Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 8A_2/10/2000 • .F 7E. t `.r rAit Gt^ *, , VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA e; t DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT' i. 1' a Post Office Box 3273 •• 357 Tequesta Drive n �`, "� `�Q Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (561) 575 6220 9 •C '.:, y 4 Fax: (561) 575-6239 h co PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 6, 2000 I . CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Village of Tequesta Public Works Committee held a regularly scheduled meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, ':.)n Thursday, January 6, 2000 . The meeting was called to order at 4 : 30 P.M. by Chair Elizabeth Schauer. A roll call was taken by Betty Laur, the Recording Secretary. Committee members present were: Chair Vice Mayor Elizabeth Schauer. Mayor Carl Hansen was absent from the meeting. Councilmember Sharon Walker was invited to sit in since there was only one Committee member present . Also in attendance were Village Manager Thomas G. Bradford and Director of Public Works and Recreation Gary Preston. Village Clerk Joann Manganiello joined the meeting at 4 : 32 P.M. II . APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Walker moved that the Agenda be approved as submitted. Chair Schauer seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth Schauer - for Sharon Walker - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda was approved as submitted. III . COMMUNICATION FROM CITIZENS (non Agenda Items) There were no cortrmanications from citizens. Pnrurinil PPnnr PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 2 IV. CONSIDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A RIVERSIDE DRIVE PATHWAY FROM TEQUESTA DRIVE TO COUNTY LINE ROAD AND PAY 50% OF TEQUESTA' S COST TO CONSTRUCT THE SAME. Village Manager Bradford reported receipt of a letter from Mr. Dan Weisberg, Engineer, Palm Beach County, asking if the Village would be interested in an Interlocal agreement for a pathway request they proposed for the east side of Riverside Drive from County Line Road to Tequesta Drive. The County had provided a copy of the proposed interlocal agreement in which they would pay for 50% of Tequesta' s portion of the pathway. Village Manager Bradford reported two sections would be affected, Tequesta Pines and seven houses on the east side of Riverside Drive north of Tequesta Drive . The County planned to do the work during the next fiscal year, which would begin in October, 2000 . Village Manager Bradford advised that the Village had not built any bicycle paths since the 1970 's and that everything installed since then had been 5-foot wide concrete in accordance with the Village Comprehensive Plan. The Village Manager reported that the Village had asked whether the path could be done in concrete, and that the County had built a concrete path on County Line Road from Old Dixie Highway to the Mobil station on U.S. Highway One, which he estimated to be 6-8 feet wide. The County had advised that the Tequesta-maintained portions of the pathway could be in concrete; however, on the County-maintained portions they planned to install asphalt with concrete curbing. The County had also advised they had found asphalt pathways to be less costly for construction, maintenance, and replacement; with which the Village did not agree. The County also stated that more miles of pathway could be installed in asphalt because of the cost savings . Village Manager Bradford explained that the Village believed construction would be less but the maintenance of concrete was much less than asphalt over time. Village Manager Bradford reported the Tequesta Pines Homeowners Association President had advised Director of Public Works and Recreation Gary Preston that they were in favor of the pathway through the right-of-way which they maintained; but that the Committee must consider whether the seven homes would be pleased with having an up to 8-foot wide pathway constructed in what they thought of as their front yards, PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 3 and to weigh that against the need of Tequesta at large and County residents having the pathway. Village Manager Bradford reported the Village Comprehensive Plan encouraged such projects, and that they satisfied State requirements for recreational purposes . The Village Manager added the pathway was also an alternative method of transportation, providing an alternative to driving; therefore, the Village provided pathways on thoroughfares at Village expense, with homeowners paying in residential areas and contractors paying when constructing a subdivision. Village Manager Bradford explained that if the Village constructed their standard 5-foot wide pathway and the County constructed 8- foot areas, in at least three locations there would be a jog from the smaller width to the larger width. Chair Schauer expressed a preference for the Village portion to be 8 ' in order to have consistency. Chair Schauer asked whether a letter could be sent to the homeowners on Riverside Drive, to which Mr. Preston responded this matter had been discussed four years ago and six out of the seven were opposed to the pathway at that time. Chair Schauer commented that Martin County had installed a sidewalk all the way along County Line Road, and she preferred sidewalks and believed a pathway would make the area safer for walking. Mr. Preston commented that the County was under the mistaken impression that Tequesta owned 45% of the right-of-way along Riverside Drive north of Tequesta Drive when in fact they only owned 20% of the right-of-way, and pointed out on a map areas the County believed Tequesta owned. Mr. Preston explained that this project was an excellent deal for the Village since the County would pay 90% of the cost, and the County very much wanted to install the pathway. Under a proposal made in 1994, the Village would have had to pay 45% . Mr. Preston expressed his opinion that because the County wanted the pathway they would probably agree to install six or eight-foot wide concrete instead of asphalt . Chair Schauer expressed her preference for 8-foot width so that bicycles might also be accommodated since there was not room for a separate bike path. Mr. Preston explained that there would be a 6" curb and the area between the sidewalk and the road would be used as a swale area for water drainage. Mr. Preston reported that the Village planned to do the same thing in two years on the south of Tequesta Drive, making the pathway extend PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 4 all the way to Dover Ditch. The benefits of an 8-foot wide pathway were discussed. Mr. Preston reported there was not much landscaping to be moved in front of the seven homes . Chair Schauer requested that the County be asked to go around the landscaping at Tequesta Pines, to which Mr. Preston responded the Village had a wider setback at that location so that nothing would need to be moved. Councilmember Walker commented she wanted the pathway to be consistent on both sides of Tequesta Drive, which Mr. Preston had already addressed. Mr. Preston expressed disbelief that the County believed asphalt would require less maintenance than concrete, since an overlay would be needed on asphalt in 20 years while concrete would last 50- 60 years . Chair Schauer stated the Village would compromise by going to an 8-foot pathway if the County would install concrete, and asked that Mr. Preston mentioned what a nice job the County had done on the concrete sidewalk on County Line Road. Richard Berube suggested the pathway be constructed on the west side of Riverside Drive, which would eliminate disruption to the seven homeowners and seemed to be more logical because there were large sections where homes were set back very far with walls in front . Discussion ensued. Mr. Berube suggested if the County would not install concrete in all their sections that at least the sections to the end of Tequesta' s territory be concrete to provide consistency, and that the widths be consistent . Bike paths were discussed. Village Manager Bradford expressed his belief that it was not against the law for bicycles to ride on sidewalks, but bicycles did have street rights like a car. Mr. Berube suggested looking into installing a separate bike path at the same time while all the equipment was there. Mr. Berube commented that the Village should be aware of another potential problem if they installed bike paths, since both West Palm Beach and Juno Beach were having problems regarding their bike paths, because apparently the municipality must keep the pathway clear of items such as glass as well as walkers and roller bladers . Mr. Berube stated he would like to see the roads widened and bike paths installed at the same time the sidewalks were installed, but did not know if it would be practical, and requested that inquiries be made. Mr. Berube suggested that if the County PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 5 would not consent to install concrete that Tequesta might pay the difference between the cost of asphalt and concrete on the County sections in between Tequesta sections . Mr. Preston commented he would be very surprised if the County did not agree to install concrete; and the Village would need to know what the County was going to do and then come back to offer additional payment for concrete . Mr. Preston expressed his opinion that the additional cost might increase the Village' s cost of the project from $20, 000 to $36, 000 . Joe Hall commented one of the reasons for placing the sidewalk on Country Club Drive on the side it had been installed was because of the density and the number of people that could be using it without having to cross the street, and that density might be the reason the County wanted the sidewalk on the east side of the road. Mr. Hall recalled that the sidewalk along Country Club Drive had been made wider than other sidewalks to accommodate bicycles, which Village Manager Bradford responded might have been true at that time since there had been a time when Tequesta' s standard had been less than the current 5-foot standard. The Village Manager commented Mr. Hall was probably right about density being a reason for placing the sidewalk on the east side of Riverside Drive, and that the Village would find out what their logic had been. Chair Schauer summarized by requesting that a letter to the County state the Village' s intent to construct 8-foot wide sections, request a bike path, and request that they construct the pathway on the west side to be consistent with what had been done previously by the Town of Jupiter. Chair Schauer requested that a letter be sent to the seven homeowners on Riverside Drive notifying them that this project was in the discussion stage, and telling them that an 8-foot pathway would be installed, so that the Village would not experience the problems encountered in Palm Beach Gardens when they did not notify their residents regarding canal work. Chair Schauer commented if the residents were notified, they could notify the Village staff or Village Council if they had problems, and they could also avoid installing additional landscaping that might have to be moved later. Mr. Preston noted their property would be very attractive with the wide sidewalks . Councilmember Walker PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 6 requested that the letter extol the benefits of an 8-foot wide concrete pathway on the side of the road where it would be constructed, and to bring out why it was best on that side of the road. Chair Schauer requested the residents also be told that swales would be installed to alleviate standing water on the road. Chair Schauer expressed her opinion that the more informed people were the less problems arise . Mr. Preston commented that the sidewalk would probably keep Riverside Drive from becoming four lanes in the future, which Chair Schauer requested be included in the letter. Village Manager Bradford commented that the newer neighborhoods off Riverside Drive were already sewered and he did not believe the homes on Riverside Drive were sewered. Mr. Hall commented that the Village must coordinate with the sewering. Village Manager Bradford commented that was addressed in the agreement and ENCON anticipated 14 months to complete the work on the peninsula, after which this project would take place. Chair Schauer commented that if ENCON dug up an area they were responsible to replace it as it had been previously. During discussion, Village Manager Bradford reported the estimate for gravity sewers in that area had been $15, 000 per unit because of elevations and because on the west side there was such a long run from the river to the street, and ENCON had wanted low pressure because they did not think anyone would pay that price. Jon Belski, 19681 Riverside Drive, stated he lived on Riverside Drive and was in favor of the sidewalks because of the dangerous conditions on the street . V. CONSIDERATION OF ESTABLISHING A TEQUESTA DECORATIVE STREETLIGHT STANDARD FOR THE BUSINESS DISTRICT ROADWAYS. Village Manager Bradford commented this would be a very busy year. Upcoming projects included construction of Main Street, the South Cypress Drive Improvement Project, and streetlighting on Tequesta Drive from Old Dixie Highway to U. S . Highway One and on Bridge Road from Old Dixie Highway to U. S . Highway One. A streetlight standard needed to be established for that area. FPL had announced the availability of four new decorative standards but did not PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 7 have the cost. Village Manager Bradford referred to the packet provided which contained a copy of the monthly streetlight bill from FPL, showing current costs of $5. 51 to $9.24 per month per streetlight, according to the type of pole, bulb wattage, etc. The Village had three options : the traditional post lamp used in Tequesta Oaks and Cypress Ridge; contemporary post luminaire used in The Pines; and typical highway-type streetlights . Village Manager Bradford explained that the beauty of FPL was that a phone call to FPL reporting that streetlights were out would result in repairs no matter what was wrong, except that there was a new policy if someone had shot out the light with a gun the municipality would have to pay. The Village Manager commented that towns such as Palm Beach had their own streetlight crews, which was something the Village did not necessarily want to get into because the cost could be astronomical. An option was to hire an outside contractor to do maintenance . Public Works and Recreation Director Gary Preston reported that FPL did not know the cost of their new decorative streetlight standards at this point, but early indications were that the cost would be approximately four times the current cost, which averaged around $9. 00 for each streetlight . Mr. Preston reported the Village now had 213 streetlights, which was approximately half the number needed, and referred to the FPL bill which showed the cost for lights with concrete poles, fiberglass poles, and wood poles, and for different wattages . Village Manager Bradford commented that very soon the Village would have an engineering plan for South Cypress Drive, Bridge Road, Main Street, and possibly Tequesta Drive, which would indicate exactly how many poles and lights were needed for proper illumination. The Village Manager discussed different types of bulbs . The most energy efficient was high pressure sodium vapor, which provided a yellow light . Two types of mercury light bulbs provided a more desirable white light . Village Manager Bradford asked the members of the Committee to notice streetlights during the next couple of weeks to see the difference . Another variable to be considered was the type of pole . Fiberglass poles had been used in Tequesta Oaks, and a decision would be needed whether to continue the lighting to the intersection with Tequesta Drive and on into PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 8 the new area across the street . Village Manager Bradford explained that Mr. Zuccarelli' s plan included bollard lighting. Chair Schauer cautioned that lighting must be consistent on both sides of the street. Village Clerk Manganiello commented that Mr. Zuccarelli planned to have stand-alone lighting and lighting on the buildings . Village Manager Bradford pointed out that streetlights could be changed later but the Village would have to pay to recoup the cost . The Village Manager commented that the streetlights at McCarthy' s Restaurant were the same as those in Tequesta Oaks but the ones in Tequesta Oaks had yellow light and those at McCarthy' s had white light . Chair Schauer requested that a decision be delayed until cost figures were provided by FPL and the Committee could look at the different types of light. Chair Schauer commented that the lighting within an area should be consistent . Councilmember Walker commented that when she had been a member of the Community Appearance Board and a decision was needed regarding newspaper vending machines, pictures of each type had been provided. Councilmember Walker requested that similar pictures be provided when the decision on streetlights was to be made. Village Manager Bradford explained that during hurricanes, streetlights could blow down but typically did not except for higher lights along highways and thoroughfares, and that fiberglass poles would blow down more easily than concrete poles . Councilmember Walker requested the names of the two two-globe lamp streetlights shown in the information provided by FPL. The names were "The Acorn" and "The Shoebox". Mr. Preston commented that the option of fiberglass poles might not be offered as a choice with these lights . Pole colors offered were black, green, and silver for "The Acorn", and dark brown or concrete for "The Shoebox" . Joe Hall recommended that the aerodynamics of the lights be considered, which could be important during a hurricane. It was pointed out that a single-globe fixture would be better in a hurricane. Chair Schauer indicated she preferred the two-globe styles . Village Manager Bradford commented that staff would obtain cost figures from FPL, and the style of JMZ' s street furniture, and asked the Committee to look at the difference PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 9 in white and yellow light . Chair Schauer stressed the importance of being consistent with the lighting in Tequesta Oaks . VI. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL YMCA FUNDING REQUEST Village Manager Bradford reported that about a year ago he and then Vice Mayor Hansen had met with the YMCA, who felt they were spending too much. After learning that they were spending money on building maintenance, the Village Council authorized reimbursement of approximately $25, 000 and alteration of the budget in the future so that the Village paid for maintenance of the building. Mr. Bradford reported that the budget was approximately $47, 000, which had to be spent in accordance with Village requirements . The YMCA had requested approximately $97, 000, or $60, 000 more than had been budgeted. Village Manager Bradford explained that in the original agreement with the YMCA, the need for the YMCA not to lose any money was never discussed, and now the YMCA wanted to change the rules . Mr. Bradford pointed out that to increase the Village budget by $60, 000 would be a 2% tax increase in itself. Village Manager Bradford reported that Gary Preston had prepared a budget to do what the YMCA was currently doing, but with the Village doing it, and asked the Committee to consider whether they were willing to spend that much money on recreation, and whether they wanted to do it overnight with a big budget increase. The Village Manager commented that the Village could do the same programs for less and the YMCA would work with the Village to bow out graciously. Director of Public Works and Recreation Gary Preston suggested that the Village might want to keep the YMCA on to ' run the summer programs each year. Chair Schauer commented she could not see the Village having a 2% tax increase just for the YMCA, and agreed that the Village should try to keep the YMCA to operate the summer programs . Chair Schauer discussed the requirement that no alcohol be used in the building, which was believed to be the reason the Village could not rent out the building for special functions . Mr. Preston commented that the building had never been rented and that the reason was because no alcohol was allowed. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 10 Chair Schauer recommended re-addressing this issue to allow alcohol. Discussion ensued regarding insurance liability. Mr. Richard Berube commented that coverage could be through the municipal insurance policy and a fee for alcohol use charged to the renters . Chair Schauer commented that the Village could try offering the same programs offered by the YMCA since it had been stated the Village could do it cheaper, re-addressing the alcohol situation, renting out the building on weekends, and retaining the YMCA summer programs . Village Manager Bradford clarified that although the Village could do the programs for less, it would still be more than currently budgeted. Councilmember Walker questioned what the Village could do for the amount which had been budgeted, to which Village Manager Bradford responded the budget included all building maintenance. Mr. Preston suggested that the YMCA budget request be reviewed, and explained that the Village now paid 1/2 of the recreation director' s salary ($15, 000) , and part of his benefits . Village Manager Bradford suggested that the Village might be able to hire a recreation director for a little more money than they were currently paying, so that the Village would have a presence there and someone to coordinate programs . Mr. Preston commented if the Village operated the programs, it would require a 2% tax increase, but Saturday and evening programs could be added.. Mr. Preston stated that currently no programs were offered for young children. Mr. Preston advised that sufficient personnel would be needed to supervise the children. Councilmember Walker requested that if the Village decided to undertake this program that activities be provided for children under six years of age . Mr. Preston explained that this was a demand type program and if there was a demand for that age group then programs would be offered. Mr. Preston discussed the difficulties of a small town going into such a program and facing situations where an employee was sick or on vacation without sufficient personnel to step in, and explained that was not a problem with the YMCA since they could call in someone from another location at any time. Another problem would be that workers must be screened. Mr. Preston explained there were not many towns as small as Tequesta who had recreation programs to this extent, because there must be enough people to handle it. Village Manager Bradford reported the YMCA' s adult programming was PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 11 successful. Mr. Preston commented that a lot of people believed the YMCA was doing an excellent job for Tequesta. Mr. Preston suggested trying to get the YMCA to continue their current operations until October 1, then this could be re-addressed in the next budget and the Village could advise the YMCA they desired evening and Saturday programs . Mr. Preston stated he had been told by the YMCA that if no agreement was reached with the Village by the time of their next Board meeting in approximately two weeks they would give their 120-day notice as required in their agreement with the Village . Since the 120-day notice would extend until May, Mr. Preston commented that they might stay for the summer program. If the Village Council then wanted the Village to try to run the programs themselves, they could probably do only what was currently being done. Councilmember Walker expressed her opinion that was not enough. Mr. Berube suggested the Village might subcontract the use of the building to someone who wanted to have a class such as karate, and to others for other types of activities, which would eliminate the expense of hiring a director and personnel. The YMCA programs were discussed. Village Manager Bradford commented that if the Village ran the programs, a director would be needed to oversee the contractual programs . Chair Schauer suggested re-addressing the alcohol issue so that the building could be rented and using the rent received to pay a director' s salary, and commented that rental rates would need to be enough to also pay for the air conditioning, lighting, cleanup, etc. Mr. Berube commented that the JTJC had made money when they had operated the building. Chair Schauer commented that the building could be used for different types of functions . Village Manager Bradford explained that in order to have an after school care program the Health Department required a staff bathroom and public bathrooms . A cost estimate had been provided by Randy Hansen of Interplan, Inc. , for the bathrooms which was in the range of $13, 000 - $17, 000 . Village Manager Bradford reported that it was believed there was a great demand for the after school care program. Mr. Preston commented that the YMCA would very much like to PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 12 run the after school care program and questioned whether it was desired to keep them on just for the after school and summer programs. Chair Schauer suggested they could be retained to run those programs temporarily which would give the Village time to work on this, and suggested a meeting with only this item on the agenda. Chair Schauer commented that the Village needed to address recreation for 13-14 year olds, and needed to know what this age group wanted. One item which they seemed to want was skateboard ramps . The Village Manager suggested contacting Palm Beach Gardens to find out how they dealt with liability concerns regarding skateboarding. Mr. Preston commented that he did not know if skateboarding would be allowed in Tequesta Park, since it was a State park, to which Chair Schauer responded there was not room at Constitution Park and Tequesta Park was the place for it. Mr. Berube commented that was a hard age group and the Village should make an effort to provide activities for them. Chair Schauer commented that dances used to be held for middle school age children, with the parents volunteering. Chair Schauer stated she would contact Palm Beach Gardens . Mr. Preston pointed out that in considering operation of an after school care program, the YMCA already had transportation to pick up children from school, and the Village would have to hire a bus driver and buy a bus if the Village operated the program. Councilmember Walker suggested giving the YMCA the opportunity of running an after school program and summer program in return for the YMCA giving the Village a one-year commitment. Village Manager Bradford commented the Village would have to pay at least $17, 000 to install a new staff bathroom. Mr. Preston commented that it could be ready for the start of school in August. Mr. Preston suggested holding another Committee meeting before the YMCA' s board meeting and inviting Mr. Bob Giese, the YMCA representative, to attend. Chair Schauer requested placing an article in the Village' s newsletter that the building would be available after a certain time and announcing that the ban on alcohol was no longer in effect . During discussion of possible changes to the building, Mr. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 13 Preston advised the building could not be subdivided or dividers used because of Fire Department rules. Village Manager Bradford suggested that the building might be rented for four hours for $60-$80 with an additional $20 added for alcohol. Chair Schauer advised that charges must cover expenses, and that this matter should be re-addressed at a future meeting after research had been done to find out what other facilities were charging. Mr. Preston commented he could bring back cost figures for consideration. Discussion ensued regarding why there had been a no alcohol rule originally, but no one could recall. Mr. Preston indicated he would contact the YMCA to tell them the Village would have the facility ready for an after school program when school started. Mr. Preston commented that it would be better if the YMCA would delay their board of directors decision until February. Mr. Preston explained that items such as a bumper pool table, air hockey table, and another pool table were needed for the building for the proposed children' s programs. Possible activities were discussed. Mr. Bradford commented that the senior program was successful and very popular. Mr. Preston recommended going over the things the Village wanted with Mr. Giese, and added that the YMCA had plans to expand in this area and really needed the Tequesta location to establish a presence and build up their clientele. Chair Schauer commented that both she and Mayor Hansen really supported the YMCA. Mr. Preston was requested to contact Mr. Giese and invite him to attend the next meeting of the Committee which would be scheduled in approximately two weeks . VII. ANY OTHER MATTERS There were no other matters to come before the Committee. VIII . ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Walker moved that the meeting be adjourned. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2000 Page 14 Chair Schauer seconded the notion. The vote on the notion was: Elizabeth Schauer - for Sharon Walker - for the motion was therefore passed and adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 6:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, 4"Ajt-- Betty Laur Recording Secretary ATTEST: Joann Manganiello Village Clerk DATE APPROVED: