Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJoint Meeting Minutes 01-22-2007BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA WORKSHOP BOCC AND CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE Date: January 22, 2007 Convened: 10:00 a.m. Adjourned: 11:45 a.m. Commissioners Present: Chairman, Chris Craft, Joseph Smith, Doug Coward, Paula A. Lewis, Chazles Grande PSL Council: Mayor, Pat Christensen, Michelle Berger, Jack Kelly Vice Mayor, Linda Baits, Chris Cooper Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator, Dan McIntyre, County Attorney, Millie Delgado-Feliciano, Deputy Clerk The County Administrator gave an update on the Joint Participation Agreement dated October 26, 2006. Ms. Berger recommended the city and the county work with the applicant with regazd to the mitigation explored by all parties. Mr. Cooper stated he felt the "may" word in the language of the agreement was not needed and he was looking for more definitive language. Mr. Kelly stated the city council has not met as a body to discuss this document. Mayor Christensen recommended scheduling a meeting in neaz future and they would then send their recommended language back to the Board of County Commissioners with comments. This is the first time they have had the opportunity to review this document. Mr. Kelly recommended scheduling the meeting within the next 30 days. Com. Craft requested being notified of when the meeting would be scheduled so that he may attend. Com. Grande recommended the city and the county agree to discuss DRI and lazge scale developments that potentially have an impact on both entities. TDR Mr. Michael Brillhart, Strategy and Special Projects Director gave an overview and the background of the TDR. He discussed the growth in the county and his concern with residential and on residential development where urban services was not scheduled. Mr. Brillhart stated they aze looking to possibly implement the TDR program countywide. Com. Craft stated he would like to have discussions with the city before going further with the program since the county has not hired the consultant as yet. Mr. Brillhart gave an overview of how the Transfer of Development Rights program works. Mr. Kelly questioned if this could be done in the northeastern area. Mr. Cooper, City Manager for Port St. Lucie, advised Mr. Kelly there would be a problem with a TDR program in the city because it would increase the density in the city from what is presently to 5 units to the acre. This would not be an easy concept since the city is 100% platted. Mr. Kelly stated he felt the city already had too much cluster housing. Mr. Cooper stated the city has a higher development level than the county and it would be a difficult concept due to the way Port St. Lucie was structured by the General Development Corporation. Com. Grande stated he was more concerned with the annexation of various projects. Mr. Kelly stated he did not have a problem with reviewing the program. He advised the Board the city has 137,000 platted lots and 44% of thee lots are built out and the city does not need anymore platted lots, however this is of interest to him due to the fact the development in the county area is very close to the city. UTILITIES The County Administrator commented on the concept of the utility agreement with the city of Port St. Lucie. He advised the City the County was interested in buying bulk water from the city for west of Rangeline Road. They would like a 25/30 year service agreement. He advised the City Council members that they rate increases are subject to the same as the Port St. Lucie customers. They would need to come up with connections fees and are looking at a discounted rate for county residents. He requested the surcharge be waived for those outside the area. The County Administrator alluded to a letter they received from the City where FPUA would be unable to provide service to Allied. He stated he would like to work out a service agreement with the City of Port St. Lucie. The City Manager stated he would need to discuss this further with the City Council members and ask them if they are willing to provide services outside the PSL service area. He stated they may be able to have ainter-governmental agreement this is permitted under state statutes. The would be looking fora 50/100 year agreement or a permanent scenario, due to the cost being too high to rebuild a utility. Com. Lewis stated the county would purchase the water and build the facility. Com. Craft stated he does not wish to start duplicating capacity and they needed to find a way to work cooperatively before state mandates something both entities would not agree with. Mr. Cooper questioned what would be the impact to the city staff and it's residents. The City Manager stated it would depend on the interlocal agreement. Allied is not a concern at 250,000 gallons because the line would be across the street. The County Utilities Director stated Allied had two developers willing to build a plant. These developers would build 8,000 units however they have not been approved. Mayor Christensen asked if the developers had contacted the city. The City Manger stated they have had some contact but no confirmation at this point. He stated they can have a single agreement as it applied to Allied. The City Attorney advised the Board of the argument Tropicana presented where they felt they were entitled to a bulk rate. He stated there are other pending litigations with both cities and county and the city's participation has been abated. It was moved by Councilman Kelly, seconded by Councilman Cooper to negotiate a draft agreement with Allied with the county providing the water; The City Attorney advised the Council that it would be up to Allied who they wish to negotiate with. 2 Com. Craft stated he believes it should go through the county to avoid any legal challenges. The County Administrator stated Allied wished to have the water provided by the county. Mr. Kelly stated it was then up to the city to negotiate an agreement with the county. Mr. Cooper stated he was not comfortable with this suggestion. He was not sure which would be the better solution, sell to the county or sell directly to Allied. Ms. Berger state she would like to have the opportunity to speak with staff. Mr. Kelly then made a motion to ask staff to obtain information and bring it back to see if they can have an interlocal agreement Mr. Cooper rescinded his second. Motion died for lack of second. Ms. Berger stated it seemed the utility ahs in the information and the council needs to review it. She felt they needed to hear from staff before moving forward and she would not vote on this issue. Com. Craft suggested having future discussion on the interlocal and also the solid waste issue . Com. Coward addressed the Southbend Conservation Parcel and requested an update. The City Manager advised the County Board they have not had discussions with the property owner. There are 71 acres and they are entitled to develop 140 units however there is significant wetlands and it would be difficult to develop it for non conservation purposes. The City's perspective is that it is a good site for conservation and they are attempting to initiate a meeting with the property owner concerning perimeters. Com. Coward requested the Board be made a part of the meeting. The City Manager advised the Board the City does not have the funds in the conservation trust to purchase the property. Mr. Cooper requested in the future he would appreciate staff reviewing the agenda with the city. Mr. Cooper also requested in the future a discussion be held with regard to the '/4 mil Park referendum. Mr. Kelly requested an update on the Midway Road project and the other county roads that boarder the city, i.e. Walton Road , Lennard Road. The County Administrator advised Mr. Kelly Midway Road to U.S. 1 they are still working with the residents on the design. He stated he would provide an update on Lennard and Walton in the near future. Com. Coward stated they are moving forward at this time and working on a113 projects. Mr. Kelly stated he still has not seen a shovel in the ground. No other comments were made. The meeting was adjourned.