Loading...
04-20-1989 - Special/Workshop '-" "WI CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER SPECIAL MEETING & WORKSHOP APRIL 20, 1989 MINUTES Mayor Mitchum called the Special Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Community Center. He stated the Special Meeting was called to accept financing proposals for the computer lease purchase and to authorize purchase of parts needed for the City's trash incinerator from a sole source manufacturer, followed by a Workshop to discuss the Shangri-La drainage problems and the two properties offered to the City located at 104 North Park Place and 131 East Park Avenue. ROLL CALL Mayor David Mitchum Councilman Dan Hatfield Councilwoman Gigi Bennington Councilman Russell Gold Councilman Thomas Fish City Attorney Jose' Alvarez City Manager William Powers Acting City Clerk Susan Wadsworth Chief Lawrence Schumaker Present Present Present Present Present Excused Present Present Present Mr. Ron Ferland of Dyer, Riddle, Mills & Precourt, Inc. was also present. Financina Dro~osals for comDuter lease Durchase - Mr. Powers read his April 20, 1989, Request for Council Action which recommended the proposals be awarded to Southeast Bank, N.A. of Edgewater, with direction to the City Attorney to draw up a resolution for the April 24th meeting. He read the various interest rates of those responding, pointing out there would be no fiscal impact this year as payments would be due 4/24/90,-91, and -92. Councilman Fish moved that they accept alternative 1 and award the financing to Southeast Bank and have the City Attorney draw up the necessary documents and review the note. Councilwoman Bennington seconded the motion. Mayor Mitchum stated this is for $66,000. Councilman Hatfield asked what they'd do if the City Attorney finds it unsat- isfactory and Mayor Mitchum replied then they wouldn't act on it. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Purchase of Darts needed for City's trash incinerator from sole source manufacturer - Mr. Powers read his April 19, 1989, memo asking for approval to allow repair and parts for the trash incinerator. He stated the approximate cost would be $6,000 and the production schedule would be in about 3 weeks. He added that funding is in the budget that they can reallocate as this was an unforeseen expense. Councilman Gold moved to authorize them to go ahead and order these parts. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Mayor Mitchum requested a motion to adjourn the Special Meeting. Councilman Hatfield so moved. Councilwoman Bennington seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at 7:06 p.m. Mayor Mitchum called the Workshop to order at 7:07 p.m., stating that all members were present. Shanari-La drainaae problem - Mr. Ron Ferland, Dyer, Riddle, Mills & Precourt, Inc., stated he reviewed the subdivision plans and they're sending a letter to the developer indicating where they show deficiencies in regard to the City's stormwater regulations. He said there's nothing in the files of record with their drawings so he can't be sure what is on the plans is on the ground. He pointed out they have construction drawings and they can assume the drawings are what the subdivision was built as, but they aren't sealed and signed by an engineer and doesn't say it's official. '-' ...." Shanari-La drainaae Droblems (Cont'd) Mr. Ferland stated that the original site had a drainage ditch running through the middle about halfway westward and the original plans showed a 36" pipe running through the middle of Shangri-La to take that flow from the adjacent subdivision and discharge it to the north of Shangri-La. He stated that between the original plans and revision #3 set of plans, the 36" culvert was eliminated and the ditch was filled in and the flow was routed to the Shangri- La retention ditch. He explained that pre-development flow is where you have percolation and going to another system and post- development flow under current regulations would say they cannot discharge stormwater off the site at a higher rate than what it would flow at pre-development flow. He said they took all the flow and had it come out at the westward end of the subdivision and they overloaded it by taking everything to that one point of discharge. He added that the 100 year flood plain was encroached in the far western portion of the site where the detention basin is. He pointed out that anytime you fill in the 100 year flood plain, there is a theory of compensating storage, and if you fill in and raise it up, you should compensate by digging a basin or providing a flood plain elsewhere on the site. He stated the flood plains were filled in but no compensating storage was provided for and all water has to be concentrated at one point. Mr. Ferland stated that there appeared to be an attempt to solve the problem through a tri- party agreement between the School Board, the developer, and the City, and it called for the School Board to donate a parcel west of the subdivision for the stormwater facility to be constructed and provide piping and the City would accept it for maintenance. He said there was a clause in the agreement that if the developer took no action within a year, the agreement was null and void, and he doesn't know why no action was taken. Mr. Ferland stated the crux of the problem is water doesn't move uphill and they seem to have a persistent and chronic groundwater problem on the site and adjacent to the site. Mr. Ferland showed on the plans the elevation of the roadways. He stated the center of the cuI de sac adjacent to the basin is at an elevation of 8.9 and the pond berm elevation is at 10., so water will come to 10 feet before it will overflow the berm. He said there's a swale for the pond to discharge but the swale is at an elevation of 9 and there's an 8 or 12" pipe that can take water out of the pond. He said the water level elevation in the pond is about 18" from the top of the pond elevation so it's at about 8- 1/2 or 9 feet and the roadway is at 8.9 feet, so with heavy rainfall they wouldn't move water off the site because the pond elevation never drops because the canal they discharge into is the same elevation at about 9 feet above sea level. He pointed out that when he looks into the drainage culverts, it's 6" to 8" below the grates and they should empty to function properly. Mr. Ferland stated that the cracked and broken asphalt is because the water is coming into the lime rock base of the road and deteriorating it further. He pointed out the low level of traffic has prevented it from being ruined. Mr. Ferland stated that at Council's pleasure, they'll send a follow up letter to the developer specifying exactly the deficiencies in the design system and put it back on him to make the improvements. He said the groundwater table wasn't taken into account sufficiently when they designed the system and they didn't compensate for the flood plain when they did the filling. He explained that they provided for drainage of the offsite parcel because by riparian rights there was an existing drainage ditch he 2 Council Special Meeting & Workshop Minutes April 20, 1989 '-' """'" Shangri-La drainaae problems (Cont'd) filled in so he had to provide for drainage to the adjacent parcel and not to the stormwater basin. He said he hasn't seen the storm- water calculations and doesn't know if that's a valid assumption. Mr. Ferland stated that the adjacent parcel to Shangri-La is under site review and they'll take theirs off the Shangri-La system and it will no longer drain to that system. He said it will not resol ve the recurring problem of flooding every time it rains because if there were a long drought, the water level would not go down enough. Mr. Ferland stated that regarding liability and who is responsible, he can only recommend to Council, based on the review of the records and on legal opinions, that corrective measures should be taken and the program should be incorporated in the ClP program and the cost for corrective action to be equitable to the total purpose of the City to be handled with a special assessment in the Shangri- La Subdivision. Councilwoman Bennington asked if they'd heard from the developer. Mr. Ferland replied that the first letter they sent was that they fel t since it was not accepted by the City, the burden of correcti ve action is on the developer and it would take about $5,000 maximum limit to analyze and provide a corrective solution and the developer said as far as he was concerned, the City accepted it for maintenance and he didn't feel they should partic- ipate in correcting the problems. Mr. Ferland stated that after careful review of the City's ordin- ances regarding stormwater, they wrote regarding the areas they found deficient and that letter didn't deal with technical matters reviewed at this meeting. He added that he'd told them none of the drawings in the City files are signed by a registered engineer and do not meet the ordinance requirements. He said they didn't see a bill of sale that the properties were free and clear of any encumbrances to the benefit of the City. He reviewed how a lien could be put on the property and they need a clear bill of sale. He said the letter identifying the deficiencies was based on the set of plans, the non-compensating flood plain, the lack of high water table and lack of storage in the basin and pre and post development calculations and the acceptance of offsite drainage water in the drainage system. Mayor Mitchum asked if he will follow up with that now and Mr. Ferland replied yes. Mr. Frank Ferguson, Shangri-La Homeowners Association President, displayed plans for Council's review. He stated that they requested and were denied them from City Hall and they went to the Court House and got a document of a dedication of the property to the City and Council accepted the property in 1981. Mayor Mitchum pointed out that was accepting the plan. Mr. Ferguson agreed and said the topo sheet shows the elevations. He reviewed the elevations of the retention pond, the sub plain, the center of the cuI de sac, and the catch basins. Mr. Ferguson stated that the first set of plans called for a 36" line coming out Paradise Lane and out through the low area. He pointed out he has correspondence since 1981 and there was never a response by the City to the deletion of the 36" pipe upon the request of Mr. Coleman's attorney which gave the City enough time to reply. Mr. Ferguson said they should have continued the line like it belongs and it should have catch basins for the eastern part of Shangri-La to take that much load off the line, but they eliminated it with no correspondence. He said there's a letter referencing that Mr. Coleman was to take the 36" line on the south side to his property line and there was a catch basin built on the other side by Ed Hall when he owned the property, and upon completion, Mr. Coleman was going to the property line to hook it up but that was 3 Council Special Meeting & Workshop Minutes April 20, 1989 Shanari-La drainaae problems (Cont'd) never done. He stated that in 1986 Mr. Coleman opened it up and found there was a section of pipe left out and it left a large hole and he bought two pipes and fastened it together and poured concrete on it. He pointed out that's against any construction regulations, there's no opening to clean it out and it shouldn't have been permitted in the first place. Mr. Ferguson stated that in 1986 they had Cory Engineers come in to take elevations. He reviewed the elevations and the condition of clogged pipes. He stated the retention pond was not built to be a lake and in the dry season you should be able to mow it. He said the swale and the 6" pipe were put in by the residents. Mr. Ferguson stated the property where the condo's are built has catch basins with false bottoms with a hole in the center. He pointed out the development was approved by the City for the entire drainage and it won't handle it. He reviewed the situation with the School Board agreement and the attempt by City employees to open up the old canal. Mr. Ferguson read from the 1981 letter from Briley, Wild & Associates, stating it was never answered by the City. He read the 1982 letter from Mr. Mitchell regarding possible retention problems with an answer to the April 16th letter that a visual inspection was done and that the contractor was aware that the potential problem exists to the west of the pond. He said they never did the inspection and never pulled a final inspection on any of it on the drainage system, the roadway, or anything else. Mr. Ferguson read the October 16, 1982, letter regarding tabling of the contract and a letter from Mr. Mitchell stating the retention pond design will allow the flow. He read the March 7, 1983, letter from Briley, Wild & Associates to the Acting City Manager regarding an inspection of the drainage and sewer system with a note that the water table was so low they visually inspected the drainage structures and pipes. He read additional correspondence from 1985 and 1986 from Mrs. Martinez and City Engineer Ferrara. Council- woman Bennington noted that there are contradictions in the City's correspondence and Mr. Ferguson agreed, also with information given to the City Council. Mr. Ferguson pointed out there was a February 23, 1986, letter from Shangri-La Board of Directors urging Council to withhold final inspection until Mr. Coleman met all the required conditions for the acceptance and requested permission to speak when the application was presented to Council, but they were never invited to take action. Councilwoman Bennington asked about the maintenance bond and Mr. Ferguson replied it was returned in 1986 or 1987. He said he asked for a copy of that document and the time that bond was released to him. Councilwoman Bennington asked how they could release the bond for the subdivision if they never formally accepted it. Mr. Ferguson read the December 18, 1986, letter from Cobb & Cole regarding the acceptance of the improvements, the letter from Mrs. Martinez stating the City had no responsibility to accept it, and the January 12th letter from Cobb asking for specific complaints and the City did not respond to him. He read another letter from Cobb to the City Attorney saying the City did not respond to the January 14th letter and transferring the subdivision improvements to the City and the electric bill. He pointed out that the City let his bond go and has given him a permit for another development for another subdivision. Mayor Mitchum pointed out that an attorney writing a letter does not bind the City in any way. Mr. Ferguson stated they've paid impact fees on utilities that should be in a workable condition and he doesn't agree with the engineer or anyone saying it should cost them any money for anything to be corrected in the subdivision because there was too much in these letters that was left out that the City didn't do. He referred to costs for lots in Shangri-La compared to Florida Shores. He said the ClP shouldn't be set up to take care of this 4 Council Special Meeting & Workshop Minutes April 20, 1989 '-' "'WI Shangri-La drainaae oroblems (Cont'd) because the ClP is for the expansion of a municipality for future growth and anything up to that time should come under assessment, and Shangri-La shouldn't be expected to pay for Florida Shores. Mayor Mitchum explained they wouldn't expect Shangri-La to pay for improvements in Florida Shores. Mr. Ferguson pointed out that Mr. Ferland's recommendation was to pay for it. Mayor Mitchum clarified that the recommendation was for their improvements only. Mr. Ferguson stated they'd paid their impact fees and taxes and feel it's up to the City of Edgewater, regardless of what it is, to bring them up to date and get their water conditions straight- ened out and take the roads over for City maintenance. He questioned the liability there and if it would come under the City's self-insurance. He said they were never notified the roads weren't accepted and they could have got insurance to protect themselves. He added that the past Council told them they could have the property back and make a recreation area out of it. He asked what the City plans to do with it after they get the water problem corrected. He asked if they'd rent or lease it to them on a short term lease so they can plan for getting liability for the front and back entrance. He stated they're trying to keep this out of litigation but they have to get an answer. He noted they signed a petition on vacacting the property on the back entrance which would open up on the industrial park, and they were told by the developer that was one street in and one street out and it's a safe community for them. There was discussion about the status of the plans for the bank and the review by the LDRA. Mr. Ferland stated that the bank and two adjacent parcels will be directed to drain onto an on-site retention pond that will hold a 100 year flood and will be constructed by Marion and told to go to the south. He added that the point of entry will be plugged to the Shangri-La system. Councilman Hatfield requested copies of the information and engineers letters. Mr. Ferguson thanked Council for allowing them to meet and go over their problems. He asked they give the fastest action that can be obtained. Mayor Mitchum stated the engineers are working on this and they'll make decisions as soon as possible. Mayor Mitchum called a recess at 8:22 p.m. He called the workshop back to order at 8:28 p.m. Two ~roperties offered to City (located at 104 North Park Place and 131 East Park Avenue) - Mr. Powers stated they had offers of properties at 131 East Park Avenue and 104 North Park Place, one at $43,000 and the other asking $40,000, and they since received an offer of $33,000 for the one property. He noted that this was tabled for a Workshop. He said Council action would be whether they want to consider those two small pieces of property or authorize the Manager to go ahead and respond with whatever they decide. Councilman Fish asked the future benefit of this property and if they're looking to expand this complex or relocating. Mayor Mitchum stated he'd prefer to look at relocating as there's not enough there. Councilman Gold stated land to the South should be looked at and they don't need this. Councilman Fish suggested they thank them for the offer and put it on the next agenda. It was agreed to wait until the regular meeting of May 1. Councilman Fish moved to adjourn. Councilman Gold seconded the motion. Workshop was adjourned at 8:31 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Lura Sue Koser 5 Council Special Meeting & Workshop Minutes April 20,1989 '-' ...., Special Meeting and Workshop Minutes April 20,1989 ATTEST; ~ 11. ~- AC~Y CLERK Approved this I~- day O;f)}t&J~ 'MAYOR A7~~~ /~S 'MAYOR r ':::: 0 fl~' y -t?S OUN Y OUNC OMAN - Z4N 0 ~ /) ,~ Y~C'.1tt'Id,'-/d cOO C~LMAN - ZONE THREE 7~~~~~ /I ?~ COUNCILMAN - ZONE FOUR .f'4/ / ?~ 6 Council Special Meeting & Workshop Minutes April 20, 1989 w ..."", Special Meeting and Workshop Minutes April 20,1989 AJ~/~ ~~ 'MAYOR ~ ~ 0 c- OUN ~ ATTEST; ~ 1.~ AC~Y CLERK Approved this 15- day ~~~~ 'MAYOR OUN OMAN - ZON 0 ') ... c~~ {ONE T~EE ~. .~ A7t~ COUNCILMAN - ZONE FOUR 6 Council Special Meeting & Workshop Minutes April 20, 1989 ,~ ~