with special attention given to the north and south U.S. #1 areas. Commissioner Lyons wished to make sure that the City and County master plans are compatible with respect to boundaries, and the Council and Commission indicated their approval of staff preparing a formal agreement on these issues. Mr. Little advised that the City has reached "agreement on a staff level in regard to deannexing certain areas to the north in order to redefine city limit lines which will make it easier for developers, and Commissioner Lyons added that it will also make law enforcement easier. Mr. Little reported that two of three ordinances on these areas have passed the first reading and public hearings are scheduled for early June. The Council denied the third ordinance which is the wetlands, an area for which the City wishes to remain in control until we see how things work out. That might change after more is learned about what the Regional Planning Council is going to require, and the Council might want to revisit the matter at that time. Robert Keating, County Director of Planning & Development, and Dennis Ragsdale, Asst. Director of City Planning, referred to a map outlining the following three areas proposed for deannexation: 1) The area north of the Main Relief Canal along the east side of U.S. #1 up to 33rd Street, which includes the R.D. Carter Subdivision; 2) a 200 -ft. wide strip running north of the R. D. 10 MAY 13 1986 =395 J MAY 13 1986 BOOK 691 F,g-uF 3 96 Carter Subdivision along U.S. #1 to 37t --h Street; and 3) the wetlands area along the west bank of the Indian River, north of the Main Relief Canal and east of the Vero Beach Country Club. Administrator Wright advised that the County would be glad to present a more thorough statement of our policy in regard to the wetlands. Under item 3, Commissioner Lyons noted that at tomorrow's regular meeting, the County Commission will be considering taking immediate steps to acquiring the right-of-way for the northerly extension of Indian River Boulevard through the wetlands by the hospital. Mr. Little explained that there are some differences betv,r,,-:°) the City and the County e:- i4 ic:: C ty rights. The City has furnished the County with a copy of our Thoroughfare Plan, but it does not impact the County because it is all in the City. The County has sent us a copy of their Thoroughfare Plan, and obviously, there is no great difference. The County has asked that when the City is approving site plans for developments that are going to be on a road that shows up on the County Thoroughfare Plan, we check with them to see if we are going to need some additional right-of-way, and as part of the site plan approval process, secure that right-of-way for them. Mr. Little felt the City is more than happy to take such a recommendation to the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council, but does not feel comfortable, legally or ethically, in demanding it without compensation. Commissioner Lyons noted that these roadways have gone one step further into the Regional Planning Council and show up on their Thoroughfare Plan as regional roadways. The County extracts concessions from developers based on their traffic impact on these regional roadways. He believed there must be some way we could get together on these regional roadways when they go through a municipality, especially 27th Avenue in Vero Beach. Mr. Little felt that while the City and County were together on this matter, one of the differences is that the City believes that we cannot require a developer to donate the right-of-way to the County. Chairman Scurlock felt that the County's philosophy has changed over the past 4 or 5 years and are coming to realize that we should not take right-of-way without paying. He felt that with the implementation of the impact fees and other vehicles for assessing the costs of the roadway project and how the roadways benefit the fronting property owners, we have an ability to reach a equitable situation. He felt that all the Commissioners would agree that taking rights-of-way has been a -difficult process at best. Mr. Little suggested that the County require the developer not to put any bulding out there, but felt that just to convey a fee simple title gets a little sticky. Attorney Vitunac advised that the City should not sign off on a site plan for a development on a County road until the County signs off on the road right-of-way issue. If the County is taking land without paying for it, that would be an issue between the developer and the County. The safety mechanism is for the developer to give the land under protest and then we would fight the issue of payment at a later date. The County has been very successful in showing developers that they do, in fact, need to give that land for the impact of their own developments on the County's road system. Sometimes the developers agree with that and decide to give the right-of-way. We are not sure who is right in that, but in every case the County .has the burden of fighting that issue. All the City has to do is hold up its approval until the County signs off, and if we have to go to court, we will not hold up the development if the developer gives us the land under protest. 12 MAY 13 1986 BOOK 6 Ft,F A MAY 13 .1986 BOOK 64 Fa,UF 398 Mr. Ragsdale advised that the City planning staff has prepared an ordinance which addresses these matters and sent it out to the Council today. Attorney Vitunac pointed out that someone has to protect the State roads and Federal roads and felt that the City would cooperate with the County on this matter. Under item 4, Administrator Wright explained that the County is looking to acquire City -owned property north of the County Administration Building, from Scotty's to the little theater, which would include the City Public Works Facility. He hoped the City would cooperate in a joint effort so that the County could consolidate their property holdings. Mr. Little did not want to get into that topic tonight, but felt there is a lot the City can effort. MISCELLANEOUS Under item 1, Mr. Little advised that the City is talking about reinstituting the Outside City Limits surcharge for electrical customers outside the City limits. Such a charge would track exactly the ICL (Inside City Limits) utility tax, which would equate the bills. Revenues could either stay in the electric operating fund or be used to fund the County's property contribution to the City Recreation Department, which would provide equity and would relieve both the City and the County's general funding of this expense. Under item 2, Mr. Little and Administrator Wright agreed that Tom.Nason, the City's Finance Director, and Tommy Thomas of the County, would move forward as quickly as possible to expedite the. resolution of ownership of rights-of-way on certain lots on Eagle Drive and Flamingo. Under item 3, Chairman Scurlock discussed the possibility of the County assuming certain DER regulatory activities with regard to utilities. 13 7- Under item 4, the City and County agreed to move forward with the joint assessment programs for paving dirt streets located on the City/County line, such as 14th Street. ADD ON ITEMS Chairman Scurlock added the discussion of the possib"ility of a joint venture in the redevelopment of the downtown area since the County has made a decision to maintain the Administration Building and County Courthouse in their present sites. He felt a professional type of complex could be developed in the downtown area and that the City and County could work together towards that goal. Mr. Little advised that the City budgeted $25,000 towards a study of the downtown area in the event the downtown merchants decided to match those funds, but nothing ever came of it. He suggested that the County might consider matching those funds for the project, and Commissioner Bird hoped the downtown merchants would decide to participate in a 3 -way deal. Administrator Wright advised that the County planning staff would come up with some type of guideline and bring it back to the Board and the Council. Commissioner Bird asked about the City's policy on sidewalk maintenance, and Mr. Little explained that while the City's sidewalk ordinance had not been enforced for years, a recent lawsuit prompted the City to hire a sidewalk inspector. The inspector will paint a red x on the broken slabs that need to be replaced. If the owner of the property doesn't do the repairs, the City will do them, and assess the owner. The inspections will begin in the commercial areas and then proceed to the residential areas. Administrator Wright thanked the Council and the Commission for their time tonight and felt much was accomplished. 14 SAY 13 1986 RooK 64Fr, k. a� 9 r, MAY 13 1986 BOOK 64 FA F.. 400 There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the City Council and the Board of County Commissioners adjourned at 9:50 o'clock P.M. ATTEST: Clerk Chairman I