Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda & Minutes 04-12-2007 FORT PIERCE HARBOR ADVISORY ~i /7 COMMITTEE MEETING ~r:r ¿ I April 12th 2007 At 3:00 P.M. In Conference Room 3 on the 3rd Floor of the Administration Building 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of the minutes of the March 8th meeting 3. Old Business: Commissioner Chris Craft and Don West will be attending to discuss certain issues that came up during the March 8th meeting. 4. New Business 5. Public Comment 6. Adjournment Douglas Anderson, County Administrator FORT PIERCE HARBOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting April12,2007 ---------- Convened at 3:03 p.m. Adjourned at 4:15 p.m. This meeting of the Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee (FPHAC) was held Thursday, . April 12, 2007 at 3:03 p.m. in Conference Room 3 on the 3rd floor of the Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. 1. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken. Members Present: Mary Chapman, Chairperson Howard Conklin, Vice Chairman Jeanne Hearn Gerald Kuklinski Pieter Stryker (Arrived at 3: 1 0 pm) Commissioner Eddie Becht Councilman Christopher S. Cooper David Souza Bill Thiess Members Absent: None Also Present: Don West, SLC Public Works Director Heather Young, SLC Assistant County Attorney Charles Grande, SLC Commissioner (District 4) Chris Craft, SLC Commissioner (Chairman, District 5) Ray Wazny, SLC Assistant County Administrator John Parry, Indian River Terminal Ed Lounds Dr. Bobbi Conti Delores Johnson 2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: After a motion and a second, the minutes from the March 8th meeting were unanimously approved. 3. OLD BUSINESS: There were questions at the last meeting about the cost involved with the spoil site at Taylor Creek. Don West, SLC Public Works Director, stated the first phase of Taylor Creek dredging has been completed. There is a second phase of muck dredging at Taylor Creek that the County is currently proposing to do. Don stated the County made a decision month's ago to dismantle the site on Mr. Bell's property. The County will ultimately have to search for another site for the second phase of dredging. Don said there was a question regarding how much n:oney it cost ~o build the spoil site on the Bell property and how much it ,=.,~! fl\\Ç~~:' . dismantle the site. 1.~.·.i C'··......·... .~..._--'-..~I \ ~.., '\: t 1 .. ..~ n:J! .. "j, t_ 0 ~,_2D¡j7 J CO. ADMIN. OFFICE Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 12, 2007 Page 2 The initial construction cost for the use of the Bell property for Phase One Dredging were: 1. Clearing & Grubbing 2. Construction Surveying & Layout 3. Spoil Site Construction 4. Engineering Design & Permitting Subtotal: $93,000 10,000 192,000 19.000 $314,000 Dismantling Spoil Site Total Cost: 159,460 12,400 16,600 $188,460 $503,450 1. Construction Cost 2. Engineering Design 3. Construction Management Subtotal: Don said the reason the Bell property was chosen for the spoil site was because it would save the County a lot of money. Mr. Bell had soil on his property that was perfect material for building a spoil site. Mr. Bell allowed the County to use the soil, which saved the County several hundred thousand dollars. Don stated the other question asked was regarding the use of a permanent spoil site. He said as of 1999 the County has tried to come up with a permanent spoil site. A site study was done and 13 different sites around the County were looked at as a permanent site. The County had grants for the construction but not to buy the land. Don said in 2000 the County located a site they call the Seminole property located right along the north line of St. Lucie Village. The property was looked at as a possible permanent site. At that time the City of Fort Pierce had just passed an ordinance that restricted the use of spoil sites in the City limits. Don said the ordinance was "still on the books" in the City of Fort Pierce. St. Lucie Village also objected to having a permanent spoil site next to their village limits. Don state "Even though it would be desirable to have a permanent spoil site, the question is where do you put it?" Commissioner Eddie Becht asked Don if there was any discussion about using the F.I.N.D. site that is located near Harbor Branch. Don said there was, but the problem with the site was the distance. He stated there is a F.I.N.D. site at the south county line and the north county line. Either site could be used but it is such a long distance that it becomes economically infeasible to go that far. Commissioner Becht said, "I don't understand that, if you are talking about trying to find and buy land that you are going to have a permanent cost attached to owning the land and using a facility that the F.I.N.D. is going to engineer, set up and put the dredged material on a barge and float it up the river near Harbor Branch." Don stated, "It is really not practical for Taylor Creek to consider putting it on a barge and barging it up the intercoastal." He said when the County looked at the idea of how they would dredge Taylor Creek, what it came down to was pumping. The dredging experts said what they would have to do would be to set up a pumping situation where they would pump it from the dredge in Taylor Creek to a remote location. It would require booster pumps along the way because it cannot be pumped that far. Commissioner Becht stated, "If F.I.N.D., who is in charge of Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 12, 2007 Page 3 --"""^ maintaining the intercoastal, has set up permanent sites, one of which is in the north county and the other in the south county, that meets their needs for dredging the intercostals, your equidistance between them. They made a determination that those two sites are sufficient for dredging what they need to dredge with the transportation costs between those two sites. Why can't the County do what they are doing?" Don said he believed it is a matter of magnitude and cost. If F.I.N.D. goes out there and dredges the intercoastal waterway, they would be doing a project much larger in scope than what the County is doing. It would probably be a 10 million dollar project for them to dredge the intercoastal from one county line to the other. Don also said Taylor Creek Phase One Dredging was a two million dollar project. To set up that kind of dredging facility and re-pump stations would take the price way up there. It would not be cost feasible for a small project. Pieter Stryker mentioned the County purchased quite a bit of real estate on the east of the airport that would seem to be fairly close. Don said the County looked at the airport as a potential site. The site may be reconsidered for phase two. The airport site was not as practical as Mr. Bell's property. Don stated the port site became the site of choice for a number of reasons such as environmental reasons, cost reasons and practical reasons. From an environmental stand point, when the County started talking to permitting agencies such as D.E.P., South Florida Water Management District, and Army Corp. of Engineers, their preference was to place the spoil site on property that had previously been impacted, either developed or dredged. Don said there is really no better place to put dredged material than on soil that is already dredged itself. The various permitting agencies came out and helped evaluate the sites the County looked at and said in their opinion placing the material at the port would make the most sense. Don stated the other sites had vegetation issues; some cases had protected habitat, protected species, a number of environmental issues and cost factors. Don mentioned if you pump saltwater inland and go one-mile inland, you are mixing saltwater where you have a freshwater groundwater table. The bottom of the spoil site would have to be lined so the saltwater doesn't intermingle with the groundwater. Then the saltwater has to be returned back to where it came from. One pipe would have to run from the dredge to the spoil site and one pipe to return the saltwater back to Taylor Creek. John Parry asked Commissioner Becht if he thought the City would make an exception to have a permanent spoil site in Fort Pierce that would not have to be torn down and built back up. Commissioner Becht responded with, "This sole commissioner would not be in favor of burning anything within pumping distance of the waterfront. I am not interested in creating a permanent site. I really have an open mind that if somebody could give me a guarantee that the site would be temporary, that I am not going to have contamination on the temporary site and that the material will be relocated at a reasonable date then I think we have solutions that might even include Harbour Pointe. I can't define what a reasonable guarantee is. I could probably define what a reasonable time period is. I don't want to burn City of Fort Pierce property close to the waterfront for a permanent site and I think that was the policy behind the ordinance. Mr. Root was hired to do Economic Development for the City as a whole. He got commandeered for a pet project, which was to open up the Taylor Creek area for a Marine Industrial Park. I've had my meetings with him and I've said this is a beautiful idea that I have no hope of it ever happening because of dealing with the Federal Government, State Government, F.E.C., S.F.W.M.D., so please as quickly as you can ascertain that this dream Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 12, 2007 Page 4 cannot happen so that we can get your efforts focused on something that can happen." John Parry commented that he spoke with Mr. Root the week prior and he said the F.E.C. was surprisingly congenial. Commissioner Becht said F.E.C. has not and will not sign anything. Commissioner Becht said they have had several meetings with F.E.C. where they are always congenial up until it's time to sign the document. "F.E.C. will not sign the document." Commissioner Becht also stated, "To premise the use of Fort Pierce waterfront, of Fort Pierce property in proximity to waterfront, a permanent spoil site based on the premise that we may at some point in time obtain the approval of S.F.W.M.D., Corp. of Engineers, D.O.T. and F.E.C. to do this. Don Root is on an agenda that is assigned to him by one or two other commissioners, so he is not going to give you the pessimistic story that I will give you." Chairman Mary Chapman asked Commissioner Becht what he would suggest. Commissioner Becht replied, "I don't freely comprehend all of the issues surrounding this. There are other people in the room that have been researching this issue longer than I have. That is why I have said that if I could be given appropriate guarantees that the spoil material from Taylor Creek would not contaminate even Harbour Pointe and an appropriate guarantee that it's not going to stay there long term, then I would be willing to entertain as a city commissioner it being stored there temporarily with appropriate guarantees. What are those guarantees? I don't know. I don't know what the cost is to dredge the materials and put it up on the F.I.N.D. sites. I heard you say its cost prohibited, I don't know if that's $10,000 or $10,000,000 cost prohibited." Commissioner Craft stated he came into office at the end of Phase One and asked what area of Taylor Creek was Phase Two. Don said it runs from the railroad bridge to the spillway, on the east side of the spillway. Also it is not really a navigational type channel but there is about six to seven feet of muck in that area that has to be removed. It is about 100,000 cubic yards and 94,000 cubic yards were removed during phase one. Commissioner Becht asked what type of heavy metals or contaminants were found in the muck. Don replied that the muck was tested and there were higher levels of arsenic and copper. They were not high enough to exceed state allowable standards based on what the scientists have said. The biggest problem with the muck was that it was very high in fines. Fines are real small particles that are so small it is like the size of clay. It is not an organic material, which can decompose and can be desirable. This material was less than 10% organic but it had very high content of fines. What that meant was that it couldn't be dried up. The only way to dry would be to spread the muck out about 12" deep in a layer on the sand and let the sun bake it for two to three days so it would be dry enough to be placed in a dump truck and hauled off. Commissioner Becht asked if there was any science to point to the contaminants being higher or lower as you get closer to the spillway. Don said there are samples that have been taken, they vary a little but all and all its not a lot different from what was found in Phase One. Commissioner Grande stated he spoke with Mayor Benton earlier in the week and that he appeared to be very anxious to not use Harbour Pointe. Mayor Benton suggested that he would do an investigation up in the area behind Publix for a temporary site. Commissioner Grande also stated he seems to remember prior to Phase One, that area was looked at very closely and one of the reasons it was not chosen was because it was shorter to go from the Phase One area over to the Destin Beach property than going up the creek. Commissioner Grande hopes Mayor Benton puts a site on the table fairly quickly. Commissioner Becht said Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 12, 2007 Page 5 whether it is there or behind Publix or Harbour Pointe he still wants the guarantees that it will not contaminate the site and that it would be relocated within a reasonable amoùnt of time. Pieter Stryker asked if once Phase Two was complete, would the County have to redo Phase One. Don said the County plans to touch up Phase One when they do Phase Two. The reason being, the permit limited the County to the navigational channel when phase one was done. Commissioner Becht asked Don how much space was needed. Don estimated about 15 acres. Jeanne Hearn asked if the modern technology of separating these things and having almost no spoil site to work on and its cleaned up once the projects done had ever been thought of. She said other communities were using this technology and it would solve the County's long- term problem. Ms. Hearn stated she was confused with the earlier figures; she had been hearing $2,000,000 for the Bell site. Don said it was possible Ms. Hearn was thinking of the overall cost for phase one, which was $2.4 million and that included everything. Ms. Hearn said she was looking at a memo from Doug Anderson to the Board of County Commissioners stating that staff was recommending the temporary spoil site on Mr. Bell's property at the Port of Fort Pierce be relocated to the western side of Harbour Pointe. The estimated cost to construct a new temporary spoil site is $1.4 million. Ms. Hearn asked why it was so expensive on the Harbour Pointe side versus the Bell property it's all pumped in. Don said there is nothing wrong with the figures. Ms. Hearn asked why there is a cost to use Harbour Pointe when the County owns Harbour Pointe. Ms. Hearn also asked about the "bill the County is now facing with Mr. Bell for the free site, how much is that?" Don said he did not know. Ms. Hearn asked why the figures were unknown when there are two letters from Mr. Bell's attorney. Don stated it was an unresolved issue. Mr. Wazny stated the County is refusing to pay. Ms. Hearn said she hates being told it is a free site when the County is being asked to pay. She also feels as though, "the information should be made public, rather than reading in the newspaper that Mr. Bell was so wonderful to offer a free site". Don stated the County's reason for choosing the Bell property was because of the savings. The cost to bring in fill is huge; there was perfect fill material on the Bell property. Vice Chairman Howard Conklin asked "Bottom line where do we stand today in terms of site selections and moving ahead. Is there a decision made already or is it still pending." Don said no decisions have been made. The County is starting all over; they will be going back to the study that was done in 1999. The County does plan to do Phase Three this year. Phase three does not require a spoil site. Phase Three is shoreline restoration; if it does not get done this year, the County looses the grant money. Chairman Mary Chapman asked Don several questions. Could he give the committee an idea of the cost of simply getting the spoil site out of the port area? If the County wanted to move the spoil site inland to an appropriate site, what is the County looking at cost wise to be able to preserve the land so that it can be developed and get guarantees. Is there going to be a cost benefit analysis of what it would cost to get the spoil site inland to a totally different place. Don responded by saying "I think that is what we are talking about going through over the next many months is looking at that on an individual site by site basis because the cost will vary with each site. Don stated the new technologies do very well with small quantities like 10,000 yards or 20,000 yards. The problem they have had with Taylor Creek was the County was limited by permit to a manatee window of six months. That means you can only dredge for six months out of the year, then you have to stop. It would mean mobilizing for six months and Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 12, 2007 Page 6 "'''~,~'''----'' dredging what they could, demobilizing and coming back the following year and doing the same. This is why such a large site is needed so it could all be dredged at one time. Chairman Mary Chapman stated the day there is a hotel on that property; it would be bringing in tax revenue that is credible compared to what it is now. Could that help with getting the spoil site moved inland? Don said the money that is in the bank now to do the project is based on the budget and grant. If the County has to but a piece of land that's not budgeted right now, they would need to find the money. If the County uses new technology and double the cost, the County would have to come up with that money as well. Ms. Hearn questioned what value the Port Master Plan had in County planning. She stated that reading 3.3.5, it very clearly states "not 'should' get a site but 'will' get a site by January 2006 for a permanent spoil site". Ms. Hearn cannot understand why the County has a Port Master Plan if its not adhered to or even people working on it. About two weeks ago on the news in West Palm Beach there was a condominium that was built and ready to be occupied when they found arsenic and nobody was able to move in. We don't want that to happen on Harbour Pointe. Ms. Hearn also said Harbour Pointe was bought with a bond issue, a very specific bond issue. She believes the County owes it to the taxpayers to keep Harbour Pointe pure. Commissioner Craft asked Don how often the site would need to be dredged once everything was complete. Don doesn't expect the County will dredge it again for about 30 years, except maybe the navigational channel. Commissioner Craft asked how often the navigational channel would have to be dredged. Don said about every ten years. Don also said in the future you would see less muck accumulation. Taylor Creek hasn't been dredged in 37 years. Commissioner Craft said "The problem I am having from where I sit being 1/5 of the body charged with managing the taxpayers' money is investing in a temporary site. I would like for the County to find something permanent. Spend the money one time, not have to worry about it in the future, not have to sit around a table having this discussion in 20 or 30 years. As a Board, we need to collectively direct staff to find a permanent site. I don't know where it will be or how much it will cost, but I can only assume it will be cheaper now than it will be in 20 or 30 years. I have had extensive conversations with members of the public, with other members within the City Commission, its time we start moving forward with what we want to do, with the intent of what Harbour Pointe was, so to use that as a site right now for me its hard to swallow. I'm not concerned with the contaminants there; I think that can be contained. What I am concerned with is I think the time is now. If we want to steer what is going to happen in the port area then the local governments need to take a stand and do what needs to be done, both the County and the City on each side of Destin Beach. If we want to have quality development in there, then its time we step up and start pressing the issue." Ms. Hearn felt as though the 30-year time frame was a stretch. She would like to see the County and the City partner on a permanent spoil site. Ms. Hearn states there are many projects that could use a spoil site from time to time and the site could possibly be rented out. Vice Chairman Howard Conklin stated "Let's say we get into the project in 2008 - 2009 and you mentioned the six month period. Six months working, six months waiting. That ties up the Harbour Pointe property for four or five years. I think if the momentum is going forward to develop Harbour Pointe, we don't want to have a spoil zone interfering with that process." Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 12, 2007 Page 7 Pieter Stryker said the airport properties, as best as he understood, they were purchased at the suggestion of a dramatic expansion to the airport. He said something tells him "St. Lucie Village may not like a dramatic expansion of the airport and I don't think that the airlines being proposed have any interest in doing it either." Pieter also said if the County needs $10 million dollars to get this job done, why doesn't the County sell back to the public $10 million dollars worth of airport property. Don confirmed the airport was looked at as a potential site. Ms. Hearn asked Don if the County had looked at Sheraton Plaza's approximated 100 acres. Don was not sure. Pieter asked Don if the County could keep them somewhat going forward, advised about what is going on in that area maybe as far as the F.A.A. Ms. Hearn suggested making a motion. Vice Chairman Howard Conklin made the motion, "This Committee recommends to the County Commission that Harbour Pointe not be used as a temporary spoil site for Phase Two of the Taylor Creek Dredging." Ms. Hearn seconded. The motion was unanimously approved. Discussion of a second motion was discussed. The motion involved searching for a permanent site and possibly a joint venture with the City, but not limited to the County. Commissioner Becht stated he would say "no to the second motion unless it is stated in terms of being in the unincorporated area of the County for the reasons already said." Ms. Hearn stated, "Well would you like for us to say that the City shouldn't use it. The City is prohibited from using it for any city projects." Commissioner Becht said the City would simply pay to use it when needed, just like the dump. Ms. Hearn said "Maybe we don't want your business then." Commissioner Becht replied, "Maybe you do." Vice Chairman Howard Conklin made the second motion stating, "The committee recommends to the County Commission that they seek out a permanent spoil site as soon as practical, consistent with the Port Master Plan." Ms. Hearn seconded. The motion was unanimously approved. Ms. Hearn discussed a video regarding Long Beach California and stacking containers. The project got away from the people that were objecting to the port expansion at Long Beach. The video shows how it engulfed two cities. John Parry stated that Mr. Morale, the Attorney for King Marathon, said they weren't willing to negotiate on any level any restrictions on their stacking. Commissioner Grande said he was not sure if it's consistent. He said this group was told by port management that they would never under any circumstances look to stack more than three containers. Commissioner Becht said, ''That was their position at the workshop where Commissioner Coke said 'well if that's your position, then you certainly should be willing to consider a cap on it'. At which time Ken Shield sat down, and then Mr. Morale said 'no, my client will not agree to a cap'. They came to the workshop, did a nice presentation on how they never stack higher than three and Christine or somebody pressed him saying, 'well if that's all you need, then we can pass an ordinance capping it at three'. That's when the Attorney said 'my client will never agree to anything'. There have been emails suggesting compromise but every time they have had to take an official position, the Attorney steps up and says 'the official position is that we will not agree to any caps." Commissioner Grande stated "so then you put the ordinance on the floor at two." Commissioner Becht stated, "My recollection is that the ordinance drafted was Fort Pierce Harbor Advisory Committee April 12, 2007 Page 8 abomination, horribly done. It affected a lot more than it was suppose to. It did not grab what it was suppose to. The heart of the Destin Beach property is zoned a zoning classification that was not covered by the ordinance as drafted. I have not seen the new issue of it." Bill Theiss asked Commissioner Becht how high the containers were currently being stacked. Commissioner Becht stated he has never seen the containers any higher than four and said he is not out there every day. Ms. Hearn urged all of the Board members and members of the public to stay tuned very closely to the City's problems and the County's problems in dealing with the Destin Beach port expansion and stacking. There are a lot of issues on the table right now at this moment. Chairman Mary Chapman requested the viewing of the Long Beach California video be place on the May 10, 2007 agenda. 4. ADJOURNMENT: At 3:53 pm the meeting was officially adjourned. The next meeting will be held Thursday, May 10, 2007 at 3:00 pm in Conference Room 3, on the third floor of the Administration Building. Respectfully submitted: Stephanie Bush