HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Regular_6/9/1981 r
MINUTES OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING
OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, FLORIDA
June 9, 19$1
A Meeting was held by the Village Council of the Village
of Tequesta , Florida at 7:30 P. I. , Tuesday, June 9, 1981
in the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida.
Councilmembers present were: Brown, Cook, Little, Mapes and
Stoddard. Also present were : Robert Harp, Village Manager,
Cyrese Colbert, VillagQ Clerk and John C. Randolph, Village
Attorney.
The opening Prayer and Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
was given by Mayor Mapes,
Item 2a. Rezoning; Action of FEC Parcels was added to
the Agenda and approved.
Mr. Cotter Christian, Gee & Jenson, told Council that
Gee & Jenson have received the letter of intent to deny from
D.E.R. on the Intracoastal Waterway Water Crossing.
Mr. Dallas Durrance ,P.E. ,Gee & Jenson, reviewed with Council
the Appeal Flow Chart - on the letter on "Intent to Deny". He told
Council that the Village has 14 days in which to request a
Chapter 120 Hearing and it takes approximately 3 months, if not
postponed or extended by Attorneys, to have the Hearing held
in the local area. In the final end .of the Appeal. Flow Chart
the Supreme Court is involved.
The Council asked the Village Attorney how long would the
Village be looking at if the results were favorable or unfavorable
and if we went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Village
Attorney told Council it would probably take from 1: years to
2 years if it goes all the way to the Supreme Court.
Mr. Christian reviewed with Council. the options which the
Village is considering and explained each one in detail.
Mr. Christian told Council that Alternative 1. is the
original. 12" crossing for which DER intends to deny the permit.
As the Council knows this option is the option that DER. intends
to deny the dredge and fill permit for and that the Army Corps
of Engineers had rescinded their general permits issued in October
of 1950.
Mr. Christian explained the advantages of this alternative
as being 1. , It is hydraulically superior to all other options,
2. , the engineering plans are complete 3 . , the Village has the
upland, DNR easements, DOT and County Road Permits in hand.
06-09-81 -02
The disadvantages were pointed out as being time consuming
` because of the DER Administrative Hearing and the Army Corps
of Engineering Public Notice. If these efforts are unsuccessful
the Village would have to turn to another alternative which in
the long run would be undoubtedly .more expensive. The 'time
delay would be roughly 2 years. The total estimated project
cost for option #1 is $665 ,000.
Mr. Christian then reviewed with Council, Alternative 2.
This crossing would be in the vicinity of the SR707 bridge.
It was determined that in order to meet the Island's flow
requirements, it will be necessary to connect a new 12" main
O
to the existing " and 101' main on U.S. 1, then run the 12"
main east along SR707, across the Intracoastal, then north
along the Island to the County Line.
The DER has told Gee & Jenson there would be a minimal
environmental impact with this alternative and DER told Council
at a Workshop Meeting that the agencies would be supportive of
this crossing.
The advantage to this crossing is the minimal environmental
impact and there are requirements of easements from private
The disadvantages would be that 1-. , it is hydraulically
inferior to the proposed looped system, 2. , the crossing would
be located too close to existing main increasing the risk of
damage to both mains, 3. , both mains would be dependent on
same feeder mains on the mainland, 4. , construction throuFh
developed area on south Jupiter Island would be somewhat
an inconvenience to the residents on the Island and 4. ,
subaqueous utility easement required from D.N.R. The total
estimated construction cost for Alternative #2 is $683 ,000.
Alternative No. 3 which is the Rolling Hills Crossing
was also dicussed by Pair. Christian. The advantages to this
alternative were, minimal permitting requirements, no needed
easements, it would take the least time required to project
completion, it would provide a true loop system and it provides
potential for northward expansion of the Village sytem.
The disadvantages are 1. , it is the highest cost , $1, 11.6,000.
2. , it will require booster pumps which are vulnerable to power
outages and 3 . , the current rate structure could not support
the �100,000. purchase price.
Alternative No. 4 is the crossing near the Loxahatchee
River Environmental Control District 's force main. Mr. Christian
told Council that although the DER and Health Department have
been somewhat encouraging about this alternative , it is
impossible to ascertain what their final decision would be.
The advantages of this alternative are that 1. , it provides
a looped system to the southern portion of the i s.l 1n,l ) 2. , it
4 06-09-81 -03
can be fed directly from Well Field #1 without depending on the
same mains as the existing crossing 3 . , it would have some
environmental impact but may be acceptable to permitting agencies
4. , it would be the least costly and 5. , the congested area near
the bridge can be avoided during construction.
The disadvantages would be 1. , that extensive easements
would be required 2. , the permitting status is still unknown
and 3. , a parallel system would still be required for northern
portion of Island.
The total estimated project cost for alternative No. 4 is
$654,000,
Council also reviewed the permit and land requirements
and the estimated time requirements for the crossing alternatives.
Mr. Byron "Mac" McCartney, Aid to State Representative
William C. "Doc" Meyers told Council that Mr. Meyers has
written Vickie Tschinkel, Secretary of D.E.R.. a letter asking
her to review our case, Mr. McCartney told Council that
representative "Doc" Meyers will back up the Village of Tequesta
in what the Village decides to do .
Little moved, "that we put in for the necessary appeal".
Stoddard seconded and vote on the motion was:
Brown -for
Cook -for
Little -for
Mapes -for
Stoddard -for
and therefore the motion was passed and adopted.
Mapes told Council that he felt Gee & Jenson should proceed
with alternative No . 2.
Little told Council. he feels the Village should go with
alternative No. 3 , Rolling Hills because it has the least total
time to complete.
Stoddard moved, "that we authorize Gee & Jenson to proceed
with the submitting of drawings and applications of permits
based on alternative No, 211. Cook seconded and vote on the
motion was:
Brown -for
Cook -for
Little -against
Mapes -for
Stoddard. -for
and therefore the motion was passed and adopted. Little
told Council. he voted against alternative No. 2 because
r
06-09-81 -04
he felt it would take longer than alternative No. 3.
Ms. Linda Vorpagel , The Humane Society of Greater Jupiter-
Tequesta , President was present to request Council to appoint
two (2) agents for deputization to The Humane Society Board
of Directors. They are Ms. Linda Vorpagel and Mr. Terry Verner.
Stoddard moved, "that this Council authorize the deputization
of Linda Vorpagel and Terry Verner to The Humane Society Board
of Directors and that our Village Mayor so authorize on our
(Village) letterhead". Cook seconded and vote on the motion
was:
Brown -for
Cook -for
Little -for
Mapes -for
Stoddard -for
and therefore the motion was passed and adopted.
The Village Manager read a note about a phone call just
received from Mrs. Manning volunteering her service to serve
the Humane Society in any way she can.
The Village Attorney told Council that item 2a. Rezoning;
Action on FEC Parcels was added to the agenda because
Councilmember Brown had requested it be added to receive a
staff report on this item. The Village Attorney explained that
the Comprehensive Plan takes precedence and that the rezoning
of the parcels of land belonging to F.E.C . Railway is a matter
of housekeeping. He advised that he would be on the agenda for
the next Council Meeting.
The Village Manager told Council that due to the fact that
the SFWMD has reduced its mandatory cut-back from 25% to 10%
the Administrative Office and Building Department believes
that the restriction prohibiting the issuance of permits for
new irrigation wells or for lawn sprinkler systems could be
rescinded. Brown moved, "that we remove the mortatorium on
drilling of irrigation wells and the installation of irrigation
systems". Stoddard seconded and vote on the motion was:
Brown -for
Cook -for
Little -for
Mapes -for
Stoddard -for
and therefore the motion was passed and adopted.
,The Village Manager explained that there is a vacancy on the
Community Appearance Board because Ruth Butterfield does not wish
to serve again as a re,,7;ular member of the Board but will serve
as an alternate. Stoddard moved, "that Frederick Sundermann be
appointed to the Community Appearance Board for a three (3 )
• • �' 06-09-81 -05
year period". Brown seconded and vote on the motion was:
Brown -for
Cook -for
Little -for
Mapes -for
Stoddard -for
and therefore the motion was passed and adopted,
The Minutes of the May 26, lQ81 Public Hearing, the
Minutes of the May 26, 1981 Council Meeting and the Village
Manager's Report for May 24, 1981 to June 6, 1981 were
received.
Mapes said he could not attend the meeting between ENCON
and the Town of Jupiter on Jupiter b coming the regional water
supplier for the area at 7:30 P.M. , une 11, 1981 but asked
Vice-Mayor Stoddard if he could attend in his place. Vice-Mayor
Stoddard and the Village Manager both agreed to go to the
meeting.
Council requested that the Village Attorney have ready an
amended noise Ordinance for the next agenda.
Council instructed the Village Manager to write a letter
to Rinker and tell them to clean up their act.
Stoddard told Council that he told the Tequesta Association
of Voters and Taxpayers that he would speak on their behalf and
tell the Council of their intent to contribute the sum of $500.
to the Village for Police Department purposes.
The meeting was adjourned at 10: 15 P.M.
4Cyrzeeacdolbert
Date Approved
Lee M. Brown
Leslie A . Cook
Thomas J. Little
W.H . Plapes, Jr.
Carlton D. Stoddard