Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 '-' Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee January 11 2000 Convened: 3:04 p.m. Adjourned: 5:12 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Monday, January 11, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: ~ Members not present: Others present: \.- William Furst, Chairman Philip Steel Dan Nelson Gail Kavanaugh Delores Hogan-Johnson, Vice-Chairman Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce was represented by Dennis Beach, City Manager Roger Orr, Esquire, City of Port St. Lucie David Souza Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Stephen Harty, Williams, Hatfield & Stoner Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering Ray Wazny, St. Lucie County Public Works Director Bob Bangert, Holiday Pines P.O.A. Jeanne Hearn, Indrio Citizen Julia Shewchuk, St. Lucie County Community Development Director Commissioner Doug Coward, St. Lucie County Commission Charline Burgess, Assistant to Commissioner Coward Stix Nickson, St. Lucie County Association of Realtors James David, St. Lucie County Mosquito Control Director Melissa Stiadle, Recording Secretary Jeni Brock Steel, Tribune Jim Reeder, Palm Beach Post Gail Sudore, Martin County Florida Land Trust Network Elizabeth T. Martin, Assistant to Commissioner Hutchinson Richard McMillen, Army Corps of Engineers Paul Phillips, Director St. Lucie County Airport Shailesh K. Patel, BCI Engineers A. L. Fletcher, Army Corps of Engineers 1 .. \.- Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee January 11, 2000 Page Two '-" Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson, St. Lucie County Barbara Felton, Assistant to Commissioner Lewis Victoria Stalls, Assistant to Commissioner Barnes Robert Weist, Weist Environmental Robert Bradshaw, Asst. County Administrator Commissioner Paula Lewis, St. Lucie County Richard Carnell, Indian River Terminal Bill Leshe', Indian River Terminal Company R. J. Leshe', OTC J. S. Leshe', OTC Jerry Vasil, River Park Mobil Home Comm. George Andreassi, Port St. Lucie News Richard Bouchard, St. Lucie County Engineering Gerald Kuklinski Gail A. Samples, Homeowner Shirley Burlingham, North Beach Association John Arena, Waterfront Council Lowell Sasser, Resident St. Lucie County Gilbert Kennedy, Fort Pierce Resident Tim Murphy, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Sam Baum, Fort Pierce Marge Thomas, Fort Pierce John Yanaros Paul Sinnott Albert Bundge Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney Bill Thiess, St. Lucie Village T. A. Wyner, Sunnier & Chamber Amy Wright, Resident Rouse Road ~ 2 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee January 11, 2000 Page Three '-' Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Public Comment Jeanne Hearn questioned the useable part of the parcel at the Lagoon. Jim David responded that there are 55 acres of useable property. Jeanne Hearn asks if they are considering the mitigation cost as part of the overall cost that is being given. Jim David responded yes. Margaret Thomas asks if the area to be used will be lined to keep it from going back into the Lagoon or into homeowners wells. There are no plans to use a liner on the Seminole property. Lowell Sasser commented about the Port. John Arena gave his view on the disposal Site issue. '-" 3. Approve Minutes from October 26, 1999 and November 8, 1999. It was moved by Dan Nelson, seconded by Gail Kavanagh, to approve the minutes of the October 26, 1999 meeting and November 8,1999 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Update/Recommendation on a tentative site for the Upland Disposal Site. Doug Anderson stated that he received a letter dated January 11, 2000 to be read into the record. The letter read as follows: I live at 5051 North Old Dixie Highway I am very concerned about the possible dump site in my neighborhood. The land I live on has been in my family for eighty years it's a very nice area and it would be a great shame to destroy the peace and quiet of Indrio. We are concerned about the odor and noise this dump site will create. My husband and I would love to be at the Harbor Advisory meeting today but cannot because we both work. Please read my letter into the record. Thank you, Barbara Guettler Debus. Mr. Anderson asks engineer S.K. Patel to give an update on the location of a site and information about the site. '-'" S. K. Patel states that he will give a brief on what has transpired the last couple of days. S. K. states that along the east side of the proposed Upland Management Site they have residents with concerns. Their concerns are the monitoring wells along their property and also the appearance of the disposal area. S.K. brought photographs of what the site may look like. S.K. stated that all the concerns will be addressed. To date none of the sediments in the Indian River lagoon or else where have been classified as hazardous material. He stressed they have no intention of dumping hazardous material on the land. 3 .. The concentration of metals may be higher than back soils but are not classified as Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee January 11, 2000 Page Four '-' hazardous materials. S. K. states that he called the members of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee to find out what their concerns are on this topic. S.K. states that he hopes to answer all questions and concerns through his presentation. S. K. shows photographs to the committee of Turkey Creek Upland Management Site and explains that this site will be similar to ours. He also has samples of water to show the clarity. S. K. states that because of future airport expansion they have come to the conclusion that the Airport site is not going to work for this particular project. This is a long range Upland Management site and once it is used it will only be used for that purpose. S. K. states that the Seminole site is the site that they will be able to work with. They called FDEP and they are willing to modify the Army Corps permit to place roughly seventy thousand cubic yards of fill back in to restore vegetation. David Souza asks if the cross overs on the railroad will be a problem. S. K. states FEC allows use of the eastern side of its right of way. Philip Steel states that he feels obligated to ask why we do not put the material on the site right adjacent to Harbour Pointe. Stephen Harty answers by saying that this is not just Taylor Creek dredging and we need to supply a long range long term Spoil Site. ~ Discussion ensued regarding the environmental issues on the sites. Doug Anderson informs the group that he is putting together a tour of the Turkey Creek site so that people will understand by seeing, feeling and touching the site. Tim Murphy from the Army Corps of Engineers states that he is prepared to make a proposal that the Army Corps of Engineers stands ready to implement. In the last couple of weeks and months the Army Corps has been working closely with St. Lucie County in trying to expedite the availability of an Upland Site and we have been waiting for several years now to maintain the Fort Pierce Harbor. In the interim we have pursued continued use of the offshore Disposal Site what we call the Offshore Dredge Material Disposal Site. The Offshore Site will probably be reopened in the near future probably by the end of January if things go as planned. The Corps stands ready to bring in a hopper dredge Corps of Engineers owns dredge McFarlane. In an April or May time frame of this year about four months away we would like to dredge and maintain this harbor including the turning basin and interest channel. Currently looking at approximately 150,000 yards of material to be dredged. We are prepared to come in and remove all the material and take it to the offshore site at 100 percent Federal expense. It will not cost the County a dime to do that. The job will take seven to ten days. Mr. Murphy explains that EPA requires many tests and that all tests have passed. Mr. Murphy ends his presentation by stating that the Corps stands ready to do a maintenance job coming up in April or May of this year he explained that he wanted to bring this up as an option/opportunity. Mr. Murphy states that the Army Corps of Engineer also stands ready to help cost share in an Upland Disposal Site and will pay 65 percent of the cost. '-'" Mr. Anderson ask if the County where able to secure FSTED funding and if the County where able to fast track this Upland Spoil Site, assuming that the Army Corps would fund 65 percent of the constructions cost, and the County had an agreement in place and could 4 go ahead and get a bridge loan and up-front these cost to get this site going now. Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee January 11, 2000 Page Five ~ The County could then receive reimbursement from the Army Corps in two years or however long it takes. Could the Army Corps possibly wait till this fall if the County was able to come up with a site by then? Tim Murphy answers by stating that the citrus season runs from November to maybe May. Mr. Murphy states that this year the Corps has been of no value to them as far as helping them make their operations more efficient and transporting out citrus at a much lower cost then they have. He explains that the mission would be to have that channel cleared before next citrus season. Mr. Murphy stated that the Corps dredge just happens to be in the neighborhood it will be coming by Fort Pierce in the middle of April on its way back to Philadelphia to its home port and that the April date came up because that is the time it will be coming by Fort Pierce. We want to maintain this harbor as quickly as possible and this is 100 percent Federal cost. It would be very hard pressed to wait, but we would work with you. Dan Nelson asks Doug Anderson if the previous Commission resolved not to support any future dredging in the turning basin as long as the material was dumped offshore. Mr. Anderson states that is correct the Commission did pass a resolution stating that they would not support offshore disposal and that is why we have been working trying to get an Upland Disposal Site. Dan Nelson asks if the County supports the project in April. Mr. Anderson states that this was just presented and that the Commissioners have not heard of it yet. Chairman Furst asks the Committee if they would be in the position to recommend to the County to proceed with acquiring the Upland Disposal site. '--" Doug Anderson explains to the Committee that what they would be recommending is to agree with the Board of County Commissioners recommendation that we apply to FSTED for 50 percent of the funding for Taylor Creek restoration and the Upland Spoil Site. Gail Kavanagh made the motion, it was seconded by Roger Orr, upon roll call the motion carried unanimously. 5. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Dan Nelson, seconded by Roger Orr, to adjourn, and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 5:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa W. Stiadle Recording Secretary C: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: William Furst, Chairman Delores Hogan-Johnson, Vice Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh Philip Steel Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Roger Orr David Souza Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Ray Wazny, Public Works Director Don West, County Engineer ~ 5 \.- Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 1 2000 Convened: 3:04 p.m. Adjourned: 4:20 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, February 1, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: Members not present: ~ Others present: '-'" Philip Steel Gail Kavanaugh, Vice-Chairman Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce Roger Orr, Esquire, City of Port St. Lucie David Souza Dan Nelson Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Stephen Harty, Williams, Hatfield & Stoner Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering Bob Bangert, Holiday Pines P.O.A. Jeanne Hearn, Indrio Citizen Julia Shewchuk, St. Lucie County Community Development Director Charline Burgess, Assistant to Commissioner Coward Stix Nickson, St. Lucie County Association of Realtors James David, St. Lucie County Mosquito Control Director Melissa Stiadle, Recording Secretary Paul Phillips, Director St. Lucie County Airport Shailesh K. Patel, BCI Engineers Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson, St. Lucie County Robert Bradshaw, Asst. County Administrator Richard Carnell, Indian River Terminal Bill Leshe', Indian River Terminal Company John Arena, Waterfront Council Marge Thomas, Fort Pierce Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County Commissioner Cliff Barnes, St. Lucie County David Hall, St. Lucie Association of Realtors Shirley Burlingham, North Beach Homeowners Assoc. Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney Dennis Beach, City of Fort Pierce Kathleen Stubbolo, St. Lucie County Community Development 1 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee \." February 1, 2000 Page Two Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Approve Minutes from the December 28, 1999 and January 11, 2000 meetings. It was moved by Mary Ann Bryan, seconded by Philip Steel, to defer action of approval of the minutes from the December 28, 1999 and January 11, 2000 meetings to give the committee adequate time to read through them. 3. Public Comment \." Stix Nickson suggested a possible solution to the dredging problem. Mr. Nickson suggested that we continue moving forward in obtaining an Upland Spoil Site for dredging and that we consider giving the Army Corps. an emergency one time dump out in the ocean by EPA regulation to cure the existing problem for Indian River Terminal and Harbor Branch. Robert Anderson asked how much silt or muck is in the area of Turkey Creek vs. how much silt will be at the Seminole Site. Robert Anderson also asked that Doug Anderson address the issues that they discussed earlier. Doug Anderson explained that there are two issues that Robert Anderson is referring to. The first issue is his concern with a buffer zone being placed on the property between where the actual spoil will be placed and the highway. Doug Anderson explained that the spoil will be placed closer to the inlet next to the illegal canal. Doug Anderson also explained that he told Robert Anderson that the County would place some type of a landscape buffer zone so that the spoil site would not be highly visible from the highway. If trees need to be added that would be included in the project cost. The second issue is possible contamination of his and his neighbors well water. Doug Anderson explained that it is not his position to state what is and is not the County's liability but, suggested that a meeting with Dan Mcintyre the County Attorney be set up so that Mr. Anderson fully understands the County's liability. '-" S. K. Patel explained that there were 160,000 cubic yards of muck in phase one of the dredging for year one at the turkey Creek site. The capacity is 270,000 cubic yards. Sediments are similar in physical characteristics (percent organic vs. sand/silt). S. K. stated he does not know what the Army Corps. percentages will be but, the Taylor Creek site would be similar to the Turkey Creek site. 2 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 1, 2000 Page Three 4. Update/Recommendation on the Upland Management Site. ~ S. K. Patel stated that he and Steve Harty met with Bruce of FDEP and went over the proposed site. S. K. stated they presented going forward with an environmental resource permit to go ahead and look at the entire site with the understanding that they would like to use as much Upland as possible. S. K. stated he would like to address some of Mr. Anderson concerns regarding a possible buffer. S. K. stated that Bruce thought this would be a good idea and something that they should definitely look into. S. K. stated that the main issue is that they have about 40 or 50 acres of Upland and a total of about 60 or so at this site and between 60 to 80 in different places. S. K. stated that what they would like to do is go ahead and maximize the use and construction so that the dollars are used most effectively. Which would mean that they may go ahead and use the 35 acres in the one area so that they have a buffer and will take into consideration all environmental concerns. S. K. stated that one of the questions that will be addressed is the method of dredging, the dredging design and whether the pipe line will come along the FEC Railroad or whether it would come through the waterways and what impact it will have on sea grass. It was explained that all of these issues will go into the permitting process. S. K. stated that they asked Bruce what he thought about this site and the Airport site stating that obviously the Airport site has wetland. S. K. stated that he explained to Bruce that they have gone through a process of eliminating the Airport site and Bruce agreed that the Seminole property would be a better site because of its location. S. K. stated that from all of the sites that they have looked into he feels that this is the best site that the County has to put this material on. S. K. stated that this may not make everyone happy but, this is the site they have and it will make the best site for a long term Disposal Site. S. K. stated that FDEP would be happy if they went ahead and filled the illegal dredged canal currently located on the property and create a wetland. They were told that they would probably get credits for doing so. S. K. stated that they have an existing permit that belongs to the Army Corp. and it would simply require a modification of that permit to utilize this site. S. K. states that this is where they stand right now as far as the Upland Disposal Site is concerned. \.. \.- Chairman Johnson asked under what circumstances the decision would be made as to whether they would use the FEC area. S. K. answered by stating that this is something they want to consider right away, because they will have requirements of burying the pipeline and an emergency plan on monitoring the pipeline throughout the dredging project. FEC does charge a nominal fee for use of their right of way. Roger Orr asked if they do use the FEC right of way would this be a permanent installation or would the pipe have to be pulled out when the operation is done. S. K. answered by stating that normally it is pulled out when it is done because the pipeline is part of the package which belongs to the dredgers. S. K. stated that he is not sure if FEC would even allow them to keep the pipeline in there. S. K. explained that pipeline will not be going over the roads it will be going under the roads. Roger Orr asked if we use this site from time to time for maintenance dredging why not put a pipe in. S. K. explained that once Taylor Creek is dredged the probability is it will not need to be done again in the next five to ten years. S. K. explained that last time is was dredged was thirty-six to thirty-eight years ago. After cleaning Taylor Creek and the turning basin what is left is the inlet. The inlet will be dredged every four or five years. S. K. stated that we need to remember with this dredging project and a lot of the storm water retrofits and sources that we are going to be controlling through the years, the need for continuous dredging will diminish as time goes by if everything is done the way it should be done. S. K. stated to keep in mind that once Taylor Creek is dredged 170,000 cubic yards we may not dredge again for the next twenty five years. David Souza stated that it is now a requirement in St. Lucie Village that the pipes will have to be buried three feet deep. S. K. responded by stating that he is very disappointed that this resolution was just passed on the 25th of January and he thinks that it has been done in haste without really understanding 3 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 1, 2000 Page Four '-' this project. S. K. explained that this is all part of public education and once people understand how its going to look they will have a different perception. David Souza stated that the pipeline would be run right through a residential area. S. K. explained that this is an issue that would be looked at and is part of the permitting process. S. K. stated that people need to understand that if they start putting road blocks up before the project begins it makes the project that much more difficult and more costly. S. K. explained that they understand all the environmental impacts and will do the best they can forthe people of this County. S. K. stated that he hopes the people also understand if we are going to be good steward to the Indian River Lagoon by passing this resolution they are just making the project that much tougher to get done. If we are all doing it for the Indian River Lagoon then we need to step back and really think about what the pros and cons are. S. K. asked if putting a pipeline three feet under the ground really solves their problem. David Souza stated that you have to remember the residents there have the highest tax base per capita in the County. The people up there pay more taxes there than in any place else in the County and to have an unsightly pipe down through there they don't feel this is reasonable nor do they want diesel pumping stations along through there. S. K. asked if the understanding is that these will be permanent fixtures in that site and stated that he is sure that if they dredge for three months and then take everything out he is sure that for three months these people would not mind having a pipeline running there. David Souza responded that he is not so sure about that. S. K. stated that there are a lot of things that we have to go through and he thinks that they have moved hastily without really understanding but they will work with them. Mr. Anderson stated that none of us want offshore disposal and we have all worked very hard to come up with a solution and having road blocks put in our way does make it more difficult and hopefully we can work our differences out. If we keep getting shut down, we are going to run out of alternatives and they will be dumping offshore. S. K. stated that the best alternative with no cost to the County may be to let them dredge and put it offshore with the stipulations that there will be people in the boats going with the barge and making sure they dump it where they say their site is and have that in the clause. This would help the people in Indian River and Harbor Branch and so forth and then we could work toward a long term disposal site. S. K. stated that in his personal opinion this would seem to be the best approach. Chairman Johnson stated that the conversation and Mr. Souza comments amplify the need and the concern that the public is made aware of what is coming down the pike. Chairman Johnson stated that her people got out and took notices up there to them because none of the citizenry was involved. Chairman Johnson stated that she thinks this should have been done a year ago because nothing beats understanding and one picture is worth a thousand words. Chairman Johnson stated that we cannot allow things like this to constantly happen where the people are not brought on board. Mrs. Johnson stated "I appreciated getting to go up there and it was made open to everybody and quite a few of us went that have different ideas about the port area but this just goes to show how we not embark upon something like this unless we give the people an opportunity." Mr. Anderson Stated the County did go to Crane Creek a couple years ago. We did this whole process and went up to Crane Creek in a bus and took citizens up there. Mr. Anderson stated that the County has really tried to do an education process in this community. Chairman Johnson stated that no where does she remember them saying that they were going to put an Upland Disposal Site up here and if that had been done for the people it would have had an effect. Robert Anderson stated that he went to his neighbors and some of his neighbor's act like as quick as they read in the paper that the Corp. of Engineers was involved they acted like you can't fight City Hall you can't fight the Corp. of Engineers. Robert Anderson also stated that it is apparent to him by being in these meeting that the Corp. does what they want and no one else can do anything about it. S. K. stated that he agrees with what Delores has to say and thinks that this is one of the things they had in the scope for Taylor Creek. S. K. explained that Taylor Creek is a separate task specifically for public involvement and ~ '-' 4 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 1, 2000 Page Five ~ public participation and since he has been involved two years now from day one we have not moved one bit further. S. K. stated to also realize that as we get more and more road blocks we have to start deviating from the scope we have. S. K. asked if anyone can get him a copy of the City Ordinance that says that dredge material cannot be placed on City property. \.,.. John Arena gave his views on how the project could be done without a water separation site and how future dredging could be prevented by digging deep pockets in Taylor Creek to catch the silt. Mr. Arena suggested that they call Steve Cassens of Fort Pierce Farms and ask if he knew of any properties that might be available. S. K. stated that they would take his comments into consideration. S. K. explained that the at the site west there was a need for a liner and that the Airport property was looked at because it was County owned and supposedly was free but there is a cost value to that as well. Mr. Arena asks what would the cost be. S. K. asked Steve Harty for the cost amount and numbers. Steve explained that he does not have the cost for the site west along the Fort Pierce Farms Water Control District canal number one except that it was significantly higher than utilizing the Seminole Site. The site was not larger. The site was eighty acres or less. This site is one hundred thirty-six acres. Of the eighty acres we could utilize the vast majority but there are a couple of problems. The liner is a problem because we do not want salt water intrusion into fresh water ground source and then the return water problem. Mr. Harty explained that they have narrowed this down from forty sites then to seventeen then to six and then this site was presented by Jim David. Mr. Harty said that he stated to Jim David that there was no way that this site could be the more economical source. The more we looked at it and the more we compared and do to the fact that we do not need a liner or the return water pumping this site stood out head and shoulders above the rest. Mr. Harty stated that he did not have the figures with him but the Airport site was much more expensive, it was surprising. Bob Bangert asked Mr. Anderson what else is tied to the use of the FSTED money and if after the site has the fill on it what happens if they want to do something else with this site. Mr. Anderson answered by stating that this is a permanent site. Mr. Anderson asked S. K. how long he thought this site would last if no material was hauled off. S. K. answered by stating minimum thirty years. ~ Richard Carnell asked how long the County has been looking for an Upland Site and if we know the date of the contract with the Army Corps. of Engineers. S. K. answered by stating that they have been looking for two years now. Mr. Carnell asked if it is fair to say that it has been pretty much five or six years. Mr. Anderson stated that he has only been part of the process for the last two years when we started looking for a site for the Taylor Creek restoration and when the Board of County Commissioner voted that they would not favor offshore disposal and that was approximately two years ago. Mr. Carnell stated that the actual contract was signed in 1994. Mr. Anderson stated that was to do the actual maintenance dredging. Mr. Carnell stated that as part of that contract the County was to provide an Upland Site. Mr. Carnell stated that he is from the Indian River Terminal Company and in deference to Robert Anderson it is the business perception that the County is engaging in paralysis by analysis. Mr. Carnell stated that this thing has been rolled over and over for six years from the date of the contract. Marcona is not here because it is their perception there is a small body of citizens or individuals who are controlling the County and not letting this happen. WCI refused to develop their property because they could not get any action in dredging before. I am empathetic to Robert Anderson's position but you have to understand from a commercial perspective we feel like it does no good to show up at these meetings because it continually gets delayed. We bring in boats, Harbor Branch runs aground and if we are at fifteen feet as Dan Nelson says at the inlet we have a real 5 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 1, 2000 Page Six \... problem. We feel like the County is not doing anything at all and Mr. Anderson's group feels like there's not enough information put out into the public. I think the County is in a difficult situation were they have to balance the interest of both people and they have done a great job, some analysis and here is a site. Doug Anderson stated that this committee will take a vote today either to approve or not approve this site. Robert Anderson stated that the first he heard of the Upland Site was when the notice was placed on his door. He also stated that he read in the Vero Newspaper about the meeting on January 11, 2000. Mr. Anderson stated that homeowners have rights too. Mr. Anderson also stated that he wants the contract to read that the Upland Spoil Site will be for St. Lucie County dredging only. Doug Anderson stated that this could be put in the contact because we are not going to let other Counties dump on our site. Chairman Johnson commented that the County should address the critical water issue concerns of the residents and see that issues are met satisfactorily through permitting. Chairman Johnson stated to Mr. Carnell that he should feel free to contact elected official and County and City Administrator if something is effecting him before it gets to a critical point. I am sorry that certain people have the feeling that a few people control everything and that is not it. We are vocal and people who speak up are vocal and this is how it needs to be. Philip Steel stated that he feels there should be an agreement with FSTED that the spoil site is used only for St. Lucie County. Philip Steel commented that this is the best of the worst of solutions for digging out Taylor Creek. \.., Philip Steel stated that he would like to make the motion that the committee accept this site. Doug Anderson clarifies the reading of the motion. Mr. Anderson stated that the motion would read that the committee would be recommending to the Board of County Commissioners that they proceed with due diligence to purchase the Seminole property. To be used for St. Lucie County disposal only. '-" David Souza commented that he feels that in the long run the Airport would be the better site. Mr. Souza stated that he realizes that a liner is needed, and that the city has already had to run a water pipe there because of the old dump site. This is a commercial area so there won't be trucks running up and down Old Dixie and you won't be impacting the residential area down through there with construction and so forth. The Airport property is a valuable piece of land that can be developed to make more tax money for the County rather then taking 1.2 million out of the County coffers as it is and keep eroding our tax base. Mr. Souza stated that he realizes that the Airport would have to be compensated but, it could probably be paid back for a least as much as the people running cattle on that property. Doug Anderson asked Paul Phillips if he has a price per acre for the Airport property. Paul Phillip stated that the sites that have infrastructure are actually sold off for $45,000 an acre. Paul Phillips stated that he was unsure what area Mr. Souza was speaking of. Mr. Souza answered by stating the area that runs along Indrio road that the cattle people lease. Mr. Souza asked what amount the cattle people lease this property for. Paul Phillip stated he was unsure what they pay but that the Shrimp aqua culture has an area at the corner of Indrio and Taylor Dairy and they pay fair market value of $1800.00 a month. Paul Phillip stated that an appraisal would have to be done and it would be based on fair market value. Doug Anderson stated that if it was to be put at the Airport this would be a permanent site. Philip Steel commented that people in the room are not in favor of expanding the Airport but in twenty or thirty years when we are all gone someone may want to do that and this could impact the future of the Airport. 6 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 1, 2000 Page Seven '-' Doug Anderson reminded Chairman Johnson that there is a motion on the table. The motion is seconded, by Gail Kavanagh. Philip Steel asked that the committee be update on all information during this process. Mr. Anderson answered by stating that the committee is now getting all the correspondence that he gets. Chairman Johnson called for a vote on the motion. The motion was accepted 5-1 (David Souza voting no.) Gail Kavanagh commented on the serious problem in our inlet and stated we should allow the Corps. to dredge and dump offshore this one time. Roger Orr expressed that committee members should be very careful throwing off numbers as to the depth of the channel stating that comments at the last meeting that the channel was at 15 feet may have been irresponsible. Mr. Orr asked Mr. Anderson if the Harbor pilot still guides ships in and out of the inlet. Mr. Orr asked if it is part of his responsibility to know where it is shoaled up and know where the problems are before he guides ships in and out of the inlet. Discussion ensued and no one was able to determine who was responsible. Richard Carnell explained to the committee that Indian River Terminal would be glad to provide the Harbor pilot as well as the current sounding if they would really like to fully discuss this. Mr. Carnell stated that he would be glad to provide some type of presentation. He stated that the most current soundings are from March of 1999. \." Philip Steel asked Doug Anderson if there was any way the County could employ a responsible citizen on a temporary basis who would check each time they dump out in the ocean to make sure that they are dumping in the right place. Chairman Johnson commented on the suspected short dumping by the dredger in the past. Richard Carnell stated that he agrees that nothing beats understanding and if the committee would like he would like to bring the Harbor Pilot in along with the current soundings. He also stated that the last dredge was not the Corps. it was a private contractor. Mr. Carnell explained that Tim Murphy of the Corps. is doing everything to assure us and make everyone feel good about this process. Mr. Carnell stated that the last thing anyone wants to see is the reef be a problem. Chairman Johnson commented that if it has to be done again people should go out and witness it. Doug Anderson stated that at the next meeting on February 22, 2000 we could have Indian River Terminal come and speak to the committee and follow up on all of these questions. Chairman Johnson stated that she would like to have a couple of divers at the next meeting and would contact them herself. Commissioner Bryan stated for the record that "the Army Corps. dredging is not free." 5. Other Business ~ Philip Steel questioned the temporary use of Harbor Branch as a site. Mr. Anderson answered by stating that he talked with Harbor Branch this morning. They will only accept the sand which is approximately 50,000 cubic yards. They would not accept the estimated 100,000 cubic yards of silt material. Therefore, this would not be a viable site. 7 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 1, 2000 Page Eight \..r Doug Anderson explained to the committee that he met with the Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development Council last week and would like to give them an update on the meeting, an update on the estimated project cost, an update on where funds are coming from and give them some information on additional funding. Mr. Anderson stated that the total estimated cost of the Upland Site including the land purchase at this point is $4,015,000.00 assuming we go with the Seminole Site. Mr. Anderson stated that he ask FSTED to fund 50% of the Upland Site and the Taylor Creek restoration projects. FSTED voted thirteen to one (Port Canaveral voting against) in favor of FSTED financially participating in these two projects which would be 50% of the cost. When permits are received from the agencies, FSTED will be ready to allocate the funding to the County. The County will pay the money up-front and then submit the invoices to FSTED for reimbursement. They would reimburse us fifty cents on the dollar. FSTED on the Upland Site is $2,007,500.on the estimated reimbursement we would receive from them based upon the estimated cost which would leave a short fall of $2,007,500. The Army Corps. now says that rather then pay 65% of the construction cost that money would go into the piping. Mr. Anderson explains that he has contacted Congressman Foley's office and Terry Lewis from Lewis, Longman and Walker, P.A. and they are going to be having a meeting with the Army Corps. of Engineers to further discuss this and further attempt to get funding from the Army Corps. Mr. Anderson stated that he contacted David Roach, Executive Director of the Florida Inland Navigation District and inquired about the site that they purchased just north of our proposed site. This site would not be big enough for all of us to use but they have set aside approximately $800,000.00 for construction. Mr. Anderson stated that he suggested to David Roach that the Florida Inland Navigation become a partner of the County and take the $800,000.00 and add it to our project. This would leave their land free for other uses and would be an asset for them. David Roach will present this to his engineers and get back to the County. There is a possibility that we could receive at least another $800,000.00 from FIND If they become our partner in this project. Mr. Anderson explained that the Taylor Creek restoration total estimated project cost is $2,150,00.00, and we have $788,000.00 coming in from other sources such as the South Florida Water Management District and St. Johns River Water Management District. The FSTED request is $1,075,000.00 leaving $287,000.00 for the County share of this project. The County budgeted roughly this amount in this years budget for Taylor Creek some of that money has been used toward engineering and I would see if the County did not receive any additional money for Taylor Creek that this money would be carried over to next year. Mr. Anderson stated that if the County had to we would come up with our share for Taylor Creek and that project would be fully funded. Mr. Anderson stated that he has come up with a concept on how the County could finance these projects to get them going now. To move forward with the purchase of an Upland Site once the site is decided upon and getting the permits so we can begin construction. This is where we stand with the projects dollar amounts. \... Upon the arrival of Delores Johnson, Doug Anderson explained to the committee that Chairman Bill Furst had resigned. Mr. Anderson asked if the committee would like to nominate Delores Johnson as Chairman of the committee since she is vice chair and have the group decide on a new Vice Chair. Philip Steel nominated Delores Johnson as Chairman, the nomination was seconded, by Mary Ann Bryan, the nomination carried unanimously. Roger Orr nominated Gail Kavanaugh as Vice Chairman, the nomination was seconded by Philip Steel, the nomination carried unanimously. ~ Doug Anderson informed the committee that a group consisting of County Official, residents and committee members visited the Turkey Creek site on Saturday. 8 · ... \.,.. \.,.. ~ Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 1, 2000 Page Nine 6. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Roger Orr, seconded by Gail Kavanaugh, to adjourn, and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 4:20p.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa W. Stiadle Recording Secretary C: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice Chairman Philip Steel Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Roger Orr David Souza Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Ray Wazny, Public Works Director Don West, County Engineer 9 f \. Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 22, 2000 Convened: 3:13 p.m. Adjourned: 4:20 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, February 22, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: Members not present: ~ Others present: ~ Philip Steel Gail Kavanagh, Vice-Chairman Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce Dan Nelson David Souza Roger, Orr Esquire, City of Port St. Lucie Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering Jeanne Hearn, Indrio Citizen Julia Shewchuk, St. Lucie County Community Development Director Stix Nickson, St. Lucie County Association of Realtors James David, St. Lucie County Mosquito Control Director Melissa Stiadle, Recording Secretary Richard Carnell, Indian River Terminal Bill Leshe', Indian River Terminal Company John Arena, Waterfront Council Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney Grace Kedziora, Turtle Mother's Fort Pierce Butch Ergle, Harbor Pilot Rick McMillen, U. S. Army Corps Engineers Mike Eduoff, SLC Community Development Betty Lou Wells 1 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee \... February 22, 2000 Page Two Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Approve Minutes from the December 28, 1999, January 11, 2000, and February 1, 2000 meetings. It was moved by Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, seconded by Philip Steel, to approve the minutes of the December 28, 1999 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. It was moved by Philip Steel, seconded by Gail Kavanagh, to approve the minutes of the January 11, 2000 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. It was moved by Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, seconded by Philip Steel, to approve the minutes of the February 1, 2000 meeting. Motion Carried unanimously. ~ Chairman Johnson asked that although she voted in favor of proceeding with due diligence to acquire the Seminole property at the January meeting, that the February 22, 2000 minutes reflect a point of clarification that she had serious concern because of the citizens concerns with the Seminole site. Chairman Johnson stated that she felt we needed an Upland Dredge Site but is still not comfortable with the Seminole property site and asked that the minutes reflect her comment. 3. Public Comment Jeanne Hearn asked if other sites besides the Seminole site had been looked into. Doug Anderson answered by stating that a lot of sites had been looked into and that a report would be out at the end of the week. Mrs. Hearn asked if they were still pursuing other sites. Mr. Anderson answered by stating that no other sites were being pursued. Robert Anderson asked if anyone had checked on previous property values on the current sites and if this was going to be done. Doug Anderson answered no and stated that he was not sure if it would be done. Robert Anderson gave his opinion on muck vs. silt and commented on the Seminole site costs. Doug Anderson informed the Committee that there would be a report coming out at the end of the week that would reflect the status of the Upland Spoil Site. ~ 4. Presentation by Indian River Terminal Richard Carnell conducted a presentation in response to Roger Orr's questions and discussion at the last meeting concerning the dredging and the proposed offshore disposal. 2 · Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 22, 2000 Page Three \...- Please see attached Memo containing discussion points and facts. Mr. Butch Ergle, the Port Pilot was also in attendance to answer any questions concerning the current status of the channel. '--" Mr. Carnell stated that from a historic perspective in 1994 the project cooperation agreement between the US Army Corp. and St. Luice County concerning certain rights and obligations with regard to the harbor itself ultimately lead to the 1995 deepening and widening of the inlet and the navigational channel. The project depth was 28 feet and the cost was $8,000,000, $6,000,000 was the Corp. expenditure and $2,000,000 was St. Lucie County's expenditure. Users of the Fort Pierce Harbor have also been assessed through an MSBU and that shows up on their tax bill and they pay a certain amount every year. The Corps. at the same time, in addition to the 1994 project cooperation agreement in 1995 and 1996, requested St. Luice County purchase an upland disposal site primarily as objection to the offshore disposal. During the 1995 widening and deepening there where 724,000 cubic yards disposed offshore. The April 2000 disposal is contemplating 150,000 cubic yards. From a 28 feet project depth in 1995 and 1996, the best guess would be an increase in rate of approximately 1.5 feet per year. The last dredging was in 1996. Dan Nelson, 30 to 60 days ago said that he felt like the entrance to the channel or the inlet was approximately 15 feet. Mr. Carnell explained that he thought that maybe this was a little shallow and that it may have shoaled in certain places at 15 feet but that is was probably more accurately at 19 feet and explained that Mr. Ergle could address this. Rick McMillen of the Corps. was available to answer any questions that anyone may have about the April 2000 project. It is a hopper dredge. It is not a dredge that can pump to an upland site. It has to go offshore. Mr. Carnell explained that there is no cost to the County. This is 100% Federally funded. They contemplate 7-14 days of actual dredging time and approximately 150,000 cubic yards in contrast to the 700,000 plus in 1995 and 1996. Mr. Carnell stated that Tim Murphy of the Corps. had spoke with NOAA to run and design a monitoring program. Mr. Carnell stated that Steve Harty had done studies as to what the material in the turning basin was vs. channel material vs. inlet material. Mr. Carnell explained that the inlet material is a high content of loose rock and it is not beach quality sand. Beach quality sand means that it can be pulled up and pumped to the beach. The turning basin material is a composition of sediment. S. K. stated at the last meeting that the turning basin acts as a catch basin for Moores Creek, Taylor Creek and the channel. Whatever is in there is coming from a lot of different sources. The location of this offshore disposal site is approximately four miles southeast of Fort Pierce Inlet, and has been used since 1949. Mr. Carnell presented to the committee a copy of the project survey depths and soundings of March 1999. The next survey will be done in March of 2000. Mr. Carnell explained that the depths of the channel outside the inlet are between 33 and 38 feet in depth. Closer to the inlet are areas of concern where shoaling occurs and it is below project depth. It is not known whether an increase has been greater than one and half feet or whether it's been less. It is not known what the Hurricanes have done, whether it is shoaled greater or less. The greatest area of concern comes in the turning basin itself at 26 and 24 depths. Mr. Carnell stated that he thinks it's a fair statement to make that what he has presented to the Committee is the best understanding or information of what they have right now. '-" Mr. Ergle stated that the project depths at the entrance at the inlet which is recorded now at 24 feet 3 inches should be 30 foot, so it is more than 6 feet under project depth. He also stated that the turning basin project depth should be 28 feet. Mr. Ergle explained that since the survey there have been a lot of storms in this area so it has definitely filled in some but the Corps. has not come in to check it yet. Mr. Carnell asked Mr. Ergle why the shallow water is a big deal. Mr. Ergle responded by 3 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 22, 2000 Page Four '--" stating that the ships want to come in with as much draft as they possibly can because that is how they make their money with cargo and if we have to start cutting back then it cuts back on their profits. Mr. Carnell asked if the shoaling has any effect on Mr. Ergle as Port Pilot. Mr. Ergle answered by stating that it is a safety factor and a ship is hard to handle in shallow water. Mr. Carnell asked if the shoaling repels the ship or pushes the ship. Mr. Ergle stated that a propeller will try to suck toward the shallower water and explained that a ship coming in at 28 feet would actually squat down at about 30 foot draft and when you hit shallow water the boat is sucked down even further then that Mr. Ergle explained that now we are running at 22 or 23 feet deep at a really high tide where we should have at least 28 feet. Mr. Carnell stated that the most obvious question is if the County is working on an Upland Site why do we need to do this dredge. Mr. Carnell stated that from their prospective if we lose this opportunity to have this done it could be another two to three years before the Upland Site is purchased and underway. Mr. Carnell stated that the dredge really needs to happen now. Mr. Carnell explained that the Corps. has taken great steps in terms of contracting with NOAA to address some concerns. Dr. Perone at NOAA is prepared to have a ship with local people follow the dredge ship out with a GPS system that will locate the offshore disposal area. Mr. Carnell explained that the Corps. has worked very hard to balance interests and concerns. \.,- Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Anderson where the County is on all of this. Mr. Anderson stated the previous Board of County Commissioners passed a resolution that there is to be no more offshore dumping. The Army Corps. has jurisdiction in this area and if they wish to come in here and do maintenance dredging in March and April there is really nothing that the County can do about it. The Upland Site will probably not be ready for two to three years because of all the permitting, designing and construction. We did take a look at a temporary Upland Site to accommodate this project but as the Committee was told earlier they cannot pump from the Ship and it has to be dumped somewhere. Even if we could have pumped it somewhere this time the estimated construction cost would have been $700, 000 to $800,000 which we are not prepared to do at this time. Jeanne Hearn asked if this dredge would eliminate Harbor Branches problems. Tim Murphy stated that the hopper dredge, the "McFarland", is a substantial vessel and would not be able to go up into the intercostal waterway. John Arena commented on fishing after a dredge has been done. Robert Anderson commented on possible solutions to prevent future dredging from occurring. Rick McMillen of the Army Corps. Engineers explained that the County has built a Spur Jetty which they are monitoring at this time to see if the Spur Jetty is holding any material in there. The purpose of the Spur was to control the amount of material coming off the beach into the inlet there. John Arena commented on the Spur Jetty and its effects thus far. ~ 5. Other Business Doug Anderson reminded the Committee of the status report of the Upland Disposal Site that would come out at the end of the week and stated that he hoped this report would be 4 ~ Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee February 22, 2000 Page Five '-" able to answer questions that have been raised in the past. Philip Steel asked Assistant County Attorney Heather Young if the County really didn't want the Corps to come and dredge would we be able to do anything. Attorney Young stated that she did not know at this time but would look into it and report back to the Committee. Richard Carnell commented on reasons why we need to let the Corps. come in and do the dredge and discussion ensued. John Arena asked when the "McFarland" was built and commented that he thought that it was time that the Corps. built a ship that could do the job properly. Tim Murphy stated that the McFarland was built sometime in the 60's or 70's stating he was not sure. Mr. Murphy stated that the "McFarland" will probably be the last Corps. dredge and that jobs will be contracted out after that. Jeni Steel asked who would stand to benefit from the dredging project depth besides Indian River Terminal. Mr. Carnell answered by stating that he thinks everyone. Chairman Johnson commented that there needs to be communication and suggested that the door of communication needs to stay open. ~ Robert Anderson commented on the amount of time it has taken to find an Upland Disposal Site and stated that he believes that the County has been sitting on its hands. Doug Anderson explained that when the contract was signed in 1994 offshore disposal was permitted. Doug Anderson explained that the Upland Disposal issue came up in 1997 and that is when the County began looking for a site and identifying financing. 6. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, seconded by Philip Steel, to adjourn, and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 4:20p.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa W. Stiadle Recording Secretary C: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice Chairman Philip Steel Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Roger Orr David Souza \... Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Ray Wazny, Public Works Director 5 · . Don West, County Engineer '--' \....- \." 6 ¡. '-'" \r ~ . . Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee March 28, 2000 Convened: 3:06 p.m. Adjourned: 3:48 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, March 28, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice-Chairman Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce Roger Orr, Esquire, City of Port St. Lucie Jeanne Hearn Members not present: Philip Steel David Souza Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Others present: Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering James David, St. Lucie County Mosquito Control Director Melissa Stiadle, Recording Secretary Bill Leshe', Indian River Terminal Company Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney Mike Ednoff, SLC Community Development Jeni Brock-Steel, The Tribune Victoria Stalls, Assistant to Comm. Barnes Liz Martin, Assistant to Comm. Hutchinson Angela prymas, SFWMD David Unsell, SFWMD Jim Reeder, The Palm Beach Post Robert Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Michael Waldrop, Anchor Marine S. K. Patel, BCI 1 r- - . ~ ~ Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee March 28, 2000 Page Two Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Approve Minutes from the February 22, 2000 meeting. It was moved by Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, seconded by Roger Orr, to approve the minutes of the February 22, 2000 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Public Comment '-' Robert Anderson asked if the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee would ask the County Commission to reconsider and buy some of the smaller sites instead of the Seminole site. He stated that he was concerned that using one large area would not be good for the environment and that several smaller sites would have less of an impact on the community. Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan asked Doug Anderson if the option had been considered rather then one large dumping spot. Doug Anderson answered by stating that it would not make sense to use smaller sites and run pipes to all these different sites because of the volume of material coming out of the Indian River Lagoon and the cost associated with using smaller sites. Doug Anderson reminded the Committee that is has not been decided that the County will purchase the Seminole site. They are doing due diligence at this point and no decision has been made. Jeanne Hearn asked if the new company would require dykes and so forth to be put up. Doug Anderson stated that Black & Veatch would be reporting in a few weeks but that at this point he understood that they would not be needed for Taylor Creek. But he stated that he did not really know. 4. Presentation by David Unsell and Angela Prymas (SFWMD) C25 Canal Modeling Study. David Unsell with the South Florida Water Management District introduced Angela Prymas Creator of the Model Study of the Fort Pierce Inlet area. Angela Prymas gave a presentation to the Committee on the Modeling Study of the Fort Pierce Inlet area. (Please see attached copy.) Questions were answered pertaining to the presentation by Angela Prymas and David Unsell. \..- 5. Other Business Doug Anderson explained that he was anticipating a report from Black & Veatch within the 2 ~ ~ ~ .;" Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee March 28, 2000 .. Page Three next two weeks and wanted to bring them before the Committee hopefully at the next meeting on April 25, 2000. 6. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Dan Nelson, seconded by Jeanne Hearn, to adjourn, and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 3:48p.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa W. Stiadle Recording Secretary C: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice Chairman Philip Steel Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Roger Orr David Souza Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Ray Wazny, Public Works Director Don West, County Engineer 3 ~ Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 25, 2000 Convened: 3:11 p.m. Adjourned: 3:48 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, April 25, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: \.,. Members not present: Others present: Gail Kavanagh, Vice-Chairman Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce Roger Orr, Esquire, City of Port St. Lucie Jeanne Hearn Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman David Souza Philip Steel (30 Minutes Late) Dan Nelson Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering James David, St. Lucie County Mosquito Control Director Melissa Stiadle, Recording Secretary Bill Lesh'e, Indian River Terminal Company Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County Mike Ednoff, SLC Community Development Jeni Brock-Steel, The Tribune Liz Martin, Assistant to Comm. Hutchinson Robert Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator S. K. Patel, BCI LeRoy Creswell, St. Lucie Sea Grant Extension Shirley Burlingham, St. Lucie Waterfront Council Stix Nickson, St. Lucie Assoc. of Realtors Lloyd Bell Julia Shewchuk, SLC Community Development George Kavanagh, Kavanagh Specialty Contractors Dennis Beach, City Manager, Fort Pierce \.- Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee 1 April 25, 2000 '-' Page Two Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Approve Minutes from the March 28,2000 meeting. It was moved by Roger Orr, seconded by Jeanne Hearn, to approve the minutes of the March 28, 2000 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Public Comment Robert Anderson stated that he was curious as to why different sites have not been explored further. '-" Doug Anderson explained that the County is exploring the Seminole site for dredge material from the Indian River Lagoon and if Taylor Creek can be dredged in the manner in which Black and Veatch is suggesting a temporary site for that portion will be needed. A very large site for future dredging of the Indian River Lagoon, the Turning Basin and the Inlet will still be needed. The total cost for the project will not exceed $ 4 Million. Mr. Anderson said that he has been directed by the Board of County Commissioners to proceed with due diligence on the Seminole site. If it becomes feasible to dredge the inlet, Turning Basin and the Lagoon in the method that Black and Veatch is suggesting for Taylor Creek then a different site could be considered but, we would also have to keep in mind the cost factors. Mr. Anderson stated that he did not know if this is feasible or not and is waiting for a report from Black and Veatch. Mr. Anderson stated that all indications at this point, based upon the traditional way of dredging, show that the Seminole site is feasible according to the Engineers. Jeanne Hearn asked if there were any County owned barrier island sites available in that area. Doug Anderson answered that he was not aware of any. Doug Anderson explained that a thorough search was done and ten to fourteen sites where originally looked at and then narrowed down to one. David Souza stated that they already have a site for dredging the intercostal waterway in Vero Beach and understood after reading the newspaper that The Army Corp. of Engineers was not going to use an Upland Site. Doug Anderson explained that The Army Corp. has stated that they will use an Upland Spoil Site once the County has one ready and in place and will pay for the piping to that Upland Spoil Site. Mr. Souza stated that it was not his understanding after reading the paper and it sounded like The Army Corp. of Engineers was not interested in using a site and was going to continue to dump offshore. Robert Anderson asked if the price or estimate of the Seminole Site includes buying homes like they had to from Ridgehaven residents for the Airport. Chairman Johnson responded by asking Robert Anderson to consider approaching the County Commission with facts and ~ Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 25, 2000 Page Three 2 '-" figures. Chairman Johnson asked if the site Robert Anderson was speaking about was one that had been considered. S. K. responded by stating at this point he could not address that questions because this is not the only dredging project he is working on. Robert Anderson stated that he would bring the map to the next Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Meeting. S. K. Patel stated that they have said all along if anyone has any questions they are more then welcome to call. Chairman Johnson suggested that Robert Anderson follow through and check with S. K. to compare facts and figures to come up with some type of ball park figure for the area he was speaking of. Roger Orr asked Robert Anderson if he objected to the Seminole Site and why. Robert Anderson answered by stating that he did object and did not want to open his door every morning step outside and see it dead in front of his home. He also stated that when the wind would be blowing from out of the east that he would have to keep his windows shut because no matter what anyone says there will be a certain amount of smell from organisms from the salt water being pumped in. Doug Anderson explained that the property is industrially zoned and that others have been looking at the same piece of property for industrial purposes. Roger Orr asked if the site would involve buffers. S. K. stated that the County has directed them to make sure there are buffers. S. K. stated that this is something that is being considered at this site. S. K. stated that at the tour of Turkey Creek no one stated that it stunk or assumed that their would be an odor. S. K. explained that sea grasses die seasonally and there is a smell. Sea grass washing ashore is a natural process that occurs every year and has nothing to do with dredging or muck. Robert Anderson stated that when the group visited Turkey Creek it had not been pumped since May so there was no way to tell anything about smell. S. K. stated that he had never had a complaint from anyone in Palm Bay regarding a foul odor from the muck. Doug Anderson reminded the Committee that the County Commissioners have not approved buying the site yet and that the Seminoles have not been given a purchase offer. Robert Anderson stated that what he is trying to say is that once the green light is given he will not have a leg to stand on. Doug Anderson stated that the financing is not lined up yet. Chairman Johnson suggested to Robert Anderson to get with Mr. Patel to line up figures and ask the spokesperson for the Seminole tribe about changing the zoning of the property. Jeanne Hearn asked when the Environmental Study would be available. S. K. stated that they are working on it and that it should be at least two weeks before it is finalized. S. K. stated that then it will go through a review period and be commented on. '-" 4. Update by Doug Anderson on Black and Veatch Study Doug Anderson presented the Committee with an E-Mail from Black & Veatch (please see attached copy). Mr. Anderson stated that Black & Veatch have indicated that their procedure for dredging Taylor Creek will work and the E-Mail confirms that the test results are favorable. Mr. Anderson stated that the County has been notified by a company in Pennsylvania who say that they can do the same process, which would mean that the County would have to go out for proposals. Once we receive the final report from Black & Veatch that the process will work then the County will go out for proposals to see what companies are out there in the United States that do that type of work and get their best proposal. Mr. Anderson stated that when we receive the go ahead from Black & Veatch we will formalize discussion with the City of Fort Pierce to come up with a site for this material to be loaded onto and then removed. Roger Orr asked about the memo from Mr. Trias of the City of Fort Pierce regarding zoning codes on dredge material. Mr. Anderson stated that the City does not allow a permanent zoning site for dredged material but that Dennis Beach was willing to talk with the County to come up with a solution. ~ Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 25, 2000 Page Four 3 ? Port Development Plan with City of Fort Pierce '-" Doug Anderson explained the action that the Board of County Commissioners approved at the April 11, 2000 Board meeting which recommended that County staff be authorized to work in conjunction with the City of Fort Pierce and Mr. Lloyd Bell, the new owner of the port property, to prepare a working plan for the development of the port of Fort Pierce to include exploring the proposal from the Trust for Public Lands. Mr. Anderson explained that Dennis Beach would be trying to attend the meeting to explain what his goals and objectives are and outline what he hopes to accomplish with Mr. Bell and The Trust for Public Lands. Mr. Anderson stated that County staff would hold a meeting with the City of Fort Pierce the week of May 8th. 6. Other Business ~ Doug Anderson turned the Meeting over to Dennis Beach, City Manager of the City of Fort Pierce to explain to the Committee what he hopes to accomplish by meeting with the County. Mr. Beach stated to the Committee that what City Hall is working toward is getting a group of staff members from St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce to start developing specific mechanisms to build and design the infrastructure and find ways to finance it. The Fort Pierce Commission's intentions are still to pursue what was outlined in the Charrette document itself, even though the Port property has changed hands recently. The infrastructure cannot be developed for the Port property without the property being publicly owned, so we will continue these discussions and pursue that end. At the last City Commission meeting approval was granted for staff to advertise for consultants to advise the City and the County on what the development concepts should look like, and for the design of the Public improvements that are being proposed. There is an engineering firm doing a feasibility study on the North Port entry and also a sizeable project for the construction of 2nd Street from the downtown area to the internal part of the Port. Dennis Beach stated that what he hopes this organization can do is just keep moving this project forward as it is outlined in the Port Charrette. Discussion ensued regarding the Port property. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Lloyd Bell if he wanted to comment to the Committee. Mr. Bell explained that there was a lot that he had to learn because of the fact that he just recently acquired the Port property. Mr. Bell talked about the Commercial use of the Port Property by importing winter vegetables from the Bahamas and explained that he was willing to be cooperative and wanted to help the county and the community in any way that he could. Mr. Bell suggested that all concerned parties meet to discuss all of the issues to make things more productive. Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Bells intentions and the time frame for making use of his newly acquired property. 7. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Roger Orr, seconded by Gail Kavanagh, to adjourn, and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 3:48p.m. \.... Respectfully submitted, Melissa W. Stiadle Recording Secretary 4 ~ '-' '-" C: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice Chairman Philip Steel Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Roger Orr David Souza Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Ray Wazny, Public Works Director Don West, County Engineer 5 '-' Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee May 23, 2000 Convened: 3:09 p.m. Adjourned: 4:24 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, May 23, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: Gail Kavanagh, Vice-Chairman Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce Roger Orr, Esquire, City of Port St. Lucie Jeanne Hearn Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Members not present: Dan Nelson David Souza Philip Steel ~ Others present: Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering Melissa Stiadle, Recording Secretary Bill Lesh'e, Indian River Terminal Company Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County Liz Martin, Assistant to Comm. Hutchinson Robert Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Stix Nickson, St. Lucie Assoc. of Realtors Charlie Bicht, SLC Purchasing Michael Harvey, SLC Engineering John Arena, Earth First Jim Reeder, The Palm Beach Post Victoria Stalls, Assistant to Comm. Barnes Drew Dixon, Ft. Pierce News Jim Lancaster, Assistant County Attorney ,-,. 1 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee \.... May 23,2000 Page Two Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Approve Minutes from the April 25,2000 Meeting. Chairman Johnson stated that concern was raised and brought to her attention that an important statement that Mr. Lloyd Bell made at the April 25th meeting regarding use of his property for dredged material was not included in the minutes. Chairman Johnson stated that she would like the statement added to the comments that Mr. Bell made at the April 25th meeting (the following statement is taken from the tape verbatim) Mr. Bell stated "... I do wish to be cooperative and any help that we might be able to give to the County and the Community, such as came up at this meeting today, as a place to temporarily deposit fill, as long as it is not creating a long term problem, I see no reason why you couldn't use the properties that I just acquired and there in the immediate vicinity where I think you are working and I would be glad to talk with your Engineers about feasibility of doing so, and if it fits I'll be glad to provide that facility to you..." ~. It was moved by Roger Orr, seconded by Jeanne Hearn, to approve the minutes of the April 25, 2000 meeting with the addition of Mr. Bell's comment. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Public Comment Robert Anderson stated he was curious as to how deep the McFarland dredge did go. He stated that it was in and out of here so many times that he could have dug it with a drag line. Chairman Johnson asked John Arena if he had any information on the dredge. Mr. Arena stated that he had not seen the soundings since the dredge was completed. Don West stated that he had called the Corp this morning to find out what he could about the dredge but was unable to reach anyone. Mr. West stated that the Corp normally does a depth survey when they are done with a project and it was his understanding that they are conducting that survey now so once the survey results are complete they will put them on a map to see how deep the water is. '-' Robert Anderson stated that he talked with someone from the Corp yesterday and was told that the Corp would use whatever Upland Spoil Site the County put at their means and that it did not necessarily have to be the Seminole Site. Chairman Johnson stated this was basically the understanding, that the Corp would use whatever site the County had available. Robert Anderson stated that it was his understanding that the Corp picked that site and said that was the one that they wanted. Mr. Anderson stated that this was also confirmed on tapes from The Board of County Commission meetings and the past two Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee meetings, which he stated he has requested copies of. Chairman Johnson asked Robert Anderson "are you saying that you heard it said here that's what we want". Robert Anderson answered "I've heard it said here and also heard it said in another room were I was taken into to be talked to". Robert Anderson stated that what he has gathered from everyone was that's the site that has been chosen and that's the reason that his neighbors are saying that you can't fight the Corp and you can't fight 2 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee . May 23, 2000 Page Three '- City Hall. Mr. Anderson stated that it was in the paper that the Corp had chosen that site too and he has the paper at his house from the 26th of December, and right after the first of the year. Chairman Johnson asked if that was the Seminole Site that he was talking about. Mr. Anderson stated yes and explained that he wanted it on record, and he wanted it brought to the attention of the Committee that the Corp told him that they would utilize any site especially if it was accessible. Mr. Anderson stated that the area along the C-1 canal would be probably three miles to pump. Mr. Anderson presented the Committee with Maps that he talked about at the last meeting. Mr. Anderson said that when stating that no decisions have been made, that once the green light is given your not going to just walk away. Chairman Johnson stated that seventeen sites had been looked at and asked if those sited had ever been published. Don West stated that the Maps that Robert Anderson gave to the Committee was a copy of those sites. Mr. Anderson stated that he had a copy of the map with the sites and the reasons why they were turned down. Don West stated that he wanted to clarify that at a couple of the meetings with the Corp in which he, AI Fletcher and Tim Murphy from the Corp. Jacksonville office, the seventeen sites were discussed and pros and cons were discussed. They evaluated the site in terms of their needs, as to what would suit them best, and they indicated to us at that time that the Seminole Property would be the best for them. One of the main reasons was because it fronts right on the Indian River Lagoon, so it is close and easier for them to run pipe in from the water side rather then having to deal with a lot of land issues. Don West stated that if you look at other sites that might be further to west or further inland, the Corp. would work with any site that we selected, however you need to look at the amount of money that is involved each time to run pipe to that site. Mr. West said that the Corp. will limit their participation is terms of dollars. They may not necessarily fund the use of one of those sites that's further west. They would use it but they would charge, so there are a lot of factors that would come into play. Mr. West said that when looking at the map they evaluated easy access and looked at environmental conditions and a lot of different factors. The Corp. strongly indicated that the Seminole site was their first choice. It is true that they could use other sites, but that was their first choice. If the quote in the newspaper indicated that the Seminole site was their first choice that is correct. I was at the meetings and they did say that. Mr. Anderson stated that if the pipes are run along the canal it could be a permanent pipe and weirs could be put up for back pumping and only utilized when back pumping right into the canal. The canal goes right into the spillway and over into Taylor Creek which would mean you could put the brackish water right back in where brackish water is already. The only difference would be a liner. Mr. Anderson stated that there are a million different reasons that he could come up with. Jeanne Hearn asked if they had surveyed the neighborhood to the west because of the fact that there are some mighty fine homes in that area that she would hate for the County to end up having to purchase. Don West stated that is one of the issues that they are looking at now and would go into that further in detail during his update on Taylor Creek. Robert Anderson stated that this was the only time that he would really get to speak. Chairman Johnson stated that if anyone had any burning questions once the presentations were over hopefully there would be time to address those. ~ 4. Update by Don West on Taylor Creek '-' Don West stated that the two main goals were to dredge Taylor Creek and remove the silt and the second one was the spoil site selection. The spoil site was for the Taylor Creek project and for the inlet and turning basin, and could also be for the intercostal waterways as well. We are partnering with the drainage districts, Florida Inland Navigation District and 3 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee , May 23, 2000 Page Four '- the Port Council. The site is fairly large. It is about eighty acres in size. Taylor Creek originally was set up as a project were they would dredge from the railroad track to the Indian River Lagoon. BCI was hired to do a soil analysis on the rest of the Creek. BCI is sampling the sediments and running laboratory tests to see what the constituents are that make up the sediments. They are also looking at the up-stream side of the weir structures at the C25 canal and the C1 canal, which is the Fort Pierce Farms canal, and checking the sediments behind the weir structures also to see what they can do to try and keep the sediments from building up on a regular basis. These tests will also help us to know what kind of chemical we will have to mix with the dredge material to settle out. ~ Mr. West stated that with regards to the Spoil site the Seminole property is the one that they are focused on because the Board directed them to look at that one site. There were seventeen sites that were originally evaluated but that the Seminole site was selected to be evaluated and looked at in detail, and it was recommended to the Board by the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee. The decision was made to look at the Seminole site and that is why they have not looked into other sites or done any other work on them. When the County buys a piece of land a number of steps have to be taken such as title search, environmental survey, appraisals and negotiations with the seller on a price. BCI was hired to conduct a special study to look at the ground water table and take samples to find out if a liner is required or not. The information regarding the liner will have to be reviewed before they make a final decision on that site. The next step would be to go back to the Board of County Commissioners and ask them to make a decision on whether or not to purchase the Seminole site, and at this time they will have the appraisal, an agreement on purchase and the information on whether or not a liner is required. Mr. West suggested that the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee discuss and make a recommendation to the Board one way or the other in terms of how the Committee feels they should go with the upland site. Whether they recommend to purchase it or to look at other sites. Mr. West stated that there are other ways to accomplish a dredging that do not actually require a conventional Spoil site and stated that Mr. Charlie Bicht would be presenting that to them later in the meeting. Mr. West stated that the Committee may also want to discuss this alternative for Taylor Creek dredging but that it was not an options for the Turning Basin or the inlet because of the magnitude of the job. Mr. West stated that recently they advertised a request for proposals which would be to hire a consulting Engineer to do dredging design and dredging permitting. County staff is in the process of going through the proposals to present a short list to the Board of County Commissioners. They hope to select two firms and set up a continuing contract arrangement with those two firms which will allow us to hire an Engineerto do dredging design and dredging permitting. The reason they have not proceeded with design and permitting of Taylor Creek is because the Spoil site has not yet been decided. When you permit the dredging you have to permit the Spoil site with the dredging because it is all one deal when you go to permit it and you have to know where you are going to put the material or handle it before you go and apply for that permit. This is why they have not been able to move forward with the design on Taylor Creek. Once the Spoil site is selected this will allow them to proceed and hire an Engineer and get the final design and permitting done. (Please see attached copy of Taylor CreeklC- 25 Canal Restoration Project Status Report). ~ Commissioner Maryann Bryan asked if the Navigational Channel goes to the Rail Road trestle or further west. Mr. West referred to a map (please see attached copy) and stated that they actually intended to dredge to the Indian River Lagoon spillways. Mr. West stated that the reason they are evaluating these areas behind the two spillways is because of concern that it would come right back after being dredged, so they are trying to keep that from happening. Mr. West stated that they have a commitment from the Water 4 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee May 23, 2000 Page Five '-' Management District to try and take steps to alleviate that problem. He stated that one step would involve coming in a removing material and also making modifications behind the spillway. Commissioner Bryan stated that she was asking because at the last City Commission Meeting a gentlemen came and made a proposal to ask the FEC about raising those tracks. She stated that she encouraged him to also come and talk with the County and the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee because of using Taylor Creek as a Navigational Channel. Chairman Johnson asked if Mr. West's department would be working very closely with the Water Management District on that. Mr. West stated that yes it would be his department. Mrs. Hearn wanted to know if her understanding that the permitting would come after the purchase of the property was correct and if there would be a preliminary approval of permits. Mr. West stated that when you permit a dredge project part of the permit process is to identify were the Spoil will be put. You have to know were it will be put and how it will be handled before you can even apply for the permit. Mr. West stated that you cannot permit the dredging without having a Spoil Site, so both have to be done as one deal. Mr. West stated that the Spoil Site would be permitted with the idea that it would be used for Taylor Creek but could also be used in the future for other projects on an as needed basis. John Arena stated that some months ago he suggested using a mud pump and pumping directly into trucks and asked if any investigation had been done into using a system of that sort. Don West stated that he remembered Mr. Arenas suggestion and stated that they would be discussing that subject later in the meeting. Chairman Johnson wanted to know if the June update on the effectiveness of the Spur Jetty was available and stated that she would come back to that subject, but wanted to discuss a comment that Robert Anderson had brought up regarding the several different sites. She stated that it was her understanding that the Army Corp. of Engineers had a whole lot of input on the selection of that site. Don West stated that was correct, and that the Army Corp. of Engineers were very strong in their recommendation of the Seminole site. Mr. West stated that he wanted to clarify that with Mr. Anderson, because if you weren't at the meetings and you read what is in the papers, you may not fully understand what was agreed to. Mr. West stated that he was present at the meetings and Mr. Fletcher with the Corp. of Engineers has had a lot of experience in actually implementing projects for the Corp. He is their expert on how to put in the pipes and how to create the project and make it happen, and he was very adamant about selecting the Seminole site, or at least recommending that as their preferred site. Chairman Johnson asked if he took into consideration the housing values and all of that. Don West explain that they did not have all that information at that time only the seventeen sites located, and had not actually evaluated the homes in that area. This was based purely on looking at it from the Corps. perspective in terms of what would work best for the dredging operation itself. Chairman Johnson stated that this just illustrates how the public is not, and by saying public meaning those homeowners and people who live in that area and have a life there, are not considered. Mr. West stated that this issue is now being considered before they make a decision on this site or whether or not they buy it. Chairman Johnson stated that is because The Seminole Site is it right now, and this is what causes the public to be so hurt and disenchanted. Mr. West stated that if you look at it from a stand point of implementing a project like that, often it is not understood how costly it can be to evaluate a site fully. For example appraisals, environmental analysis and ground water analysis and looking at the homes, when looking at all these factors. Mr. West stated that they looked at seventeen sites and did a broad analysis and that cost $25,000 to look at basic details and the cost. Mr. West stated that they are spending another $50,000 or $60,000 to look at a site and get every single detail about it that they possibly can. It is very expensive, to do this on all seventeen and then make a decision. Chairman Johnson stated she was not saying to do all seventeen. Mr. West stated that there really is a lot to it and a lot of detail and its hard to catch all the detail up-front. Robert Anderson asked about the different agencies '-'" ~ 5 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee . May 23, 2000 Page Six '-' involved and if anyone had the figures of those agencies, which he stated he has asked for before, on what they are putting in. He stated that he asked and asked and asked on how much South Florida Water Management was putting in and how much the Corp. was putting in and how much everyone was putting in, so he has it in his file. Mr. West stated he could provide that for him and stated that the Water Management District has committed 500,000 for the Taylor Creek project. They have also committed another $500,000 to the work behind the spillways. Mr. West stated that is committed in writing and there will be a contract that will be approved by both parties, but at this point we only have a letter from them that says that they are committed to that. Mr. West stated that St. Johns Water Management District has committed $188,000 to the Taylor Creek project and the Florida Inland Navigation District has committed $100,000 for the Taylor Creek project through a letter awaiting approval of the contract. Mr. West stated that they are talking with the Florida Ports Council about Taylor Creek and they have indicated that if they will support it they can fund up to 50 % of the cost of the project. Mr. West stated that they plan to apply to the Ports Council in the next several months and are working on a application now. Robert Anderson asked for a copy of the figures committed by the different agencies and commented on a comment made by SK Patel at the last Fort Pierce Harbor Meeting regarding his statement that no one had complained about the Upland Spoil Site in their back yard. Mr. Anderson stated that it would be in his front yard and that he would have to look at it every time he opened his front door. Chairman Johnson asked what the interest was on the part by the St. Johns and F.I.N.D. She asked if they wanted to dump something there. Don West stated that they were interested in the Taylor Creek project but not necessarily in the Spoil Site. The St. Johns Water Management District drafted a plan for the restoration of the Indian River Lagoon. It is called the Comprehensive Management Plan for the Lagoon. Mr. West explained that one of the key goals in that plan in terms of restoring the Lagoon is dredging and silt removal which is called restoration dredging, therefore they support this project purely from an environmental stand point. They also did the project at Crane Creek and Turkey Creek and the whole reason they did that was to get the silt out of the silt traps to keep it from going out into the Lagoon where it can harm the grass beds. Mr. West stated that this is why they are really glad to see the County committed to it, and regardless of what happens to the Spoil Site they wants to see Taylor Creek get dredged out because they are concerned with the silt. Chairman Johnson asked if there had been any progress on the "point-source". Mr. West explained that it has not been talked about much but that it was being done through the Corp. of Engineers Restudy and one of the big issues is how will we stop the sediment source from going into the canals, and how we will implement the Restudy which will be a very big undertaking. It is a thirty billion dollar project. Chairman Johnson stated that she brought this up because she feels that these kinds of things need to be brought to the attention of the public so the public can understand. She stated that after the deal came up with The Seminole Site that she and Maryann were talking after a meeting and she felt that your pouring all this money down a black hole when you don't do what it takes to stop the "point-source". Chairman Johnson stated that she is pleased to hear that and is truly encouraging Mr. West and his office to continue in whatever aspect his office or engineering can do to keep the Commission updated, so that they can dialog going and money flowing. Jeanne Hearn asked if the FSTED funding would come before the Commission or if staff would have the authority to just apply for funding. Don West explained that it is a typical application and would have to go before the Board first before being submitted. Bill Lesh'e asked Mr. West what F.I.N.D.'s interest was in C25 and also what Florida Ports Councils role would be in the Taylor Creek project. Mr. West explained that the FSTED group, the Ports Council, sees the Taylor Creek project as a infrastructure element of the Port and the Spoil Site particularly. Mr. West stated that they would apply for Taylor Creek to see if they were willing to help with that. They mayor may not consider the Taylor Creek project as an '- ~ 6 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee . May 23, 2000 Page Seven '-' element of the Port but they would consider the Spoil Site to be an element of the Port, because it would be used for the turning basin and the inlet. Mr. West stated that the Florida Inland Navigation District generally supports project throughout the coast of Florida that are dredging related. Their philosophy is they have to dredge the intercostal waterway on a regular basis just like the Corps comes and dredges the inlet, and anything they can do to stop the silt and sediment from getting out into the intercostal waterway is a big help to them. They see it as a preventative measure and they are a funding partner in it. They also own a Spoil Site further north up from Harbor Branch. They have indicated to us that they mayor may not want to use the Upland Spoil Site because they have another site in the area, but they would support the project purely from the stand point of preventing the silt from coming out into the intercostal waterway. Chairman Johnson stated that she was glad that he clarified their intentions. Chairman Johnson ask Mr. West if he knew the money value that they intended to commit. Mr. West explained that the way F.I.N.D. works is that they fund projects in stages. They would not give all the monies in one allocation and at this point they have agreed to fund $100,000 in design and permitting and have also left the door open for us to come back and ask for construction funding. Robert Anderson asked how F. I. N. D. can be involved when JoAnn Allen is a board member of F. I. N. D., and when she will be the one that will have to be dealt with when buying the Seminole property. Mr. Anderson stated that she is also the one to talk to about getting funds for. Her boss told him on the phone that he has told her and told her not to be telling people stuff like that. Mr. Anderson stated that this sounds like a conflict of interest to him. Don West stated that she would probably abstain from voting because the F. I. N. D. Commission functions just like the County Commission, so she could certainly abstain from voting on it. Chairman Johnson asked if she was still on that board. Mr. West explained that she was on the F. I. N. D. committee for another term because she just got reappointed. Mr. Anderson commented that in other words she got inside information that was needed for the Seminole Site. Chairman Johnson stated that it makes you wonder that they have talked about that too. ~ 5. Update by Charlie Bicht on New Dredging techniques "Black & Veatch" Mr. Bicht explained that after a presentation to the Commission by Black & Veatch he received a call from a company in Pennsylvania called mobile dredging and they explained that their process was similar to The Black & Veatch process. Mr. Bicht explained that there is competition out there. Black & Veatch states that they have a patent on this process but that there may be other processes out there that could get the same result without following there patent. Mr. Bicht explained that the process he is presenting is not the Black & Veatch process but one that he went to see in Boston. Mr. Bicht passed out a packet of information which he went through page by page. (Please see attached copy of packet for entire presentation.) After the presentation Mr. Bicht explained that this was a very interesting process and one that we really need to consider. '-" Jeanne Hearn asked if The Black & Veatch quote came in before this new company came in or is that being kept. Mr. Bicht answered that he has not seen anything. Mr. West stated that Black & Veatch has decided that they do not want to release cost figures. Robert Anderson asked what the depth was that they could go. Mr. Bicht stated that they were dredging to 10 feet and they geared their dredge size toward their lake depth and production schedule. Jeanne Hearn asked when the RFP for other companies would go out. Mr. Bicht explained that they are looking to design the process first so that they can go out for the actual process. Mr. Bicht stated that Taylor Creek could be dredged without the use of a Spoil Site and they could use a couple acres of Harbor Pointe and accomplish the whole process. Chairman Johnson stated a couple acres of Harbor Pointe and stated 7 · Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee May 23, 2000 Page Eight \..,. that the Water Front Councils concern is to make sure that none of that is toxic and she stated that is still their concern. Mr. Lesh'e asked if there had been any preliminary indications on what this type of process will cost. Mr. Bicht stated that he did not talk to them about cost because different conditions exist between what they were doing and what we need done. Mr. Bicht stated that he was sure that the dredging process may be a more costly process but you're off setting the cost of a Spoil Site and the cost of pumping a great distance, and the possibility of using the Spoil as an end product, so there are a lot of different aspects to look at. Chairman Johnson asked if the consultants would decide the size of the dredge. Mr. Bicht stated that what they are looking for from the consultant would be for them to specify what we've got and the depth size and so forth, time frame and end result. Jeanne Hearn asked what time frames they are anticipating before we could have Taylor Creed dredged. Mr. Bicht stated that if they got the consultant on board and designed they could get an RFP out within six months if everything worked well. Don West stated that actual construction would probably be about a year before you actually break ground. Robert Anderson asked if they lost the permits that they got for dredging Taylor Creek. Don West stated that the Board of Commissioners abandoned those and agreed to go after a full permitting process. 6. Other Business \w- Chairman Johnson asked Robert Bradshaw if the meeting in conjunction with the City on May 8th took place and if there was any movement. Mr. Bradshaw referred the question to Don West. Don West stated that they tried to set a meeting this week but Mr. Bell was not available and that they were trying to get in touch with him now to set something up for the following week. Chairman Johnson asked if that was the reason the May 8th meeting did not go. Don West stated that since Mr. Bell lives far away they have to schedule around him. Chairman Johnson stated that she was pleased to hear that they are including him. Jeanne Hearn asked what the status was of the Berth Permits and how would it be decided to utilize or not utilize them. Will that be decided by staff or would it be a Commission decision. Don West stated that there were two up for renewal and he was unsure which ones but that they are working with Terry Lewis's office to help get those renewed. Mr. West stated that a sea grass survey was just completed and sent in to the Department of Environmental Protection. Jeanne Hearn asked how we would utilize the permits with Mr. Bell. Robert Bradshaw stated that they would sit down with Mr. Bell to discuss this and find out his level of interest regarding the permits. Mr. Bradshaw stated that the County has taken the position to go ahead and pursue the renewal on them. Jeanne Hearn stated that she understood that but was asking if staff would have the privilege of dealing with Mr. Bell or if whatever he wants he gets. Mrs. Hearn stated that it was her understanding that at previous Commission meetings and past Harbor Advisory Committee meetings, that these permits are very valuable to us and this would be a means of determining what transpires there. Mr. Bradshaw stated that he didn't think that staff would act laterally on this, of course it would go back before the Board for any type of movement on them. Mrs. Hearn ask if there had been any type of discussion about the value in them. Mr. Bradshaw stated not to his knowledge no. Mrs. Hearn stated that she hoped they would retain their value. Chairman Johnson asked about the Sea grass survey. Don West stated that the Department of Environmental Protection requested this as a part of the evaluation of the permit extensions. Mr. West stated that the last survey was based on six years ago, so they ask us to update it and get a new survey so they could evaluate that for extension of permits. The County hired BCI Engineers to do that work and it was recently completed and forwarded, so the permits are not in hand yet but it is in the process. Chairman Johnson asked if he knew what it said. Mr. West stated that he did not but that he would provide a copy of the survey to the Committee members. Chairman Johnson stated that yes she ~ 8 · , - \. ~ \.. Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee May 23,2000 Page Nine would like that provide along with a summary. Chairman Johnson asked if anyone had information on the Ports Council Meeting. Mr. Bradshaw stated that he thought it was in the first part of June in Port Canaveral and that County staff would be at Strategic Planning so no one from the County would be able to attend but that John LaCapra had told him that he would send or forward information back to the County from what comes out of that meeting. Bill Lesh'e stated that the meeting was on June 12th and 13th. John Arena asked about the Mud Pump that Don West stated he would comment on. Mr. West stated that what he thought Mr. Arena was referring to was the tanks or containers for the dredging. Mr. Arena stated that what he was referring to was a mud pump that could pump mud directly into dump trucks to be carted off and these pumps are available right here in Fort Pierce. There is a six inch model for rent. Mr. Arena stated that it would take that material and pump it as is without adding water to it and put it directly right into a waterproof aluminum body dump truck to be carted off and spread onto the land which would be a lot simpler and a lot less expensive. Mr. Arena stated that he has discussed this before but that no one has decided to rent one and try it out. 7. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Roger Orr, seconded by Jeanne Hearn, to adjourn, the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 4:24p.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa W. Stiadle Recording Secretary C: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice Chairman Philip Steel Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Roger Orr David Souza Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Ray Wazny, Public Works Director Don West, County Engineer 9 \- Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee August 22, 2000 Convened: 3:11 p.m. Adjourned: 5: 18 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, August 222000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: \.- Members not present: Others present: '-' Gail Kavanagh, Vice-Chairman Roger Orr, Esquire, City of Port St. Lucie Jeanne Hearn Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman David Souza Kevin Jackson Dan Nelson Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering Melissa Stiadle, Recording Secretary Bill Lesh'e, Indian River Terminal Company Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County Robert Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Stix Nickson, St. Lucie Assoc. of Realtors John Lesh'e, Ocean Towing Corp. R. J. Lesh'e, Ocean Towing Corp. Richard Carnell, Indian River Terminal Company Heather Young, Asst. County Attorney Dennis Beach, City of Fort Pierce Emily Grande, Hutchinson Island Charles Grande, Presidents Council, Hutchinson Island Betty Lou Wells Don McLam, SLC Recreation Manager George Kavanagh Shirley Burlingham 1 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee ~ August22,2000 Page Two Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Approve Minutes from the May 23, 2000 Meeting. It was moved by, Jeanne Hearn seconded by, Roger Orr to approve the minutes of the May 23,2000 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. '-'" Vice Chairman Gail Kavanagh stated that she had a point of observation and a question on a point of order in reading over the minutes in content on page six. Gail stated is was her understanding that this Committee was covered by the Sunshine Law and asked if that was correct. Gail Kavanagh stated that if this is the case it states in the minutes on page six "Chairman Johnson stated that she brought this up because she feels that these kinds of things need to be brought to the attention of the public so the public can understand. She stated that after the deal came up with The Seminole Site that she and Maryann were talking after a meeting and she felt that your pouring all this money down a black hole when you don't do what it takes to stop the "point source". Gail Kavanagh asked if this is a violation of the Sunshine law. Chairman Johnson stated that she and Maryann were standing right here and that she made the comment in the meeting also. Gail Kavanagh stated that she was just concerned and has always been timid about discussing issues without the Committee. Chairman Johnson asked Gail what her understanding was of the Sunshine law and Gail stated that she would like it explained to her and stated that Roger explains it well. Mr. Bradshaw stated that Heather Young represented the Committee and would be able to explain. Heather Young stated that items that are going to be discussed during the meeting that are on the agenda should be limited to discussion during the meeting. She stated that if an item has already been decided upon or discussed you can discuss it afterwards. Heather stated that she did not attend the meeting in question therefore she is unable to determine whether the Sunshine law was broken. Heather stated that it would be best to refrain from comments and keep comments to the recorded portion of the meeting. Heather stated that committee members really need limited comments with each other on items that the committee is going to discuss at the public meeting. Chairman Johnson stated that it was not an agenda item. \..- Jeanne Hearn stated that it was her understanding that if a Commissioner for instance received correspondence they would have to make it relevant which she did at the meeting she made reference to what their conservation was she stated that as long as it is reveled. Heather Young stated that is a way to get around the judicial nature of some of the things that Commissioners my deal with when it is a zoning matter or something like that. Jeanne Hearn asked if that would have eradicated it. Heather stated that what Ms. Kavanagh is referring to is something that happened after the meeting. Gail Kavanagh stated that it was a conservation that happened after the meeting. Chairman Johnson stated that it was not this meeting either. Heather stated that if the committee received something that will effect the vote on an issue that is coming before the committee it would be appropriate to disclose it. 2 ~ ..... \...- 3. Public Comment Robert Anderson asked Don West if the survey was in on the study of the spur. Don West stated that they have not received information on it yet. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. West if he had any idea when the survey would be in. Don West stated that he had no idea but, would check into it. Robert Anderson asked if Mary Morris of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission would be at todays meeting. Robert Bradshaw stated that she was the last item on the agenda and that she would be in to discuss Manatee Issues. Mr. Bradshaw also stated that Don McLam with the County would be in attendance to answer questions on the Manatee Protection Plan. Shirley Burlingham stated that she is not a fisher person but had knowledge that the problem of dock launching space in the County is a real issue. She stated that new docks where to be put in place at Little Jim Bridge and are now on hold. She stated that she attended the meeting with F.I.N.D. at the Radisson on February 19 th when they brought up the Manatee Protection Plan. She stated that she is wondering why the County did not go ahead with their Protection Plan knowing that all of these grants would have to be put on hold. Mr. Bradshaw stated that someone would get Don McLam to answer her question. Don McLam explained that the Boating study is done and the Marine siting study will be finished in November. Currently Mary Morris, with the Manatee Protection Committee is here talking with County staff about putting the total plan together. Mr. McLam stated in a newspaper article that the State had set aside $231,000 for thirteen coastal counties and nine other counties to complete their plans. Mr. McLam stated that the County submitted a letter about two weeks ago and the State has excepted that letter and it looks like we will be getting a portion of that to complete our plan. Mr. McLam stated in reference to the new Boat launch the Governor is not providing anymore submerged land leases. Mr. McLam stated that we are building our ramp in the upland area so we are doing a dredge and fill permit so it will not be a submerged land until we open it up to a waterway it will be built in the Upland area. Mr. McLam explained that the Army Corp. of Engineers has stopped us and all other communities from building anything connected to any kind of Manatee water because of the a law generated by Save the Manatee Club. Mr. McLam stated that they are suing the US Fish and Wildlife the Federal Fish and Wildlife and also the Army Corp. of Engineers for failure to protect the Manatee to the level that they agreed to do back in the 1990 when the Plan was put into effect. Mr. McLam explained that it is not necessarily the submerged land that is effecting us it is the law suit by the Manatee Club that is effecting our ability to move forward with a boat ramp. Mr. Bradshaw stated that the County has been in direct contact with D.E.P. and the Army Corp. Mr. McLam stated that we have also talked with Florida Inland Navigation District over the last two or three years, which has committed over $250,000 every year to this project. Mr. McLam stated that the County has a permit for the boat launch area from the Florida Department of Transportation for a driveway and turn lane. The County also has a permit from South Florida Water Management and all the permits are in order with the exception of the Army Corp of Engineers. Mr. McLam stated that as soon as the permit is obtained the County is ready to begin construction work. The planning, design work, and specifications have been completed. The County is ready for the Army Corp of Engineers permit. Mr. McLam stated that construction can begin thirty days after the permit is obtained. Mr. McLam stated that the County has gone to the extent of making the County dollars that were put into this program extended even further. The County applied for a grant through U.S. Fish and Wildlife for exotic removal. The County received $22,600 to remove the exotics along the birm on the southern part of that piece of property. Mr. McLam stated that there's quite a few Australian pine trees and some peppers and that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife is going to match the County 50/50. They will be removed and the property will be re-vegetated with natural vegetation, basically between the retention pond area and high birm that 3 ~ '-' '-" protects that property from the mosquito control area. About 4 ~ acres of Australian pine trees will be removed. The County is mixing and matching as much as we can, hopefully to get it accomplished. Mr. McLam stated that it should be really nice once completed. The four ramps are going to be floating docks. There will also be tie-up areas, bathrooms and sidewalks. The County just needs to get the Army permit to begin. The question was asked where the uplands area is located. Mr. McLam stated that it is located right across from Little Jim's Bridge on state property. The County has a long-term lease with the State of Florida State Parks Systems for fourteen acres. Once you go over Little Jim's Bridge and turn around to the right hand side, it's going to be located in the open field area. The County is going to carve in a cove. The boat will actually go into the cove area and not out into Shorty's sloot. You'll be able to back up, turn around and drive out into Shorty's Sloot. When you put the boat in the water it's not going to be like North or South Causeway Island. It's going to be similar to Morris Creek or Black Pearl where you put your boat into semi-calm water. It will be designed so that it has enough flush to get any debris out and to take it back out into the waterway rather than boxing it up into the boat ramp area. Mr. McLam stated that the County has Taylor Engineering out of Jacksonville, Florida, which is an excellent company, for boat design and redesign. They have been working on the scope of service for the County and have completed everything. 4. Update by Dennis Beach on joint City/County Meeting regarding Port consultants. Dennis Beach explained to the Committee that on August 2nd the City of Fort Pierce Commission and the County Commission met for the purpose to interview potential consultants for a development plan for the Port Property. Mr. Beach stated that they are currently scheduling a meeting to rank the four firms that interviewed. Mr. Beach stated that there is a meeting scheduled for August 28th for the County Commissioners to talk with some of the stake holders of the property Port. Mr. Beach stated that after this meeting he hoped to have a date for a meeting to rank the firms and start negotiations with whomever is ranked number one. Mr. Beach explained that requests for proposals and initial discussion on what the scope of that work might be is outlined in the request for proposals that went out to the engineers and is available to anyone who would like to get it through the City or the County. Chairman Johnson asked which Department she would need to go to for a copy either at the City or the County. Mr. Beach explained that she could obtain a copy at his office at the City of Fort Pierce. Robert Bradshaw stated that the County could provide a copy to the Committee members if they would like a copy. Jeanne Hearn asked if the four put anything in packet form or information. Mr. Beach stated that they had very specific proposals or statements of qualifications which outlined their experience and what they had done previously relating to this subject. Mr. Beach stated that their documents related primarily to who they are, where they are from and what type of experience they have. Richard Carnell asked Mr. Beach if he would prefer to withhold his recommended ranking until after the 28th or is it something he would want to share with us. Mr. Beach stated that he has talked with different Commissioners and has a general idea as to what their rankings would be but stated that this process really needed to be a joint decision between the City and County Commissions. Chairman Johnson asked if recommendations and ideas could be done in house in regards to Port development. Mr. Beach stated no that the expertise just does not exist in this County its just not at the City staff level or the County staff level do we have the type of background or expertise to make this come together. Jeanne Hearn asked if the cost of the study was round $300,000. Mr. Beach stated that the cost of the study would be determined by the scope of services that are negotiated and that scope of services is going to depend on what we want to be accomplished. Kevin Jackson asked if the property needed to be sold before they have an surveyor come in an study about it before that. Mr. Beach stated that it is not a good idea to use the figure $300,000 or $250,000 or any figure because we don't have a figure and if we keep saying that it will go into the media about what this is going to cost. Mr. Jackson stated that what he trying to say is that the property needs to be owned by the City and the County before they send a man in to study that. Mr. Beach stated that you have to determined if it is feasible before you do it. Mr. Beach stated that they have to determine if there is a development plan that can be implementated where it would make sense for the City or the County or anyone else to acquire all of that vacant property. Mr. Beach stated that they do not know at this point and time that it is in the 4 \. \.- ~ best public interest or if it makes financial sense to do and so on and these are the things we need to know before we do it. Roger Orr asked what keeps this from being a rehash of the studies that have been done in the last twenty years. Mr. Beach stated that he hoped that there would actually be an implementation strategy with this and maybe different approach to doing it. Mr. Beach stated there was a Port Master Plan conducted in the late eighties and is a technical and legal requirement of the state of Florida. It is unrelated to any type of implementation strategy and has to do with Concurrency and Development issues. Mr. Beach explained it has everything in the world other than implementation and the reason the Port has not evolved is largely because of the community's inability to set a direction for itself. Mr Beach explained that land ownership is another issue. There has been a number of issues why it hasn't gone full and the work they are proposing to do right now should not be that same process. Chairman Johnson asked if there where any other comments of questions. 5. Shailesh K. Patel, BCI Engineers, to review St. Lucie County FSTED Application for Taylor Creek Project funding; Presentation of Hydrogeological Exploration of the Upland Disposal Site (Seminole Coastal Property), Presentation of Final Report for the Taylor Creek Restoration Project. Mr. Patel introduced himself to the Committee members. Mr. Patel stated that he was asked to join the meeting by Robert Bradshaw and the County to make a presentation on three aspects that they are working for, towards the Taylor Creek Restoration Project. The first one is the sediment characterization study they had been done as a sub-consultant to Williams, Hatfield & Stoner. The second one is the assessment of the direction of the ground water flow at the Seminole site which was one of the sites that the Commissioner had asked to proceed with. The third one is the FSTED Application. Mr. Patel stated that they are trying to go through the Florida Ports Council to secure funds towards the dredging of Taylor Creek. Mr. Patel stated that he would like to start off with the sediment characterization report and will be happy to answer any questions now or later on. Mr. Patel would like to clarify in the report of the restoration project. In the report there are three areas identified. The first reach going from the western limit from the intercoastal waterways navigation channel from 100 ft. wide to 140 ft. wide. This was done previously before BCI Engineers came onboard. BCI Engineers has asked the Army Corp of Engineers to confirm whether this is a federal navigation channel or not. As BCI Engineers shows previously in their 1998 report there is about an average of 6 ft. of sediments that are already in that navigation channel. The second reach goes from the FEC Railroad all the way to the C25 canal structure and then there is a submerged fixed structure in the F1 canal. Reach three goes from the fixed structure at F1 all the way to the North canal where there is another spillway and then about a 1000 ft. back. Originally the scope asked for them to go up to 1000 ft.. Because they could not find access in certain areas they decided to go close to the 25th St. Bridge. Mr. Patel stated that when BCI Engineers got into the process South Florida Water Management District was trying to get additional funding close to $500,000. Taylor Creek Restoration Dredging Project starts on the western side of the Intercoastal Waterways all the way up to the F1 spillway 1000 ft. to the west and C25 1000 ft. to the west of that. BCI Engineers was asked to determine the sediment characterization and the water, chemical, and physical characteristics. The final aspect was the material disposal options. Mr. Patel stated that based on the previous data BCI Engineers had in 1998, they contacted FDEP in Port St. Lucie and spoke to Bruce Cherner about it. BCI Engineers informed Mr. Cherner that they were getting additional data and that this is what they recommend. Mr. Cherner agreed. BCI Engineers collected seven to nine sediment samples and equal quantity of water samples. What you see is the depth of muck where they took composet samples going from surface to the bottom. All samples were located using what is known as a global positioning system so they could go back if they had to and locate the exact location in the water body of where the samples were taken. Mr. Patel stated that the State of Florida has no regulations for sediment upland disposal. Mr. Patel stated that there were concerns previously regarding the land, residential, and industrial clean up goals. He said that they normally don't use those in comparison to sediments but in this case, since the people wanted it, they would give a list of those goals for residential and industrial. After looking at the data they have, Arsenic is about the only one that exceeds those rules. Arsenic for the residential site was elevated. In a previous report Arsenic levels were not detected. Mr. Patel stated that just because Arsenic was not detected 5 '-' previously and was this time does not mean the reports are wrong. Mr. Patel clarified that in certain areas you will find the Arsenic and in some areas you will not. Mr. Patel stated that one of the things they use in testing is the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure. This is used mainly in a landfill to look at the acidic water that leaches out and what are the implications of the leaching. When this testing was done on two of the samples most of the components were below detection limit except for lead. When the lead was detected and it was compared to the limit allowed it is lower. Delores Hogan-Johnson asked at what depth the samples were taken. Mr. Patel stated that these were composet samples taken from reach 1 to S1, depth composet samples 7 ft. to 13 ft.. It is about a composet sample of 6 ft. of muck. Charles Grande asked if the reach 2 S8 site mercury level is well over the limit. Mr. Patel answered by saying yes. Mercury 1.5 is above the limit. When the previous testing was done again they did not see that. This is what FDEP will use to say more sampling is needed or that they feel that this mercury level may not have based on the characteristics of the material any significant impact. This is for FDEP to determine. Charles Grande asked if the level of Mercury is over the limit is that not a signal for BCI Engineers to do more extensive testing to determine if this is an overall pattern. Mr. Patel stated yes and that they always recommend additional testing when they see some hot spots which is at an additional cost. At this level, because of samples and data points that they have taken, they would rather FDEP come back and say they feel that it is a concern and that BCI Engineers need to give FDEP more data points. Jeanne Hearn asked how it could be over the detection limit if there is no limit listed on the other side of the chart where there are blanks and if it's automatically given a clearance if it hasn't been detected. Mr. Patel responded by saying that not all perimeters have limits set. They can not test every element that is available. Detection limit is set by the instrument. '-" Delores Hogan-Johnson asked about the average level taken with the samples. Mr. Patel stated that the samples were taken at different levels up to minus 12 ft. Bill Lesh'e asked if there were seven samples taken and over what distance were the samples taken. Mr. Patel stated that yes there were seven samples and based on the previous 1998 study there were several samples in the navigation channel, several samples in isolated locations, and then muck samples. The intention for this is a restoration project not a navigation benefit. The FAC only has about a 3 ft. clearance. So they want to take out muck. Once you dredge the material and you do not do a good job at it, it is going in the intercoastal waterways. Bill Lesh'e asked how long the project is. Mr. Patel stated that it is about 6,000 ft., a little over a mile. Levels of the samples of water will be taken by the FDEP and they will look at what the implications are and what are the probable effects on those and all other issues. The sediments in the water are acting as a sink. Delores Hogan asked what the S7 reach is. Mr. Patel stated that S7 was above the spillway. S5 is above the C25. Mr. Patel stated that potential sources for this is from the two canals draining into the spillway. When the permitting process happens they will be looking at those issues. John Lesh'e asked if the groves, highways and roads spill off into Taylor Creek. Mr. Patel stated yes and that the north canal brings in a lot of it. When FDEP reviews this they will look in the permit commission for source control, where the material is coming from and what is being done about it. Richard Carnell asked if FDEP has veto control of the project. Mr. Patel stated that it was his understanding that FDEP is the governing agency over all. There are four other agencies that have input as well. Richard Carnell then asked at this point whether or not FDEP has given the green light to this particular project. Mr. Patel stated that FDEP has not reviewed data. Richard Carnell asked when they anticipate FDEP approval or denial. Mr. Patel stated that is contingent upon the permit. FDEP looks at data with the permit in hand. \r Richard Carnell asked if Mr. Patel had stated a number of months ago that the material in the turning basin was consistent with the muck material in Taylor Creek and that the turning basin was characterized as a catch basin for the material for Taylor Creek. Mr. Patel stated that he did not believe that it was consistent, but that he may have said that the Army Corp had indicated that the 6 \.. turning basin has more of the fine fraction. Because of the depth it is probable that once the water goes down with the low system the particles will begin to settle out. Richard Carnell asked if it would be Mr. Patel's opinion that the material in the turning basin is probably originating or a portion of it from Taylor Creek. Mr. Patel answered by saying "perhaps". Richard Carnell asked Mr. Patel if he was aware that the turning basin needs to be supplementally dredged. Mr. Patel stated that he has had conversations with Bill Lesh'e. Mr. Patel's understanding is that the Army Corp didn't finish all the depths that they said they were going to do and there were problems with boats turning around. Richard Carnell asked if the dredging at Taylor Creek would increase the flow of material into the turning basin. Mr. Patel stated hopefully not. It is a restoration project. If it is dredged would it contribute more to the turning basin, Mr. Patel's answer at that point would be no because they are now cleaning up the traps and hopefully the traps will be available for the material. Richard Carnell asked if it wouldn't make sense to do the turning basin at the same time that your doing the Taylor Creek operation to eliminate any increase into the turning basin. Mr. Patel stated that it would all depend on the cost. If the dredge that is there is capable of taking care of the projects other than Taylor Creek then the County may want to consider that. Richard Carnell stated the turning basin would be dredged at no cost to the County because it is a Federal navigation project. So wouldn't it make sense to coordinate the two projects? Mr. Patel stated that it makes sense to coordinate. Richard Carnell asked if the source was not cut off before dredging Taylor Creek would it cause problems for the turning basin. Mr. Patel stated that the material would move into the turning basin if the source was not cut off. Mr. Patel stated that if traps were set up in Taylor Creek so that there would be easy access, in the future, if quick maintenance dredging needed to be done without losing material into the turning basin. Roger Orr asked what does the dredging at Taylor Creek do to the velocity of water it goes through. Mr. Patel stated that in most cases the velocities should increase but it is not always the case. It depends on the integrity of the design of the channel. '-'" Betty Lou Wells asked why there is no S4 on the chart. Mr. Patel stated that there were more sediment samples taken than water and that's why it's missing. Richard Carnell stated that the DEP letter attached to the County's application indicates regardless to the source the hydro-dynamic conditions of the port, ICWW Taylor Creek Inlet and Reefs are largely unknown and must be carefully studied before further action is taken regarding changes to the bottom in this area. Richard Carnell asked what studies have been done to the extend that we have discounted DEP concerns so that we can go forward with this project. Delores Hogan-Johnson stated that she would like to comment on concerns that she has regarding point source, going back to develop, culture, cattle, etc. She stated that the whole point source issue needs to be dealt with. Delores Hogan-Johnson asked ifthe soot was coming from the sand that's coming through. Richard Carnell stated that the source is in part Taylor Creek. The County's concern is that the project was a "cart before the horse" issue. Richard Carnell stated that Mr. Patel is not done designing the project, Don West has indicated that they have not done any additional studies despite DEP's letter, and we our in the process of an FSTED application sitting with the Florida Ports Council that was done on an emergency basis and yet this Taylor Creek project has been out there for four years. Delores Hogan-Johnson stated that one of the things that needs to be emphasized is that Taylor Creek has acted as a trap to stop a lot of that stuff. We dredge it enough so that it can be a trap again. So now they are intentionally setting up areas that it can intentionally be caught. Mr. Patel stated that that was a correct response. No engineering has been done as of yet. Once the muck has been taken out of the deep pockets you now have sinks for suspended matter. If you take your best management practices, take care of some of the sources, will we dredge again in the next forty years. Maybe not. Mr. Patel stated that FDEP has a letter that shows that a lot of the sea grasses, the resources that we've been trying to protect, trying to get the muck out of, they've seen three to eight inches of fine grain according to that letter. Material that has deposited which they did not see in 1998 or 1999, now they see that coupled with the fact that sea grass went from 100 meters wide down to 8 meters in some areas. Richard Carnell stated that he is commenting on why St. Lucie County submitted an emergency application for FSTED funds for this project. This has been a three to four year process and fail to see what the emergency is in 2000. Secondly, as Roger Orr pointed out the velocity of the water is going to increase. Everybody in this Committee knows we've had terrible difficulties in getting maintenance dredging performed and what we see is the velocity in the water increases, and it's going to run downhill with material in the turning basin. We are then going to back two years from now, somebody's going to study it, we aren't going to have an upland site, we can get it dredge, there's a County Commissioner Resolution out there that says that \.- 7 \.... we can't go offshore, it just snowballs. It's unfortunate that somebody is not looking at it as a complete project. One effects the other. Someone should be in touch with the Army Corp so that it can be pulled together. It appears that there is a supplemental dredging of the turning basin that must occur. You want to dredge Taylor Creek. Somebody should figure out what the source is or be fairly satisfied that we can stop the flow of material, or inhibit the flow of material, or reduce the flow of material to the point where it is not creating a problem or you are going to spend taxpayers dollars all over again ten years from now. Mr. Patel stated that Richard Carnell's points are valid but that's more of a political issue here than a technical. Jeanne Hearn stated that John LaCapra came to town one day with money dangling from the Ports Council which is what created that rush to apply for funding. It was approved at a commission meeting at 7:00 p.m. and the application deadline was at midnight that night. Jeanne Hearn stated that she thinks it's a critical situation that we are applying like that without understanding the repercussions of those funds and we just do it. ~ Robert Anderson stated that he wants to know about the research study from the 1998 Taylor Creek report. Mr. Patel stated his presentation is on the study that BCI Engineers did recently. The research study is not here because I am only here to present the year 2000 report. Jeanne Hearn asked if the samples were taken in the same areas. Were they GPS readings also? Mr. Patel stated yes. Mr. Patel stated that the Reach 1 area from the intercoastal to the FEC, previous study was done, identified 90,000 cubic yards in there. Reach 1, the same area, north and south of the defined navigation channel. Reach 2 from the FEC to the C25 spillway, 80,000 cubic yards which was in the previous study. Interestingly enough, in the F1 fix to the F1 spillway, the sediment surface samples were sandy. There was no muck sediments found. When you go behind the Reach 3 F1 spillway 1,000 ft., there was about 5,000 cubic yards, and on the C25 there was 10,000, adding up to about 21 O. We were also surprised that we got the water depths going as deep as about 15 ft. With the big storms, perhaps a lot of the material isn't being trapped but it is being pushed over. We come up to an estimate of 210,000 cubic yards of material that needs to be taken out from this project area. Disposal options are stated based on the technology we have available. It will all depend on the final cost. That is basically what the report contains. The sediment, the water, chemistry, the physical characteristics, the volumes, and the disposal options. There is still a lot of work to do. Based on the letter in the FSTED application, you have 3 to 8 inches of sediments, you have lost a significant amount of sea grasses. The main message is we have done enough sediment characterization, argued enough about every point and element in the water system, if the trend is continued chances are we are going to loose the resources we've been trying to protect. Richard Carnell asked if DEP's position needs to be carefully studied before any action is taken. Jeanne Hearn asked if she could get a copy of the letter from DEP. George Kavanaugh asked if anybody has check the area above the navigation area that has already been dredged to see if any material has settled on the sea grass. Does anybody know what the consistency or the physical attributes of that material was as opposed to what's in that sediment? Mr. Patel asked when the dredging occurred and is not aware of the dredging. Robert Anderson asked if anyone has heard from the Commission meeting for the Harbor Town Marina. Robert Bradshaw said that they have had no contact since. Charles Grande stated that based on the results of the sampling in 1998 and the mercury results that were taken this time wouldn't that mandate any upland disposal site would require lining. Mr. Patel stated that FDEP would have to determine that. He does not know what the mandates are on a liner and really can't comment on that question. Mr. Patel stated that this is the starting point and is trying to get everyone's opinion on what's the right thing to do. You do the feasibility studies by saying how many dollars it's going to cost, you look at what funding sources you have available, can you go after them right, take advantage while you can. The next step would be to do an engineering study of the design, what are we actually going to take out, what are the proposed pipelines, what is the disposal. When you have all that information that is when FDEP will say you have a complete permit application. We know what the permit questions will be and we will be able to answer them. Jeanne Hearn asked where we were with the spoil site. Mr. Patel stated that he would not comment on that until he receives the NOAA report from Terry Nelson. Mr. Patel stated the Army Corp had indicated that they would pull out if the expenses were too high. They will go to a site which is more economical for them. Mr. Patel stated that the total project cost would be $1.4 million. In FSTED it was requested at $700,000. It is indicated that there is matching funds of $750,000. Broken down from South Florida $500,000, Indian River Program $130,000 and the Florida Inland Navigation District $100,000. When added you get the $730,000 plus the $700,000 requested from FSTED to total the $1.4 million. Confirmation has been given that the application was received ~ 8 ~ by Florida Ports Council. They will notify BCI if there are any problems. Mr. Patel said that his understanding is that sometime in September they will meet to make the determination on which projects can begin. Bill Leshe stated that on August 1st there was an agenda request. The funding sources are different from what was applied for. Is there any reason why the funding sources changed from the time this application was filed to when the agenda request was submitted? Don West stated that at the same time the application was filed he was in the process of preparing an invoice for St. John's for work done to date. The grant contract for St. Johns is now closed out. St. John's was only able to credit $115,000 under the grant. Don West stated that is the difference. Mr. Patel stated that all the money that has been spent has been included in the amount. In conclusion to the presentation, Mr. Patel stated that the application is in, BCI Engineers is waiting for the Florida Ports Council to get back to them on their comments, and then they will wrap it up from there. Mr. Patel stated that the St. John's Water Management District has taken charge of the material movement. They anticipate by the end of October to have the disposal site cleared and empty for next years dredging, which should begin December 1. Mobilization of the dredge and pipeline installation will begin November 1. Mr. Patel stated that 80% of the material has been removed. 6. Discuss RFP for Dock Lease Agreement for the North Dock on South Causeway Island. Robert Bradshaw stated that everyone has a proposal in the Committee packet, it's out, and is on the Internet. It's called Demandstar. There have been direct mailings, one gambling ship, the Rachel B. Jackson, Andrew Kablenski, a group out of Stuart that has a 98 ft. trawler that might be interested. Robert Bradshaw stated that he has asked the Board of County Commissioners to bring it back to the Committee for a recommendation report. Robert Bradshaw stated that he expects to have the information before the next meeting. 7. Mary Morris, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission invited to discuss Manatee Issues. '-' Don McLam introduced Mary Morris to the Committee. Mary Morris stated that the Governor said that there would be a tabling of decisions on any new facility that didn't have an approved Manatee protection plan, which was something directed by the 1989 Governor and Cabinet. It wasn't a mandate but each County was given the charge to come up with a Manatee protection plan, as part of that plan, come up with the best place for setting new boat facilities. For a number of reasons, it's been in St. Lucie County sort of a challenge, we haven't always had the resources to do that. In the last couple of years we have gotten some funding to help address that so we are presently contracting work to do boat facility setting and there is a meeting with Jody and Don today on a contract to help write the actual Manatee protection plan document that would go before the County Commission within a year and a half. Mary Morris stated that there will be an announcement by the Governor of press conference on Thursday, where he will be saying what he intended. There has been meetings with DEP which actually issues permits for new boat facilities, the Water Management districts which have some responsibility for that, and the Governor's office on what was intended by increased Manatee protection. Right now the Governor sits as one of the persons on the cabinet, as one of the votes, for approving any leases for any permits that come to them through having to have a state submerged land lease. A majority of permits are coming to the DEP and the Water Management districts. So there are a lot of projects being reviewed at that level. Mary Morris stated that her agency which does the Manatee reviews act as the commenting agency to DEP. They are no longer a part of DEP. The Governor's office is trying to figure out what authority they have and what their position is and whether his statement will reflect what they do as the Governor and Cabinet or whether it pertains to other agencies which have executive directors apart from the Governor or Cabinet and make those level decisions through their executive directors. Mary Morris stated that as of right now business is as usual. ~ 8. Other Business Chairman Johnson introduced Kevin Jackson, new committee member appointed by Commissioner 9 · . Doug Coward to the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Board and ask that he introduced himself and tell the committee a little about him self. Mr. Jackson introduced himself by stating that he is the International Longshoreman Association President dealing with cargo for 30 some years. He explained that he has been working on the docks since he was seventeen years old and Is presently working on the dock in Port Canaveral. He stated that he is here to try to get some ideals together and see if we could work things out and get our port going so that he will not have to travel all the way down to Port Canaveral and also to create jobs and such for this area. Mr. Jackson stated that he is glad to be on the committee and stated that something needs to be done about Fort Pierce with all of the stores moving to other areas and try to bring things back into Fort Pierce. Chairman Johnson stated that she appreciated his comments and thought that it helped the Board to have a cross section of opinions and representations. Chairman Johnson stated that at future Harbor meetings she would like to discuss the concerns of the Longshoreman and of those whom have concerns about the impact of cargo. \- Roger Orr stated that he does not feel like his time is being utilized and would recommend to the County that this Committee be disbanded. Jeanne Hearn stated that the Commissioners do want the FPHAC to be more informed and issues to come before the Committee first. Richard Carnell stated that he recommends the application be withdrawn because it was improperly submitted as an emergency without public contribution. Delores Hogan-Johnson asked if the Committee wanted to issue a recommendation regarding the $700,000 grant. 9. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Roger Orr, seconded by Kevin Jackson, to adjourn, the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 5: 18p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ Sandra L. Hood Recording Secretary C: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice Chairman Kevin Jackson Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Roger Orr David Souza Jeanne Hearn Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Ray Wazny, Public Works Director Don West, County Engineer \.., 10 \." Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee September 26, 2000 Convened: 3:08 p.m. Adjourned: 5:32 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, September 26, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Gail Kavanagh, Vice-Chairman Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce Jeanne Hearn Kevin Jackson Stix Nickson David Souza \...- Members not present: Dan Nelson Others present: Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County John Arena, Earth First Robert Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Charline Burgess, Assistant to County Commissioner Coward Richard Carnell, Indian River Terminal Company Commissioner Doug Coward Jim David, St. Lucie County Mosquito Control District Jim Egan, Marine Resources Council Sandra Hood, Recording Secretary George Kavanagh Gerald Kuklinski, St. Lucie Waterfront Council Bill Leshe', Indian River Terminal Company John Leshe', Ocean Towing Corp. Kaisaimari Lind John McDonald, Sr., Resident Ft. Pierce Roy Orjala Mark Pollio, Ft. Pierce Tribune Marge Thomas, St. Lucie Waterfront Council Betty Lou Wells, Conservation Alliance Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering Heather Young, Asst. County Attorney '-' 1 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee ~ September 26, 2000 Page Two Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Approve Minutes from the August 22,2000 Meeting. It was moved by, Jeanne Hearn, seconded by David Souza, to approve the minutes of the August 22, 2000 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Delores Hogan-Johnson stated that she had a question regarding the dredging on page 7, of the August 22, 2000 meeting minutes, and could the source come from the Heffelbower dredging. Bill Lesh'e stated that he thinks that the source is more closely tied to an operation on the Harbor Point property several months ago. The equipment that was used, was stuck, and created a vast amount of build up in the area. Delores Hogan-Johnson stated that on page 9 that the disposal site needed to be clarifyed as Taylor Creek. 3. Public Comment '-' John Arena stated that we have a specified deepwater coral formation, located in front of Ft. Pierce. He feels this area could be a terrific eco-tourism draw. He has located a tour-submarine that would take passengers out and down to look at the coral banks. Robert P. Anderson stated that questions asked in previous meetings regarding the spur jetty were not answered. He wanted to know what the results were and what the benefits are. Robert Bradshaw stated that the study is in-house and that it is going to be on the agenda for next month's meeting. Don West will be there to provide copies of the report prepared by the Army Corp of Engineers. Robert P. Anderson asked if a bid had been submitted for Taylor Creek or when the dredging will begin. Don West stated that at this point, they still have to design and get permits for the project before they begin to solicit bids. Bill Leshe' stated that he was recently made aware of an action that has been taken by the St. Lucie Waterfront Council against the County. Robert Bradshaw stated that he received a fax regarding an administrative court proceeding on the permitting process the County is going through for one of the berth permits. He said that was all that he knew right now and that he would get Bill Leshe' a copy of the fax. Gerald Kuklinski stated that his personal feelings regarding the Dock Lease Agreement for the North Dock on South Causeway Island are as such. He thinks this should be assigned to the Rachel B. Jackson. He feels this is the opportunity to permanently assign a spot for a tall-ship, instead of a gambling ship, which we already have. '-" Robert P. Anderson asked what was paid by the Rachel B. Jackson last year when it was here. Robert Bradshaw stated that it was less than $250.00 for the entire season. The percentage that came back to the County was $1.00 per paying customer. 2 , Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee September 26, 2000 Page Three '-' 4. Presentation by Jim Egan, Marine Resources/Scientific Survey - Shipping Effects on the Indian River Lagoon. Jim Egan introduced himself to the Committee. He gave a presentation on the scientific study done on the shipping effects of the Indian River Lagoon. Jim Egan stated that the Waterfront Council and the Marine Resources Council, both contributed for an independent researcher, a graduate student at the Florida Institute of Technology, to undertake a scientific survey, under the guidance of Dr. John Windsor of the Florida Institute of Technology. The intent of the survey was not to steer anyone into making an opinion, or a conclusion. It does not contain FIT, the Marine Resources Council, or the Waterfront Council's official position on the subject. Jim Egan stated that the survey is a combined collection of the scientific information that was available over the two years of collection, which consisted of over 200 studies. The short conclusion section was the only creative writing in the document except for summarizing what the scientific data themselves said. The advisor, Dr. John Windsor, was there to ensure that the student was using valid scientific studies, not overlooking any, and at no time was the student given the idea to go one way or the other with the findings. Jim Egan highlighted certain areas throughout the document that he felt were important. The areas included the Invasive Species, Dredging Impacts, Emissions from Vessels, and Economic Viability. All information can be found in the summary of the study packages given to each Committee Member. \... Jim Egan stated that in conclusion, the author expressed his opinion, based on the scientific studies he had been looking at. The author stated, "Because existing deep water ports will continue to attract most of the vessel traffic for economic reasons, there is no economic incentive to expand smaller ports along the Florida East Coast. Impacts related to expanding smaller ports are also inconsistent with the needs of the rising tourist industry and the commercial and recreational fishing industry in Indian River Lagoon. A long-term management strategy more compatible with these uses, would be for smaller ports to capitalize on the natural features of the Indian River Lagoon, and concentrate on natural resource based recreation opportunities like water sports, fishing, boating, and river cruises." Gail Kavanagh asked what constitutes the $400 million a year in revenue on one of the slides and whether or not it was for the Indian River Lagoon or one of the other ports listed. Jim Egan stated that $400 million was in reference to Laguna Madre in Texas. He also explained that an acre of sea grass is vital habitat to over 9,000 fish. Of the 9,000 fish inhabiting that area, the economics associated with recreational and other use of that resource would equate to over $10,000 per acre. The figure keeps rising and has been recently as high as $14,000 per acre. We have about $700 million dollars a year worth of economic benefits that are derived from a healthy lagoon. If we improve the health of the lagoon, we could actually get another $700 million in resources out of it. If we compromise the health of the lagoon, we can easily compromise the current $700 million but also undermine about $2 billion dollars in waterfront real estate. ~ Stix Nickson asked if there had been any case studies of human health hazards related to toxic organisms and if so where are they. Jim Egan stated that in the Chesapeake Bay area, there have been 278 extensive studies done on human health effects. In the report itself, it should talk about the dangers of invasive species coming in. Stix Nickson asked if any of the studies had been done in the Indian River Lagoon, in the Ft. Pierce area. Jim Egan stated that the scientists made the decision that every study applies to the Indian River Lagoon. Stix Nickson stated that the studies seem to project a very gloom scenario and were there any positive studies. Jim Egan stated that the positive benefits of having a port in our area has not been shown to have an impact on the environment. Stix Nickson stated that he would like to get together with Jim Egan to share some issues that he has researched, that present a different opinion and side than what is being presented. 3 Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee September 26, 2000 Page Four '-' Kevin Jackson asked about the conclusion of the study from the graduate student. Jim Egan stated that the conclusion was of the student's own opinion, but it was also the conclusion of the Urban Harbor Institute. ~ Richard Carnell asked if the Indian River Terminal Company is a smaller or a larger port. Jim Egan stated that he could not answer the question, as if there was only one potential answer to the question. Reading the actual study, it talks about each port and talks about the depths of the port and the levels of the activity that goes on. Richard Carnell asked if Jim Egan knew the level activity of the Indian River Terminal Company to the point where he would be able to say whether or not it is a smaller or a larger port. Jim Egan stated that the levels of activity, based on the report, associated with the ports listed, you might read into it that Ft. Pierce would be a smaller port. Richard Carnell asked what the date was of the study. Jim Egan stated that it was released in April 2000. Richard Carnell asked Jim Egan if he was aware of the emission studies on the effect of outboard motors on the lagoon versus cargo ships and the fact that the emissions from outboard motors cause more damage than the current amount of cargo ships that come in and out of the Indian River Lagoon. Jim Egan stated that he was aware, and world-wide there is a large percentage but it is not relevant to our area. Richard Carnell asked if Jim Egan was familiar with the current State and Federal regulations governing ballast water. Jim Egan stated that he was and just recently the regulations had been changed to try to get the vessels to change the ballast water out in the deep water. The difficulty will be enforcing it. Richard Carnell asked if Jim Egan was familiar with the study currently performed by NOM, regarding the analysis of the offshore dredge activity. Jim Egan stated that this report did not cover that, because at the time of this study, NOM's study was still ongoing and wasn't available. Richard Carnell asked if it wouldn't be more prudent in terms of analyzing the effects of any dredging activity to wait for NOM's report. Jim Egan stated that NOM's study, though it may show very good or very bad about Ft. Pierce, should not contradict what is understood about the physics of material being dropped into deep waters. Jim David stated that as long as there is shipping, there is a risk. The sea grass in Indian River is primarily a storm water runoff problem not a port or inland dredging problem at this point. All of the sea grasses were practically destroyed when the inlet was reduced in its capacity, in the mid 1970's. Jim David stated that we have lost 75% in this area and we have recovered a huge amount of that since the reef and inlet have been managed differently. Jim David feels that if you stopped every ship from coming into the port, the organisms would not stop coming into the United States. It is a National port problem that everyone has to deal with and it has to become an important part on how we manage both our coastal fishery's and coastal fleets. Jim Egan stated that it is important to point out that every comment that Jim David made is consistent with the study and isn't contradictory. Jim Egan stated that storm water runoff is believed to be about 80% of the impacts and a large section of the study talks about the storm water impacts. 5. Consider RFP #00-088 to enter into Dock Lease Agreement for the North Dock on South Causeway Island. Robert Bradshaw stated that in the packages, there are two respondents to the RFP's for the North Dock on South Causeway Island. Also included, was a short comparison between the two respondents, the Rachel B. Jackson and the motor vessel entertainer. The Committee indicated in the last meeting that they wanted this issue to come back before them, and after consideration, for the Committee to make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. ~. Jeanne Hearn asked about the installation of the berth and pilings, whether or not there is any cost factor available, and how much improvement in dollar value that entails. Robert Bradshaw stated that in the proposal, it seems that they would absorb the cost, but he does not know what the figures are 4 but will find out. Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee September 26, 2000 Page Five \.... Delores Hogan-Johnson asked if Robert Bradshaw knew when this recommendation was to go before the County Commissioners. Robert Bradshaw stated that it was contingent upon the action taken at this meeting. Jeanne Hearn stated that she has concerns as far as the educational aspect of the area with the new Smithsonian display and the present Historical Museum. She is concerned about people coming into the area intoxicated and while students are visiting the area. Jeanne Hearn stated that she has concern on turning our back on the Rachel B. Jackson. She understands from the Smithsonian that they were very helpful to them in doing research, letting them use the docks, and they also worked at the Historical Museum on rainy days in support. The Rachel B. Jackson is an educational vessel. Jeanne Hearn stated that she would also be concerned about how this is going to be monitored. Stix Nickson stated that the Rachel B. Jackson is a fine vessel, but if we are looking at the overall good of the county and its residents, he sees a big disparity between the two. The integral part of this, is the improvements that are going to take from the revenue. Robert Bradshaw responded by quoting from the CSL proposal, "In considerations of the improvements to be made by SureBet, the County will credit the cost of all pre-approved improvements, which are agreed to and accepted by the County, against all rent due to the County." David Souza stated that the Rachel B. Jackson would be a better fit for the County, money aside, than a gambling ship offshore. He thinks it would be more of an asset in the long run than the other ship. \.... John McDonald stated that the gambling ships are mostly cheating people out of money. He suggests that if the County chooses a gambling boat, a stipulation be set, holding the boat owner liable. Richard Carnell stated that either proposal might be in conflict with the existing Port Master Plan, and that the County may be supporting the views, which is in direct competition with the Indian River Terminal Company. David Souza stated that he thinks the County Commission and their representatives should be responsible for handling this. David Souza feels that they are only asking the Committee for an advisory on which way the County should go with this particular situation. David Souza made a motion to recommend the Rachel B. Jackson to the County Commissioners Office for a dock slip. Delores Hogan-Johnson stated that there is now a motion on the floor that the Committee recommend the Rachel B. Jackson and those being in favor ofthe Rachel B. Jackson being recommended by the Committee, raise your hands. The answer being, four hands in favor, three hands opposed. Delores Hogan-Johnson stated that the recommendation was to go forth with the Rachel B. Jackson. Delores Hogan-Johnson stated that in light of the recommendation going forth, valid comments had been raised, and they are worthy to be looked into by the County Commission. 6. Consider RFQ #5025 Port and Waterfront Development \." Robert Bradshaw stated that Delores Hogan-Johnson has copies of four proposals. There will be a joint City/County Commissioners meeting on September 29, 2000 to discuss and draft the scope of the services. Jeanne Hearn stated that she is very confused on what is being studied. Robert Bradshaw stated that this is at the request of the City and that the Counties agreed to participate to the extent which they are at now. As far as financial mechanism's, or endorsements the County has not reached that level yet. Robert Bradshaw stated that this is at the urging of the City of Ft. Pierce. The issue will be discussed at the meeting on September 29, 2000. Richard Carnell stated that he understands the Department of Community Affairs is coming out with a letter in the next seven days that will specifically define the County's rule, as well as the City's rule. 5 , . Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee September 26, 2000 '-'" Page Six 7. Review Guide to the Sunshine Amendment Heather Young stated that the Sunshine Law, as it pertains to committees and boards, is designed to ensure that the decision making process occurs in the open and that the public has access to that process. She stated that the important thing to remember is that you are prohibited to having discussion, related to a matter, which is foreseeable that the Committee may take action on in the future. If it's something that has already been decided upon, that discussion is permissible, but you are looking at making sure that whatever goes into the decision making process happens in the open. You are not allowed to have discussions between members of the Committee at public forums. 8. Other Business Mary Anne Bryan asked if there is a possibility of closing the boat ramps permanently at the Manatee Amphitheater area that are closed part of the year. Robert Bradshaw stated that he did not know but he would check into it. Mary Anne Bryan stated that at the last meeting there was talk about new boat ramps and asked if the County was pursing it. Robert Bradshaw stated that the County is pursing it. The County is working with the Manatee people, to have them review the permit again, and if they approve the permit, the County will resubmit it back to the Corp and hopefully get it approved. ~ Jeanne Hearn stated that part of the problem about not having facts regarding the Port of Ft. Pierce, is because we do not have a Port Director and we do not collect facts on private enterprises. Jeanne Hearn stated that the community would be very interested to know what the facts are but private enterprise has the right not to tell us the facts. Richard Carnell stated that the Port Director in St. Lucie County is Doug Anderson. Jeanne Hearn stated that in a previous Harbor Advisory meeting, Doug Anderson was asked directly if he was Port Director, and he did not indicate that he was. Two years ago, Doug Anderson was interim Port Direct but she has never been at a meeting where that has been confirmed. Heather Young stated that the Florida Legislature abolished the Port & Airport authority and all duties of the authority were transferred to the Board of County Commissioners. Heather Young stated that there is not someone designated specifically as the Port Director at this time. 9. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, seconded by Jeanne Hearn, to adjourn, the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 5:32p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sandra L. Hood Recording Secretary CC: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice Chairman Kevin Jackson Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney ~ 6 Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Stix Nickson David Souza Jeanne Hearn Ray Wazny, Public Works Director Don West, County Engineer ~ '-' ~ 7 ( ~ Minutes of Meeting Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee October 24, 2000 Convened: 3:12 p.m. Adjourned: 5:03 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, October 24, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 3 of the Administration Annex Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Members Present: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Gail Kavanagh, Vice-Chairman Jeanne Hearn Kevin Jackson Stix Nickson David Souza Members not present: Dan Nelson Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan, City of Fort Pierce '-' Others present: Robert P. Anderson, Resident St. Lucie County John Arena, Earth First Robert Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Commissioner Doug Coward Jim David, St. Lucie County Mosquito Control District Bill Leshe', Indian River Terminal Company John Leshe', Ocean Towing Corp. Marge Thomas, St. Lucie Waterfront Council Betty Lou Wells, Conservation Alliance Don West, St. Lucie County Engineering Heather Young, Asst. County Attorney Douglas Anderson, County Administrator ~ 1 .. .. ~ Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee October 24, 2000 Page Two Agenda 1. Roll Call: Roll Call was taken. 2. Approve Minutes from the September 26,2000 Meeting. It was moved by, Jeanne Hearn, seconded by Stix Nickson, to approve the minutes of the September 26, 2000 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Public Comment Refer to Section 5 in Minutes. 4. View Galveston Bay Conservation & Preservation Association video entitled "Container Ports: Lessons from Long Beach" \w The Committee viewed three videos. One from the Water Front Council on the Galveston Bay Conservation & Preservation Association entitled "Container Ports Lessons from Long Beach". Jeanne Hearn stated that the Board of County Commissioners recommended that the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee members view this video. Stix Nickson asked which Commissioners made this recommendation. Jeanne Hearn stated that she could not recall but that it was brought up at a Commission Meeting. Robert Bradshaw stated that the recommendation was made for the board to view the video and they referred it back to this Committee to look at first. Stix Nickson asked which Commissioners were involved with it. Robert Bradshaw stated that he honestly did not know but that it was the general consensus of the Board to bring it back before the Committee first. The second video viewed was brought in by Committee member Kevin Jackson. The video was promotional regarding Port Canaveral. The Committee also viewed the promotional video for St. Lucie County. After viewing the three videos discussion ensued of differing opinions from the public and Committee members on each film. The views ranged from an environmentalist perspective to support for cargo development at the Port. 5. Other Business ~ Doug Anderson stated that he had items to report on and wanted to report about the erosion happening at the beach and what is being done to try to keep it from getting worse. Mr. Anderson stated that the County had originally received an allocation of funds several years back to buy the property at the port from the McArthur foundation which never 2 ;¡ -{ occurred. Mr. Anderson stated that three years ago he went to the FSTED council and Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee October 24, 2000 Page Three ~ stated that they could have the money back for other port projects. He explained the way FSTED works is if a port has money set aside for a project and they are not ready to go with the project and there are other projects that other ports want to go ahead with then they can reallocate that funding. Mr. Anderson stated that it has taken three years to finally allocate all the funding that we had set aside for the purchase of the property. Mr. Anderson stated that the final funding was reallocated at the last FSTED meeting and he had to give them the final ok to reallocate it to other ports and now that account is zeroed out. Mr. Anderson stated that it was also agreed that if we have projects come on board that the Florida Ports Council would be supportive in allocating funding for future projects. Mr. Anderson stated that he submitted an application to FSTED for Taylor Creek for $700,000.00 which is 50% of the project. Mr. Anderson stated that the project is not scheduled to begin until July 2001. Mr. Anderson stated that FSTED approved that application being forwarded to the various state agencies. Mr. Anderson stated that he received a letter sent to FSTED from Indian River Terminal protesting the County applying for that money. Mr. Anderson stated that Bill Leshe of Indian River Terminal spoke at the FSTED meeting and that the letter from Indian River Terminal was also forwarded with the County's application to the agencies. '-' Mr. Anderson stated that he had received a phone call that we had lost significant beach material on south causeway island. Mr. Anderson stated that the County and City Public Works departments along with the County Public Safety department inspected the South Causeway island and beach. Mr. Anderson stated that in one day we lost up to twenty feet of beach front. Mr. Anderson explained that high tide tonight would be around 6:30p.m. with another high tide around 6:30a.m. and stated that we are expecting higher than normal tides. Mr. Anderson stated that the latest weather forecast received after lunch stated that this is to worsen and that the winds would pick up even more tomorrow and Thursday. Mr. Anderson stated that after taking all of this into consideration, at 11 :30a.m. this morning we declared a local state of emergency and have notified Tallahassee of the state of emergency. Mr. Anderson stated there is concern about losing more beach and has notified the Sheriff's office, Fire District and the Police department. Mr. Anderson stated that all departments will be meeting out at the Beach on site tomorrow morning at 8:00a.m. Mr. Anderson stated that he had planned to get six hundred and fifty truck loads of sand from the City of Fort Pierce, but that after analyzing the sand it did not pass to be beach quality sand and cannot be used. Mr. Anderson stated that since this sand is unacceptable we would have to purchase sand from the two private sand mines in the County and are obtaining prices from them now. Mr. Anderson stated that by declaring this a state of emergency that the State should pick up at least 50 percent of the cost and stated that he has contacted Congressman Foley's office to see if we could get the Federal Government involved. Mr. Anderson stated that they are doing everything that they can and that all County Beaches are closed until further notice because of the strong currents and debris washing up on shore. John Arena asked if the sand that was already there was beach quality sand. Mr. Anderson stated that it is beach quality sand and that the Department of Environmental Protection issued the permits for that sand which is the process needed for the sand that needs to be replaced. Robert Anderson stated that it seems like about every year or two we have to spend this kind of money on the beaches. Doug Anderson stated that the beach renourishment was a long time coming and that this is very unusual weather. Jeanne Hearn stated she is concerned that if we where to get a serious hurricane that the beach renourishment would not hold up and we would be over the hill for sure. Mr. Anderson stated that a hurricane is in and out of here but that this is just constantly battering for at least two weeks now. Mr. Anderson stated that he is convinced that if we hadn't done the renourishment that it would have been a lot worse situation right now. ~ 3 it Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee October 24,2000 Page Four '-" Robert Anderson asked if the FSTED funding on Taylor Creek was set up for July. Doug Anderson stated that their budget would begin July 1 , 2001. Robert Anderson asked if that price included the amount for keeping water in it. Doug Anderson stated that the total project best estimate was 1.4 Million and that it included dewatering. Robert Anderson asked if there would still be a need for the Seminole Site. Doug Anderson stated that if that method worked there would be no need for the Seminole Site for that purpose. Stix Nickson asked Doug Anderson whether or not he was the interim Port Director and asked for his position on that matter. Doug Anderson stated that he was just filing in along with Robert Bradshaw since the County currently has a vacancy for the Port Director and it is his responsibility to fill in when there is a vacancy. Mr. Anderson stated that when there is a Director position vacancy the responsibility falls back on him and Robert Bradshaw the Assistant County Administrator. Stix Nickson asked if someone had a question for the Port Director should it then be directed to Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson stated to direct the question to him or Robert Bradshaw. 6. Adjournment Having no other business to discuss, it was moved by Delores Johnson, seconded by Jeanne Hearn, to adjourn, the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 5:03p.m. '- Respectfully submitted, Missy Stiadle Recording Secretary C: Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee: Delores Hogan-Johnson, Chairman Dan Nelson Gail Kavanagh, Vice Chairman Kevin Jackson Commissioner Mary Ann Bryan Stix Nickson David Souza Jeanne Hearn Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw, Assistant County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Ray Wazny, Public Works Director Don West, County Engineer '-" 4