11-06-1978 - Regular
[\ t.'
I ~.
\
~
f
t
I
,
I
,
.
\
\
l
r""t
U
)j
@.~ ~I-'
,- o;...~!. f.tp ~.....,
'" ,.,j' 1",1 (, lJ ",c,
/','n .,....~
~. ,J !i 1*"-1/ ,," ~
~} rJ I..
..,,~ ,
-.... ,",.,"
CITY OF EDGEWATER
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
November 6, 1978
Mayor Christy called the Council Meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
in the Edgewater Community Center.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Robert H. Christy
Councilman Louis J. Rotundo
Councilman Carl Shell
Councilman Walter B. Sikes
Councilman Calvin R. Dietz
City Attorney Judson Woods
City Clerk Sue Blackwell
Police Chief Earl Baugh
Present
Present
Present
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Present
INVOCATION
Councilman Sikes gave the invocation.
SALUTE TO FLAG
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There were no minutes to be approved at this time.
BILLS AND ACCOUNTS
The bills were not posted due to the change over to computer
billing. The City Clerk read the bills.
Councilman Sikes made a motion that the Council approve these bills
for payment. Councilman Rotundo seconded the motion. Upon roll call
the motion CARRIED 4-0.
Councilman Sikes asked if Column F on the printout sheet corresponded
with the budget number.
Mrs. Blackwell said that it did.
PRESENTATION BY MAYOR
Mayor Christy announced that eight members of the Police Department
thirteen members of E.V.E.R., one member of the Fire Department and
one member of Civil Defense attended the seminars on the handling
of hazardous material. Certificates have been awarded to these
people.
COMMUNICATIONS
The City Clerk read the report from Charles Murphy, Building Official,
concerning the permits issued during the month of October. Mr.
Murphy also presented his bill to the Council which was approved under
the bills and accounts.
The City Clerk read a notice of a VCOG meeting to be held at the
County Court House Annex on November 8, 1978 at 3:00 P.M.
The City Clerk read a letter from the Fire Department announcing
the results of the elections for operational and executive officers.
.
.
o
o
The following men have been elected:
Operational
Chief
Asst. Chief
Captain
1st. Lt.
2nd. Lt.
Russell Foster
Fred Browning
Jesse ~Jal1s
Dave Severance
Dave Pummer
Executive
President
Vice Pres.
Secretary
Treasurer
Dan Cory
Bob Wolfe
George Negedly
Steve Hardock
Board of Dir.
William Nichols
John Palmer
Gregg Dietz
Councilman Rotundo made a motion that the Council accept these
officers for the 1978-79 year. Councilman Shell seconded the
motion. Upon roll call the motion CARRIED 4-0.
The City Clerk read a memo from the Zoning Board requesting
that the IIsale of operative vehiclesll be added to the list of
permitted uses in the B-3 district. The Board also recommended
issuing temporary licenses to Rickelman's Used Car and Larry
and Bob's Used Car Lots to allow them to begin operating until
the zoning amendment is accomplished.
Mr. Woods said that there was no ordinance allowing the Council
to issue temporary licenses. He also asked for a clarification
on the definition of an lIoperative vehicle.1I
Mr. Mackie, Zoning Board, spoke to the Council and said that
the Zoning Board felt that an operative vehicle was a vehicle
that could be driven off a lot as opposed to junk cars kept
around for parts, etc.
Mr. Woods said that in order to add a permitted use it would be
necessary to hold a public hearing.
Councilman Sikes asked if the City could restrict a permitted
use to operative vehicles.
Mr. Woods said that the City had that power.,
Mr. Gross reminded the Council that there were already a couple
of used car dealers operating in the B-3 zone of Edgewater. He
questioned a possible double standard for issuing licenses.
Mr. Woods said that two wrongs do not make a right and this matter
should be handled according to our ordinances. He added that the
people wishing a license for used car lot could apply to the Board
of Adjustments for a special exception. This would be the proper
course to follow until such a time as the ordinance was amended to
add used cars as a permitted use.
The City Clerk read a letter from Jean R. Brown, 2809 Mango Tree
Drive, Edgewater requesting that the City Council place her name
in nomination for the Volusia County Commission on the Status of
Women.
Councilman Sikes made a motion that the Council make the
recommendation to the County Council that Mrs. Brown's name be
placed in nomination for this position. Councilman Shell seconded
the motion. Upon roll call the motion CARRIED 4-0.
2
o
o
PROCLAMATION
Mayor Christy read a Proclamation proclaiming November 9, 10 and
11 as POppy DAY in the City of Edgewater.
COORDINATORS REPORTS
Councilman Rotundo told the Council that he had met with Fire
Chief Foster and Mr. Hetrick, Assistant County Manager, to discuss
the proposed fire district. Mr. Hetrick seems to believe that
the County Council will go along with a purchase-lease deal which
can be renewable each year. He also feels that the County Council
will try to regulate a 1.75 mil increase for operating costs. The
County will buy all the equipment and be responsible for all the
payments. The City will have nothing to do except sign a contract
with the County for a fire district. Mr. Hetrick will send a draft
of this proposal to the Fire Department for their opinion and
recommendation to the City Council.
Councilman Shell did not have a report.
Councilman Sikes called attention to the fact that the bills
and accounts will be on computer and that once the system is
established it will be easy to keep a check on total bills and
also amounts paid to specific vendors over a period of time.
City Attorney Woods told the Council he had a recommendation on
the subject of the 6' planting strip around Florida Shores and
the request from Mr. Holahan for access to property he has purchased
in the area. He suggested that the City adopt a resolution which
would allow the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the appropriate
quit claim deeds to property owners that request ingress and egress
to their property through this planting strip.
Councilman Sikes said that we only have the 25' dedicated to streets.
Would we quit claim them or just give an easement?
Mr. Woods said we could give them a quit claim deed for right of
way and reserve right of easement for sewer and water lines, etc.
Mr. Ed Hall told the Council that actually there is a 501 right of
way.
Mayor Christy asked the Attorney what would be wrong with leaving
it as part of the City street or a 101 easement of our street.
Mr. Woods said that the 61 strip is a cloud on a title for purposes
of ingress and egress to the property.
Councilman Sikes said if we prepare a quit claim deed for each owner
it would be very expensive.
Mr. Woods said that the City could require each owner to pay the
costs.
Councilman Sikes made a motion that the 61 strip around Florida
Shores be dedicated fori road and street purposes and that the
Attorney be authorized to prepare the proper resolution. Councilman
Rotundo seconded the motion.
Mr. Armstrong told the Council that he did not believe the strip
went around the entire area of Florida Shores. Some of the property
backs up to the County line. It might be necessary to take this
street by street.
Councilman Sikes said he would amend the resolution to include
that portion where it is adjacent to existing street.
3
o
o
Mr. Holahan asked the Council if they could consider the property
at 16th and Mango now and then if it is needed they can take care
of the rest of the request later. At the present time, there are
__ no request from other areas in Florida Shores. In the interest
of saving time he requested that the Council deal with just this
specific area.
Councilman Sikes again brought up the subject of the expense.
Mr. Woods said that property owners could be asked to pay expenses
for survey and deed. The simplest solution for these people is
just to pass a resolution on this area.
Councilman Sikes withdrew his motion. Councilman Rotundo withdrew
his second.
Councilman Sikes made a motion that the Council authorize the
City Attorney to prepare the necessary documents needed for a
right-of-way on 16th and Mango. Councilman Rotundo seconded the
motion.
Mr. Woods then brought up the request by Mr. Fuller that the
City give back certain properties that were deeded to the City.
Mr: Woods suggested that the City should go ahead and make a
decision to either keep this property or vacate it.
Mayor Christy asked the City Clerk to check if the City owns
this property.
Mr. Woods then brought up the warrenty deed from Mr. Love and Olive M.
Jess to dedicate Mockingbird Lane. Mr. Armstrong owns a 2~'
strip North of that property which he is willing to dedicate to
the City.
Mr. Armstrong said that according to the records he had checked out,
Mr. and Mrs. Duran took title to Lot 17 Alvarez Grant and then
recently sold the N 150' of lot 17 to the Missionary Alliance Church.
Mockingbird Lane is now separated by 150' plus what Mr. Armstrong
owns. Mr. Love does not own it and never did own it.
Mr. Woods said that the deed he was given shows Westerly 60' of
the Northerly 150' of Lot 17.
Mr. Armstrong said that if they could show him where the Church
deeded that to Mr. Love, he will dedicate his piece of property
to the City.
Mr. Woods said that it was his understanding that Mr. Love had
conveyed that property to the Church.
Councilman Shell said he had been told this was all straightened out.
Mr. Woods said that it was not all straightened out. We have to
determine who owns the small strip on the map that was presented to
the Council. He requested that the Council table this until he
has had a chance to check this out.
Mrs. Blackwell reported on the bills for the Water Plant. The
total is $13,129.23. This will be the first money we have to borrow
on this construction.
Councilman Sikes asked if we approve this will it then go to Farmer's
Home for their rejection or approval to pay.
Mrs, Blackwell said that it would.
4
o
o
Councilman Sikes made a motion that the Council authorize payment
of these bills. Councilman Rotundo seconded the motion. Upon
roll call the motion CARRIED 4-0.
Mayor Christy asked Mr. Kuyk, Director of Public Works, to
make a report to the Council on the sewer plant.
In summary, Mr. Kuyk reported that because of the engineer's
(Briley, Wild & Associates) report on the sewage treatment plant
facility and the immediate need for same, the City Council voted
against the water plant expansion. Due to an apparent inaccurate
flow meter the City was advised that they must proceed with a
new treatment facility or be faced with a mandatory building
moratorium. Mr. Kuyk concluded by saying that it appears that the
taxpayers of Edgewater have been denied the much needed water plant
because of one flow meter that was evidently not checked for
accuracy. He suggested that the matter be referred to the City
Attorney, Mr. Woods, for appropriate action.
(A copy of Mr. Kuyk's report is attached to the minutes of this
meeting.)
Mayor Christy asked that a copy of this report be given to each
member of the City Council. He then asked Mr. Wild if he wished
to speak to the Council on behalf of Briley, Wild & Associates.
Mr. Wild said that he took exception to Mr. Kuyk's remarks and
there were certainly some points that he would like to clarify.
(A transcription ,from the tapes, of Mr. Wild's report to the
Council is attached to the minutes of this meeting.)
Councilman Sikes said we should give Mr. Wild a copy of Mr. Kuyk's
report so that he could respond to it by letter. He then made a
motion that we defer any action on this until Mr. Wild has
answered Mr. Kuyk's report. Councilman Rotundo seconded the motion.
Upon roll call the motion CARRIED 4-0.
Mayor Christy read a letter from the Public Relations Director
for Mr. Bob Graham expressing regret that Mr. Graham was not able
to attend the gauge installation ceremonies in Edgewater.
Mayor Christy said he also had a letter from the Director of
Civil Defense but he would like to postpone that until next week.
Mayor Christy told the Council that Florida Statute Section 403
requires that the County Council shall administer and be responsible
for the disposal of all solid waste and resource recovery for the
entire County unless an interlocal agreement is effectuated on
or before December 1, 1978. He said that he will bring this to
the attention of the Volusia Council of Governments at the meeting
on November 8.
There was a 10 minute recess. The meeting was called back to order
at 9:20 P.M.
RESOLUTIONS
Mr. Woods reguested that the Resolution accepting dedication of
Love and Jess property be tabled until the property question could
be resolved.
5
Q
o
ORDINANCES
The City Attorney read Ordinance No. 78-0-3. (First Reading)
AN ORDINANCE ASSIGNING THE R-2A ZONING CLASSIFICATION TO CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY FRANK AND MARY HALL, HIS WIFE, WHICH HAS
PREVIOUSLY BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA:
REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Councilman Sikes made a motion that the Council adopt this Ordinance.
Councilman Shell seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion
CARRIED 4-0.
OLD BUSINESS
Mayor Christy asked the City Attorney what the present status was
concerning the agreement to buy a truck for the W/WW Dept. from
Spence Chevrolet.
Mr. Woods said that he had talked to Mr. Spence. Mr. Spence said
that Mr. Dietz had authorized the purchase of the 1979 vehicle.
Mr. Kuyk is presently checking into prices of 1979 vehicles to see
if we are paying too much. The City can reject the bid from Spence
but it will take a considerable length of time to get another
vehicle.
Mayor Christy said that the Spencel bid was accepted in good faith
by the Council and he thinks they ought to be held to the original
price.
Mr. Woods said that if we filed suit against them, it could prove
more costly than accepting the higher price for the 1979 vehicle.
Councilman Sikes said that he felt we should reject the bid we
accepted last May.
There was further discussion about the cost of vehicles and the
need in the department for extra transportation.
Councilman Sikes made a motion to table this until next week.
Councilman Rotundo seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion
CARRIED 4-0.
Mrs. Blackwell said that the PBA was requesting that a date be
set for negotiations. They had suggested either the 14th or 15th
of November.
The Council will wait until the new Council members are seated before
setting a date for these negotiations.
The buffer strip in Florida Shores had been discussed earlier in
the meeting.
Grantsmanship Seminar, Mrs. Blackwell reminded the Council about
the seminar on November 28, 1978. Mayor Christy, Mr. Diamond,
Mr. Asting and possibly Mr. Ladhoff will attend this meeting.
Mrs. Blackwell requested that the Council move to continue the
Prudential Insurance until the Council can decide what they wish
to do about the insurance problem.
Councilman Shell made a motion that the Council approve the continuation
of the Prudential Insurance program until the Council can decide
about insurance. Councilman Sikes seconded the motion. Upon roll
call the motion CARRIED 4-0.
NEW BUSINESS
The Council was asked to grant a Home Occupational license for the
Still Air Conditioning business at 1524 S. Riverside Drive.
There was some objection from a neighborhood about the cars parked
in front of the house.
6
o
o
Mayor Christy said that this had nothing to do with the business.
These were family owned cars and if there was a problem it should
be taken up with the Police Department.
Councilman Rotundo made a motion that
Occupational License to the Still Air
Councilman Sikes seconded the motion.
CARRIED 4-0.
the Council grant a Home
Conditioning business.
Upon roll call the motion
The Council was asked to grant a Home Occupational license to
R. Phillips 320 S. Riverside Drive for a jewelry and rug business.
There was a discussion among the Council about storage for this
type of business particularly the rugs.
Councilman Sikes made a motion that, based on the information
in the application, the Council reject this application. Councilman
Shell seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion CARRIED 4-0.
Mrs. Blackwell read the census report from the University of
Florida. According to this report the present population of
Edgewater is 4,956.
There was a discussion about the fact that this is not a true
representation of the population.
The Council instructed Mrs. Blackwell to notify the University of
Florida that the City Council does not agree with their estimate.
Councilman Shell made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Councilman
Sikes seconded the motion.
MINUTES TAKEN BY:
Sue Blackwell
Nancy Blazi
~--
U
ATTEST:
~~~
(S0y Clerk
-../
~~.~
Counci man
fiLe
10.
-----
Mayor
7
Q
Q
. .
Transcription from Tape 2-A
Council Meeting November 6, 1978.
Mr. Wild: (Briley, Wild and Associates)
Frankly, I am not too sure how much to say if the recommendation
is going to be to take this matter up with the City Attorney.
We may be prejudicing our position later by making too many statements
now. There is a couple of points though that I would like to clarify.
We did receive this letter of October 30, 1978 indicating and I
quote II We met with you September 20 and discussed subject study.
-- Since that time I have received no further information from your,
offices in regard to the accuracy of this report. At the time of
this meeting we advised you that the subject would not be mentioned
to others until you had ample time to study and re-evaluate the
report. I feel that you have had sufficient time to give us an
answer and feel that it is my duty as Director of Public Works to
inform the Council of our suspicions. If I hear nothing further
from you, I will advise the City Council the night of November 6,
1978. signed Don Kuyk, unquote.
He is very right, we did meet on September 20th. Since that time
we have held four conversations at least with Councilman Dietz.
We have kept him informed of the various progress and the information
we found. It was Councilman Dietz, it was told to us many years ago,
who would be our contact. I didn't realize that I had to keep Mr.
Kuyk informed of all aspects of this because we were working with
Councilman Dietz who was the person that we were told to discuss
this with.
We did request some informatio~ that being a power study, which we
were constantly looking into. When they talked to us on Sept. 20,
those discrepancies of 1974 weren't mentioned, the only thing that
was mentioned was the 1/1 analysis questioning how it was done and
the different methods to arrive at the equal analysis.
At that time, also a little bit later in a conversation with Mr.
Dietz, we requested that we have information available as to the
power requirements of the pump station. Councilman Dietz said that
we could have it, we have not yet gotten it. In a conversation with
Don this morning Don mentioned he had done the tesf, we nave
not seen it, it has not been available to us prior to today. We
got the advice that we are not going to make any statement
on it.
Let's review the history of the treatment plant, just a little bit.
On November 22, 1968, we have a letter signed by the Mayor of
the City c of Edgewater. Mayor Carnie. -------to a letter received
by him sent October 25, 1968 from Ralph Baker, Florida State Board
of Health. In that letter, the Florida State Board of Health says
the Fla. State Board of Health has reviewed your operating reports
for the fiscal year 1967 and find that you have not conformed to
current State regulations pertaining to the operation of sew~n~
treatment plants in the State of Florida. It goes on to say you
will note that the new State requirements dictate that a minimum of
90% organic and inorganic removal be obtained. However this figure
is a minimum and in some instances, depending on the discharge of
the affluent a higher degree of treatment may be required, including
nuclear removal. Florida extension for an ---;t-----"---------- assistant
or approval by this agency will be continued upon receipt of the above
requested information. This agency will be happy to consult with either
you or your consulting engineers in this regard.1I
The letter sent back was dated November 22, 1968. IIDear Sir: This will
~~~~~~~~dg~p;~~~~6~sOf yO~~_~=~~=~_~~_~=~~~er 25, 196~_~=~~~~~~~_ the '\
by the City sewage treatment plant to develop a 90% organic
matter removal ---------- In this respect please be advised that the
City recognizes its responsibility and pledges to be on the line with
----------- treatment by required date January 1, 1973.11 It further
goes on to say they are not prepared at this time to furnish a schedule
II
April 30, 1975 there was a letter written to Mayor signed by Rick
Fernandez, the subject was the Water and Sewer Plant Construction for
Edgewater, Florida. It says, in part II construction of these facilities
was authorized by Resolution No. 512 dated t.1arch 18, 1974.11 That was
o
o
~
prior to either of the reports that were mentioned. II It should be
stressed at the outset that budget considerations were foremost during
the design phase. The F.H.A. $700,000 loan was considered in the selec-
tion of a mode of treatment and equipment selection alternatives.
The design reflects a value engineered product.1I The letter goes on
to say II The Florida Department of Pollution Control determined that
the Indian River North was effluent quality limited. They determined
that the Edgewater sewage treatment plant discharge should be at
least 75% nitrified when flow reached one million gallons per day.1I
There was a State effluent limitation in effect at that time which
said that you must remove nitrogen from your treatment.
On October 27, 1975, there was an Edgewater Council Meeting which
Mr. Fernandez attended. He gave the alternatives of doing nothing,
reminding the Council of the various regulatory agency requirements,
dated October of 74, ----------- or the alternative of receiving
the service from New Smyrna Beach, which were two alternatives
initially developed.
November 11, 1975 a letter from the County of Volusia, Florida,
signed by ------------ Environmental Controls. IIHonorable Mayor
Armstrong: This is to urge you and the Edgewater City Council to
take whatever steps are necessary to proceed with the proposed
extension of the subject treatment plant from :~.420 million gals/day
to 1.0 million gals per day as soon as possible. I~e make the
recommendation for two reasons, No.1 - a conventional tricklin~ filter
system such as Edgewater's is by design not equal or capable of-the
required 90% removal of B,O,D. and suspended solids. I must
add here that by State law it is a -------(fine?) not to meet that
removal treatment -------sometimes filters can ---------but by law
the definition of --------- 90% removal ----------------because the
trickling filters were incapable of meeting that ---------. Even
though --------operating reports indicated a consistent --~---removal of
87 to 90%, the suspended solid removals have often been reported as
70% or less. Correspondence on this goes back to 1968 ----------------
Surprisingly, --------average daily flow still has to-----design
--------- has - ---- significantly increased ---- more than three
years. Nevertheless we have ------------ ~? code to necessitate
-------- capacity in the near future. II Then he went on to remind
-~----- operator's ---- certification requirements and it ends with
II we cannot ------------
the importance of implementation -------------------.
December 2, 1975, from Thomas Hunnicutt Department of Environmental
Regulations. He reviews the history 90ing back to 1971 ---------
operation permit and concluded that there was notice a~d order..issued
based on the inability to provide secondary treatment levels prescribed
Florida Administrative Code 17-3 (-Nov. r 1972) on the construction
application case ,closed. It goes on to discuss other things in 74 and 75
and ends up saying that no application for permits to operate:!'! the
existing facility have been received although your plant is operating
without a valid permit &.construction was completed a year ago. Monthly
operating reports and your sewer and water reoort indicate no reserve
capacity exists i~ your plant p~esently~ : These are City report~ not BWA. These
are the reports that are made by the City to the State, later to the
Federal Government. Reports that we received as information and
____________ II This information provides the basis for an-application
to~ operate t~e existing f~cility. However! little or no expansion
capacity is included in this option. If the City's Plans require
expansion during the next three or four years, steps must be taken to
somehow provide that treatment capacity. This may be done by
exploring the options open to you with your consultant. In the meantime
permit DC 64-2251 will be held in abeyance until the City updates
its status. Such status should also reflect meetin~ wasteload
allocations (including 75% Nitrogen removal) or tie:in to the New
Smyrna Beach regional facility at the very latest by July 1, 1979.11
April 13, 1976 letter from DER, St. Johns River District to Mayor
Carnie. IIDear Sir: On December 2, 1975 this Office notified you of
the need to apply for an operating permit for your recently upgraded
existing wastewater treatment facility. II It !loes on to say, II a review
of operation data submitted to this Office, and comparisons made with
2
o
o
data submitted to this Office, and comparisons made with data submitted
to fulfill requirements of your NPDES permit FL0021431, reveals
contradictory operational data filed for each permit." They then
go on to discuss the requirements of the Florida Administrative Code.
the letter continues "Reported flow figures on average daily basis,
have not varied markedly in several days. The data in the table
also indicates sizeable discrepancies between the reporting to the
State and to EPA. Our December 2, 1975 letter required a recalibration
of your flowmeter. We have not received word that this has been
accomplished. The figures representing 8005 and total suspended solids
(averages for the month) are different by as much as approximately 300%
between the two reports for influent concentration. A look at the
concentrations of total suspended solids also reveals as much as
approximately a 400% discrepancy between what is reported to the two
agencies on what is discharged to the Indian River. A close examination
will also reveal other discrepancies between the two reports." They
go on to say that information submitted for an 0 & M inspection
reported to the DER is ----------discrepancies.
May 7, 1976 from Mr. Fernandez to the DER. "Dear Sir: The City of
Edqewater in reference ---------- we would like to address your ----
as-follows: No.1, the City in response to your notification had
their flow meter recalibrated during December, 1975. The reported
results are correct. That flowmeter was recalibrated in 1975, December,
and the flows for November and December prior to the recalibration
and the flows for January after recalibration showed no significant
difference. In other words, the flowmeter as of December, 1975,
calibrated by a factory representative of that meter, indicated to
the City that the flow was. accurately being recorded at 400,000 gals
per day.
A lot of this information was compiled as a result of the meeting
on the 20th because frankly, I want to find out myself if there is
anything wrong. ----------- We looked at the chronology of all these
letters ---------- III analysis. We looked at the way it was done
in the office. We got ample samplings -------. We again requested
information --- on the power bills to see if that would lead us in
any particular direction, III analysis -----. We were also trying to
look at some other things, what is the -- relation today on flow
strengths and it doesn't seem to jibe with other things. --------
We looked at the water treatment plant which is only -----100,000 gals
per day and I asked the question why is it ----a couple of hundred
thousand gallons a day but taking in 400,000 gals per day in the
sewage treatment plant. We don't have as many people connected to
the sewer plant as we do the water plant. One obvious answer is
infiltration inflow. One very rapid demonstration, not of the ouantity
of the III but of the fact that you get the ----- is in this graph that
is in this III analysis report that was given to the City and dated
November 77. -------- shows the sewer flow from October 75 this
top curve-------- and down here you can see these vertical lines
represent----. Now the---- represents the amount of rainfall and --
this graph represents the -----. Then you can see here that there was
not too much rainfall in Jan. Feb., Mar., and Apr., then we have some
rain here in May, June, and July and your plant flow goes from what
I consider to be .35 (350,000 gals per day) it jumps up to well over
100,000 gals per day, as a result of rain. It drops when it gets dry
here --- and when you have some more rain and the ground is saturated
-------- and then you get some peaks that go up to 700,000 gals per day.
Over a period you get ---------due directly to the rainfall. Now this
doesn't give any indication necessarily, Quantitatively, how much but
you can certainly --- the response between rainfall and what goes into
the sewer system. That is what this report was intended to show. I
think there was recommendations in there and reference to the potential
inflow where perhaps --- were taken off ---- and other areas that were
subject to flooding, it is quite common --- for the people who have
-------- water in back yards ------ standing water. It is my understanding
that there was ----------,
100,000, -- gals per day -- is not an unrealistic number, as a matter of
fact some of the reports suggested ----- as high as 150,000 per day.
Using 100 gals per ---- that would come out to be about 330,000 --
that you can expect at the treatment plant. It is significantly greater
than the 200 -------- Now, the real need for a plant expansion
3
L
o
o
was not only capacity but also the need for equal ------______
------- to remove the nitrogen to meet present wastewater
allocations placed upon you by the State -------- -----
Halifax River
Daytona Beach, Ormond Beach and the Holly Hill treatment plants
all still have the nitrogen requirements because of their distance
away from the --------- New Smyrna Beach, to the best of my
knowledge has the nitrogen requirements. I can see that Edgewater
will continue to have the nitrogen removal requirements since
----------- We requested as a result of the 201 Study that
the State -------our wastewater allocation in an attempt to make
the treatment process less expensive and to minimize the type of
treatment that you will have to give in the future. __________
---------- but we still are going to have to remove nitrogen
and your trickling filter plant will not remove the nitrogen.
The plant that you have presently in operation will remove it.
We are considering --------------- in order to do that you have
to have --------- --------design ahead 20 years. It is not like
it used to be. ---------
At that time in order to maximize the amount of ---____
We at that time attempted to expand the treatment plants in smaller
units -- for frequent expansions -----in the event that we were
going to have to pay more for it -----because the cost of construction
was increasing. But it would mean that you would have the smaller
requirements for ---------. expansion every 5 years you would
have a few more people to share the plant expansions.
EPA says you will design the treatment plant for the next 20 years.
In the next 20 years you will need a plant slightly larger -______
Your plant is not oversized ---------- EPA requirements that you
presently have.
We went out today and we looked at the -----flowmeter. We tried
measuring the flow of the and we measured what the flow was
compared to the flow tables of the Weir and we came out with about
100,000-150,000 units per minute. The treatment plant record meter
at that time was reading 300,000 ----------.
The entire presentation was on the basis that the year that you got
the ------------ which is a similar mechanism to the meter we
had, it is less complicated and less accurate, is correct. Why one is
correct and the other incorrect, I don't know. We do know that we
had --------two readings. We got 400,000 on the V notch, we got
200,000 on the needle.--------- Which ones are right and
which ones are wrong? We had the old meter recalibrated in
December 1975, no changes, the flow was fine. Perhaps infiltration
maybe we are down 200,000 gals. because of infiltration. It maybe
something else. We really don't know. --------- where the discrepancy
was. We certainly don't and never have recommend people construct
treatment plants that they don't need and frankly we resent the ------
As a matter of fact we kept you out of trouble, many times, by trying
to ------------ system -----so that we could get DER to agree to
provide a standard trickling filter --that by law would be capable
of ------. We thought that by spending a few dollars --- to convert
the standard trickling filter plant to somethin~ else, we could --
prove to this regulatory agency that this was not a ---------
and as a result of that they could not ------- that you now have
by law that it will not be 90% -----
I think if you look at what we have done since 1952. We have done a
lot to straighten it around, we have done a lot to try and minimize
expense, frankly we've suffered and so has the City. The City has
had to do, make do, with things ---------------------
The removal facilities were not in the original expansion because it
cost too much. We certainly have not gold plated the treatment plant
we have tried to make use of everything single thing that is in that
treatment plant. We have kept the trickling filter available because
4
o
o
in the next phase when the State finally tells you that you have
to, by a certain date, remove the nitrogen, we intended to put
the trickling filter back into the flow ------- so that you could
get the nitrogen removal ------ through the trickling filter and
into the aeration.
I guess to summarize, I really shouldn't have taken up so much of
your time, is that historically or chronologically the decision
to construct your treatment plant was not based on this -------
report and frankly it wasn't even based on the 1974 sewer report.
That report was written for Farmer's Home Administration as a
requirement of that grant. The plant had already been decided
upon before that report. The figures on the sewage flow were
from your meter and your personnel. It should a steady increase
from 1969. --------That meter was recalbrated by the manufacturer
in 1975 ---------. In 1972 ---------report ----said that based on
growth we were going to have to expand to ---------
In 1968, Edgewater was advised to ------- with qBality -----
by State -------- to achieve 90% of the -----removal for the
contingent ----------------.
In November 1975, ----------urged Edgewater to expand ------
Our construction was completed in 1977.
"I
The III report was dated December 1976 which was well after
construction was --------
Mr. Wild said he would answer questions.
Mayor Christy asked if the plant was operating properly and to
capacity now.
Mr. Wild said that it was not operating to capacity
It is operating something less than
52%.
Mayor Christy asked if the new part was operating properly.
Mr. Wild said that it was his understanding that there are some
items like the center column. The contractors are fixing this.
We still have not accepted the plant and we have not recommended
that the City accept it there are still items that have to be
corrected by the contractor before we accept it.
There was some more discussion before the motion was made to
allow Mr. Wild an opportunity to respond directly to Mr. Kuyk's
report. Mr. Wild will send his answer to the Council before the
next Council meeting,
Note:
The preceding transcript from Tape 2-A and B contains many b~ank
spaces due to inaudibility of the tapes. Except where Mr. .Wlld
reads directly from a letter and I could copy the letter, lt was
extremely difficult and sometimes impossible to transcribe what
Mr. Wild said, verbatim.
N~~'
'I
1
5
//
REPORT TO: The Mayor, City Council and City Attorney
FROM:
Don Kuyk, Director of Public works~ 1<,
Sewage Treatment Facility
SUBJECT:
In October 1974, Briley-Wild submitted to the City a
preliminary Engineering report on the sewage treatment
facility.
This report in part states - I quote I~The plant expansion
proposed in this report will supply capacity sufficient for
the connection of existing residents presently utilizing
septic tanks and for future growth in the city. The need
is emphasized when one compares the pollution co~trol
facilities rated capacity, .42 MGD, with its 1973 average
annual flow, .40 MGD. The Florida Department of Pollution
Control will not permit any line extension or new. subdivision
connections that will generate flows greater than the
remaining capacity of .02 MGD. Thus, orderly growth cannot
take place until construction is in progress".
Due to this Engineering Report the City Council
proceeded to construct a new one million gallon per day
treatment facility.
During the construction state (approx. June, July or
August, 1976) Briley-Wild conducted an infiltration inflow
study that indicated the city system was treating an average
of 252,680 gallons of sewerage daily and an average of
206,680 gallons of 1/1. This meant that the existing
plant was treating.a combined total of 459,360 gallons
per day in a plant designed for 420,000 gallons per day.
r
o
-2-
o
These III figures confirmed their '74 engineering report
that the city needed a new facility. Further, these III
figures should represent the actual plant flow, as each
pumping station was monitored and flows recorded.
The new facility incorporated a Fisher Porter flow
recorder that went into operation April 13, 1977. The
first day's flow was 209,000 gallons and the months average
was 262,006. It is noted on the first report that the
flow indicator is believed to be inaccurate. However, the
manufactures of the meter checked it's accuracy and it was
correct. The plant operators also checked the accuracy
using the V notch weir. It was determined that the flow
was correct.
You will note that figures used by Briley-Wild in
'74 to determine that a new facility was needed were
400,000 gallons average per day. It is now apparent that
these figures were obtained by a faulty flow meter. For
example, the flow registered at the plant in June of 1966
was 155,000 gallons. There were 1,036 connections at that
time or an average of 150 gallons per connection. The last
reading on the old flow meter was in September 1976. It
showed an average flow for the month of 434,000 gallons.
At that time there were 1,389 connections or an average
of 312 gallons per day per connection. Comparing the
September 1976 figures with the June 1966 figures gives
the following breakdown: An increase in flow of 279,000
gallons per day or 180%. An increase in connections of
.353 or only 34%. This increase in flow with only 353 new
Q
o
~
-3-
connections would indicate that: There was an incredible
amount of inflow or infiltration (almost 195 gallons per
minute per day). The flow indicator was not accurate.-
At present, using an accurate flow recorder and checking
the V notch weir, we recorded an average flow of 234,000
gallons per day in October and we had 1,507 connections
to the city system. Comparing these figures with the
June 1966 flows it indicates a 46% increase in connections
and a 51% increase in flow. There is a difference of
5% which can be contributed to either 1/1, increased usage,
or induced flows. The kilowatt hours of electricity
consumed by each lift station, also have remained- fairly
constant.
After a thorough study of this situation I have arrived
at the following conclusions:
There was no need for the construction of a one MGD
sanitary sewage treatment plant. There is no need for this
plant in the foreseeable future. At present we would be
using only 56% of the c~pacity of the old plant. I have
met with the Dept. of Environmental Regulation officials
and presented them with plans for a reconfiguration of the
plant, which will essentially revert it back to its original
design. They have consented to this change. The savings
to the city in power bills alone will amount to approximately
$14,000 per year because the aeration blowers will be turned
off. I have further advised the DER that we will be able
to meet their standards and also those required under our
6
-4-
o
federal NPDES permit (Non-pollutant Discharge Elimination
Systems). We are presently in the process of making the
necessary piping changes and will be able to proceed in
.the .very near future.
Councilman Calvin Dietz, City Attorney Judson Woods,
and myself met with Mr. Harry wild PE, Mr. William Cross
PE, Mr. Michael White PE and Mr. Thomas Strang all of Briley-
Wild Associates on September 20, 1978. We presented them
with the facts of the 1974 engineering study, the 1977
1/1 studies, and the di~crepancy in present flows. They
did not at that time have an explanation and we therefore
afforded them time to re-evaluate their work and report
back to us. We have heard nothing furt~er on the" subject.
I advised them by letter dated October 30, 1978 that I would
present my suspicions to the council tonight, November 6,
1978. It is my suggestion, since no explanation was given
the city, that the matter be referred to our attorney, Mr.
Judson Woods, for appropriate action.
The implications of-this repcirt are "mind boggling".
Due to an apparent inaccurate flow meter our consultants
,
advised the City Council that they must proceed with a
new treatment facility or be faced with a mandatory building
moratorium. Further, the consultants, backed up the
accuracy of this meter by publishing their 1/1 analysis,
which was part of the south coastal 201 facilities plan.
Using the words of a Briley-Wild engineer, "It appears
that the 1/1 study was done backwards from the flow meter".
If done properly the 1/1 study should have represented
~
r
u
-5-
o
the actual plant flow of about 250,000 gallons per day.
The question of course is: Are the I/I figures a complete
falsification?, were they falsified so that Briley-Wild
did not have to report back to the City Council that the
new plant under construction was not needed?
At the same time the wastewater expansion was proposed
to the city, a new water plant was also proposed. Because
of the engineers report on the sewage treatment plant facility
and the immediate need for same, the City Council voted
against the water plant expansion.
It now appears that the taxpayers of Edgewater have
been denied the much needed water plant because" o~ one
flow meter that was evidently not checked for accuracy.
0'
.
.
Notes on Flow
Q
Present Flow compared with 1966
Month Flow Connections Per Connections
Oct. '78 234,000 1,507 155
June '66 155,000 1,036 150
Increase 79,000 471 5
% Increase 51% 46% neg.
Last Recording on old meter compared with '66
Month
Sept. ' 76
June. '66
Increase
% Increase
Flow
434;lJrrO
155,000
279,000
180%
Connections
1,389
1,036
353
34%
Per Connections
312
150
162
108%
B-W Inflow/Infiltration Study
Average Daily Flow
Average Daily Inflow/Infiltration
Average Daily Sewage
% Inflow/Infiltration
% Sewage
.
459,360
206,680
252,680
46%
54%
Actual Flows '78 compared to capacity of old plant
Month Flow % of capacity of old plant
January '78 221,000 53%
February '78 Plant Down
March '78 291,000 69%
April '78. 230,000 55% il
May '78 221,000 53%
June '78 214,000 51%
July '78 219,000 52%
August '78 196,000 47%
September '78 223,000 53%
October 234,000 56%
Average % of Capacity 54.33%
Last Six Months of Flow byOld Meter
April '76
May '76
June '76
July '76
August '76
September '76
Average Daily Flow
329,000
343,800
464,000
397,000
530,000
434,000
416,300
""~
;..;
r ,;)
.
.
~ "
()
-2-
Q
Six Months of oldest flow records available
June '66
July '66
August '66
September '66
October '66
November '66
Average Daily Flow on
. ,
155,000
148,000
144,700
170,000
170,000
167,000
reasonably new meter - 159,000
"
-
- ~ ....
~ -
#,..
....
,.. ~
..t ~)
ftlovember 6, 1978 Cour~l Meeting
.. ~
Coordinators Reports:
.....
~
~
.
.i
Mrs. Blackwell, City Clerk: I have bills on Phase I and Phase II of
the Water Plant totaling $92,801.06 and I have bills from Briley,
Wild and Associates total $13,261.35 less $132.12 per Mr. Kuyk's
recommendation which would leave us owing them $13,129.23 that are
due on the construction of the Water Plant and this will be the first
money that we have borrowed on this construction. I would like for
the Council to approve that, please.
Mayor Christy: What is the Council's pleasure?
Councilman Sikes: Now we approve this and then it goes, based on
our recommendation, it, goes to Farmer's Home for their approval?
Mrs. Blackwell: Yes.
Councilman Sikes: Then they reject it or advise us to pay it. This
is for the $92,000.00.
Mrs. Blackwell: $92,000. yes.
That is to the contractor and
you can do it together or separate and the $13, 129.23 to Briley, Wild.
Councilman Sikes: Mr. Kuyk is recommending that we pay these bills.
.
Mrs. Blackwell: Yes, he has gone over each one of them and he did
.-
delete $132.12.
Councilman Sikes: I make a motion that we authorize the payment of
these bi 11 s.
Mayor Christy:
I have a motion by Mr. Sikes, do I have a second to that ~
motion'?
l
Councilman Rotundo:
I second the motion.
'~
.
Mayor Christy: Any questions on the motion?
Councilman Sikes: These go to Farmer's Home?
Mrs. Blackwell: That is correct.
No further questions.
1
Roll Call
motion CARRIED 4-0.
Councilmen Rotundo, Shell, Sikes &
Mayor Christy.
l
I
I