August 24, 2005 Minutes
Aug 24 2005
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
August 24, 2005
The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in joint session with the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County on August 24, 2005, at 1:00 p.m. in the Community Dining Room, Brevard Community College, Palm Bay Campus, 250 Community College Parkway, Palm Bay, Florida. Present were: Chairman Ron Pritchard, D.P.A., Commissioners Helen Voltz and Susan Carlson, County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox. Absent were: Commissioners Truman Scarborough and *Jackie Colon.
Also present were: Indian River County Board of County Commissioners Chairman Thomas Lowther, Commissioners Arthur Neuberger, Wesley Davis, and Sandra Bowden, County Administrator Joseph Baird, and County Attorney William Collins. Absent was: Commissioner Gary Wheeler.
Chairman Ron Pritchard led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Invocation was given by Commissioner Helen Voltz, District 3.
ANNOUNCEMENT
Chairman Pritchard advised of an accident on I-95 and resulting traffic problems that have prevented Commissioner Scarborough from attending the meeting.
INTRODUCTIONS
Chairman Pritchard, Commissioners Voltz and Carlson, County Manager Busacca, County Attorney Scott Knox, Utility Services Director Dick Martens, Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff, Transportation Planning/MPO Director Bob Kamm, Planning and Zoning Director Robin Sobrino, Chief Dennis Neterer of Fire Rescue, Library Services Director Catherine Schweinsberg, Assistant County Manager Don Lusk, and Solid Waste Management Director Euri Rodriguez introduced themselves.
REPORT, RE: ACCIDENT ON I-95
Chief Dennis Neterer advised I-95 northbound is open and I-95 southbound should be open soon; there was a 5,000 gallon diesel tanker that overturned; there was minor leakage, but all the fuel has been pumped to another truck; and the road should be open soon.
INTRODUCTIONS (CONTINUED)
Chairman Pritchard advised of the boundaries of his Commission District. He thanked Commissioner Voltz for putting the joint meeting together; and commented on common issues with Indian River County.
Commissioner Voltz thanked her Special Assistant Tres Holton for setting up the meeting.
Chairman Thomas Lowther stated the Indian River Commission met with St. Lucie County twice this year; they just set up a joint meeting with Martin County; and hopefully they will be continuing to meet with Brevard County as both counties have a lot in common. He advised he will have to leave a little early; but Vice Chairman Neuberger will take over.
Vice Chair Arthur Neuberger, Commissioners Sandra Bowden and Wesley Davis introduced themselves and advised of the boundaries of their Districts and their connections with Brevard County. County Administrator Joseph Baird, Assistant County Administrator Mike Zito, Assistant County Attorney Bill DeBraal, Emergency Services Director John King, Community Development Director Bob Keating, Executive Aide to the Commission Kim Massung, Utility Services Director Erik Olson, and General Services Director Tom Frame introduced themselves.
Chairman Thomas Lowther introduced Joel Tyson, City Councilman and John McCants, Mayor of the City of Fellsmere. Chairman Lowther advised of the boundaries of his District.
Chairman Pritchard welcomed the representatives from Fellsmere; and advised he has been to the Frog Festival a few times and most recently had lunch there.
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION, RE: GROWTH TRENDS
Brevard County Planning and Zoning Director Robin Sobrino pointed out areas in South Brevard and the Brevard County-Indian River line on an aerial map; and stated the southern portion of Brevard County is quickly experiencing development pressures. She stated within the last year there have been about 4,200 acres come in for rezoning requests; it has been a very rural area; most of the zoning in the area is two and one-half or five-acre residential type zoning; and a lot of those properties are going to RR-1, which is one-acre zoning.
Commissioner Davis inquired in RR-1, does one truly get one unit per acre with land development regulations and buffers; with Ms. Sobrino responding if it is a subdivision, no because the roadways, drainage, and things like that take away from gross density. Ms. Sobrino displayed a synopsis of the Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map, and the Zoning Map for the South Brevard area; stated the City of Palm Bay takes a big portion of the area; and it is beginning to spread out fingers of annexation; but a lot is still five-acre and two and one-half acre zoning. She stated part of the area is Comp Planned for one-acre zoning, but most happens to be zoned for two and one-half acre residential. She stated developers are coming in to take advantage of the Future Land Use Map designation, which would allow a maximum density of one unit per acre; and as a result of the rezoning requests, the County is seeing a lot of the neighborhoods galvanizing against development as they are concerned about
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION, RE: GROWTH TRENDS ( CONTINUED)
jeopardizing the rural lifestyle, demands for services, and impact on roads. Ms. Sobrino stated in response to all of the rezoning requests, the Board has started to look at small area studies and master plans; and this is a process that is embraced by the Department of Community Affairs, which is looking for jurisdictions to undertake the visioning process to get in touch with what the residents of an area feel should be their future and make sure the Comprehensive Plan and future zoning actions reflect the desires of the community. She stated as a result both District 3 and District 5 are undergoing studies; one of the biggest issues is the density; and there are community meetings to see how residents feel about the Future Land Use Map designations of one unit per acre, which may result in changes to the Future Land Use Map. She stated because development is so intensive in all of Florida, the Planning and Zoning Department is experiencing difficulty in recruiting professional planners as they are all going into the private sector; and as a result, they are feeling the pinch of not having sufficient staff to keep up with the development demands. She stated the City of Palm Bay is looking toward expanding its service boundaries out into the South Brevard area; and that has resulted in concern of the Commissioners’ constituents.
Discussion ensued on the buildout and population of Palm Bay.
Ms. Sobrino stated the barrier island is part of the area of concern between the two communities; one of the things that takes some of the development pressure off the South Beaches is the fact that back in the 1990’s the Board did a significant undertaking of Comprehensive Plan density rollback, followed by rezoning rollback; so the predominant density in that area is approximately one unit to the acre. She stated the A1A corridor was at one time earmarked for widening to accommodate future growth in the beachside; but they do not believe that will be necessary because of the rollback in density. She stated that will help with the issue of hurricane evacuation.
Chairman Lowther stated Brevard County does things by District; and inquired if zoning is different in each District or is there a uniform zoning. Ms. Sobrino advised zoning is Countywide; and there are a tremendous number of zoning classifications. She pointed out the two and one-half and five-acre areas on the Land Use Map.
*Commissioner Colon’s presence was noted at this time.
Chairman Pritchard advised Commissioner Colon is the Commissioner from District 5.
Ms. Sobrino stated Brevard County, according to the State requirements, is due to submit its Evaluation and Appraisal Report, which is the precursor to the update of the Comprehensive Plan, in August 2006. She stated they have just begun to set up the process for taking that on; and as a result, they are anticipating that a lot of the visioning process that is going on right now with the small area studies will help tailor the Comprehensive Plan update to reflect the needs of the South Brevard area.
Commissioner Davis inquired what needs are anticipated. Ms. Sobrino responded based on some of the visioning activities that have taken place, commercial is not what is being sought;
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION, RE: GROWTH TRENDS ( CONTINUED)
and the biggest concerns are density and safety of the roadways. Commissioner Voltz requested Ms. Sobrino point out where the potential for a new I-95 interchange is; with Ms. Sobrino pointing it out on the map. Commissioner Voltz stated it is between Micco and Grant, and it is within the City limits of Palm Bay. Commissioner Davis inquired what road is there; with Commissioner Voltz responding it will be the new Palm Bay Beltway, so someone would be able to get from Micco Road north to the Palm Bay Beltway, and all the way west to I-95 and the Melbourne International Airport.
Discussion ensued on the location of a new I-95 interchange.
Commissioner Davis stated there has been a lot of interest in the issue from the Roseland community; their main concern is people using Roseland Road when they come south on I-95; and they would like to see some way of relieving traffic without having to four-lane Roseland Road. Commissioner Voltz stated that is the furthest south they are looking at going; it would be $60 million to do that; and there are four individual developers in that area who are each willing to commit $15 million to privately fund the interchange. Commissioner Davis inquired what is the timeframe; with Commissioner Voltz responding she does not know. Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff advised it is at least a 12-month period. Commissioner Colon stated there will be community input as well; it is not written in stone; and it may not even be in the Micco area. Commissioner Voltz stated the interchange would be in Palm Bay.
Ms. Sobrino stated one of the issues that has been raised with the interchange is the sensitivity to the concerns in the area; roadway improvements might increase the demand; and there has been a lot of citizen concern.
Commissioner Voltz inquired how much is EEL’s property in the area; with Ms. Sobrino responding quite a bit. Ms. Sobrino stated the Board has advocated doing joint planning agreements with each of the municipalities in the County; to date there are four Joint Planning Agreements; they involved the sharing of information about development requests and the ability to comment on development activities within other jurisdictions; and hopefully they will help identify growth issues and bring about a comprehensive approach to dealing with problems along the interface areas between the jurisdictions. She stated there are JPA’s with Melbourne, Titusville, Palm Shores, and Rockledge; and they are in the process of negotiating a joint planning agreement with the City of Palm Bay, so hopefully they will be able to identify areas in which Palm Bay wishes to expand and resolve any possible problems involving overlap of services and make a more unified approach to growth issues and planning and zoning decisions.
Indian River County Community Development Director Bob Keating stated he will be talking about Indian River County’s growth; Indian River County is a lot smaller than Brevard County; and its current population is 130,041. He displayed a slide showing growth over time; and stated like Brevard County, Indian River County has grown significantly over the years. He stated it is interesting to look at population growth incrementally; Indian River County grew much faster in the 1980’s than it did in the 1990’s; in the 1980’s, it grew 51%; in the 1990’s, it grew 24%; and even though the 24% was on a larger base, the growth in the 1980’s was higher
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION, RE: GROWTH TRENDS ( CONTINUED)
on an absolute basis than the 1990’s, not just a relative percentage basis. Mr. Keating stated it is also interesting to look at annual growth rates; in the 1980’s, every year was over 3%; but in the 1990’s, they never got to 3%. He stated things are different in the current decade; but with the recent estimate of population, the growth rate has gone down from last year. He stated from 2003 to 2004, the growth rate was approximately 4.5%; from 2004 to 2005, it was approximately 2.5%; initially his staff thought that was wrong as they are still getting all kinds of building permits, so they were going to challenge it; but when they thought about all the hurricanes and how they put the builders behind and delayed construction, they decided it was probably correct. He stated recently the County looked at its population projections through 2030 because the MPO is preparing its 2030 long-range transportation plan and a good population projection is needed to get a good feeling for where the County is going in terms of land use. He stated when they looked at the population projections through 2030, they felt they were low; his staff did some statistical analysis and came up with updated and increased population projections; and the new numbers are the subject of a Comprehensive Plan amendment that the County is in the final stages of doing, and which should be approved by the Department of Community Affairs within the next month or so. He stated they are projecting population at 280,000; there has been a lot of activity in the last few years; and displayed a slide showing single-family building permit application activity in the unincorporated area as going straight up. He commented on where growth is occurring; stated 65% of the County’s population is in the unincorporated area; and after the unincorporated area, Sebastian is the fastest growing, and Fellsmere is going to start having quite a bit of growth in the next few years. He stated geographically growth is occurring throughout the County within the urban service area; historically the central County has been a little low; however, these days any vacant piece in the unincorporated County is having developers trek over it. He presented a slide showing density comparison; and stated it shows the difference between allowed density and actually built or approved density. He stated they looked at all the development projects that had come in and the underlying zoning and land use density and what is actually coming in and building; in the three unit per acre category, the yield is actually 1.93 units per acre; and in the six unit per acre category, it is approximately 3.3 units per acre. He stated because of all the growth in the County, they have been looking at the regulations closely; and advised of the work of two committees that did reports and came up with recommendations for changes to land development regulations and the Comprehensive Plan. He noted there was some overlap between the committees; and they are in the process of implementing the recommendations such as increasing landscaping and buffering requirements, tree protection, increased open space requirements, stormwater regulations, requiring more sidewalks, changing upland preservation rules, concurrency vesting, allowances for walls within subdivisions, changes for subdivision bonding requirements, small lot subdivisions, corridor plans, and turn lane standards. He commented on planning initiatives, the visioning process, and actions taken as the result of both. He stated they recently raised impact fees; the voters approved a $50 million land acquisition bond referendum; and commented on attempts to build an interchange and do a vacant land study. He advised of the urban service initiative; displayed the Indian River County Land Use Map; and stated the urban service area hugs the coast. He stated Commissioner Wheeler has put forward an initiative, which the Board supported whereby the Legislature will be asked to adopt a special act to set the urban service area boundary as it is with a requirement that any changes to the boundary be done by voter referendum.
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION, RE: GROWTH TRENDS ( CONTINUED)
Chairman Pritchard inquired how much land has been set aside for conservation. Mr. Keating responded approximately 100,000 acres, which represents approximately one-third of the County; like Brevard County, Indian River County has the upper basin of the St. Johns River and St. Johns River Water Management District owns 80,000 or 90,000 acres; and there is also the buffer preserve. Chairman Pritchard inquired how much vacant land is there; with Mr. Keating responding he does not know that number; but there are approximately 100,000 acres in conservation, about 100,000 in the urban service area that includes the municipalities, and approximately 100,000 that are non-conservation and outside the urban service area. Mr. Keating stated the analysis shows that the amount of land in the urban service areas that is vacant has a yield sufficient to accommodate the 2030 population. Chairman Pritchard inquired what is the length of the County from St. Lucie County to Brevard County; with Mr. Keating responding 22 miles and approximately 25 miles wide, or 495 square miles. Chairman Pritchard inquired about intersection studies; with Mr. Keating responding the County revised its turn lane requirements for development projects; instead of just looking at peak hour turning volume, they look at the volume of the roadway also; and the net result was requiring more turn lanes from development projects. Chairman Pritchard inquired what does Indian River County do about road concurrency; with Mr. Keating responding the County has a very detailed database; it requires traffic impact analyses for every development project; they load trips on each of the 300 or 400 links in the County; they have a capacity to do counts at least annually; they keep track of vested trips by link; and then they do the concurrency test when projects come in to see whether there is sufficient capacity on each link. Chairman Pritchard inquired about median price for affordable housing; with Mr. Keating responding $235,000 to $250,000. Commissioner Voltz advised Brevard County is at $235,000. Chairman Pritchard inquired how Indian River County is going to provide affordable housing; with Mr. Keating responding they do not think they can do it through subsidies, but they have a lot of programs. Mr. Keating outlined provisions in various programs, including SHIP, hurricane housing recovery, and CDBG. Chairman Pritchard inquired about small lot subdivisions; with Mr. Keating responding it gets down to 50-foot lots and five to seven-foot setbacks.
Commissioner Colon inquired if the $50 million that was approved by the citizens was for conservation land; with Mr. Keating responding in 1992 the County approved $26 million bond referendum just for environmentally-sensitive property; and the latest bond referendum of $50 million allows the County to purchase three types of property, environmentally-sensitive property, cultural-heritage property, and development rights from agricultural property. Commissioner Colon advised the Mayor of St. Cloud purchased for development a lot of acreage; and it is incredible what they have been able to do. She stated Representative Poppell is an incredible champion for Indian River County in Tallahassee. She stated she was interested in the land acquisition because right now in South Brevard, they are looking at it as a blessing. Commissioner Davis inquired if Commissioner Colon is referring to the buffer preserve; with Commissioner Colon responding she was referring to the County’s EEL’s properties.
Commissioner Carlson stated it sounds like Indian River County has done some progressive things in terms of smart growth; Indian River is a small county; Brevard County is three times the size of Indian River County; and inquired if Indian River County has gone through a
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION, RE: GROWTH TRENDS ( CONTINUED)
visioning process and adopted a communitywide vision. Commissioner Carlson inquired if that is what has given Indian River County the impetus to do a lot of the projects it is doing such as the management provisions; with Mr. Keating responding yes, but when the County went through the visioning process, it had a specific focus. He stated the visioning process was associated with the long-range transportation plan; prior to initiating the long-range transportation plan, the County heard a lot of criticism from the people that the Comprehensive Plan was broken and not working; and they knew they could not do a good transportation plan without a good land use plan. He stated they initiated the visioning process primarily to determine what the community wants from a land use planning perspective in the future; and they structured it going out to the community and looking at three different scenarios, a limited growth scenario, continuation of the trends scenario, and a villages concept scenario. He stated the visioning process came up with a hybrid of those scenarios. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the hybrid is what the County is attacking right now in terms of some of the processes. Commissioner Davis advised the hybrid allowed them to keep the low density that people wanted without going to court; by strengthening land development regulations, they were able to reduced density without being sued for taking; and they did leave the new towns concept in the Comprehensive Plan as a future long-term plan. He noted there is not a lot of support at this time for the new towns concept in the community, nor is it practical in the way it is written in the land development regulations. He stated in the new town concept there is a requirement to retain 100% of the traffic in the community; and that is impossible. Commissioner Carlson inquired when does Indian River County update the EAR; with Mr. Keating responding there is a deadline of 2008, so they will be starting soon. Mr. Keating advised they also find it difficult to find planners. Commissioner Carlson stated Brevard County has a growth management task force; she and Commissioner Colon sit on it; and they are looking at concurrency, annexations, and lots of different things; but the EAR came up, and there are 15 municipalities in the County, so it is a little different than Indian River County. She stated they have the dates for when the EAR is due; Ms. Sobrino is trying to coordinate with all the municipalities; and it might be worthwhile to look at the boundary between the counties to see if there is some way to work together beneficially for both sides.
Chairman Pritchard stated Mr. Keating commented on strengthening land development regulations in an effort to reduce density; and inquired if something is zoned AU, does Indian River County want to keep it agricultural at one unit per two and one-half acres. Mr. Keating stated what they have done through the land development regulation changes that are going through the adoption process now is putting additional regulations on development projects that enhance their aesthetics; they have increased buffer requirements and open space; and they are having the principal effect of having development that is better, nicer, and more aesthetic, but also reducing the yield.
Chairman Lowther stated Joe Paladin took charge of the Growth Action Committee; in Indian River County there was a battle between the Indian River Neighborhood Association and the developers that got very ugly and nasty from the standpoint of almost having a building moratorium; but Mr. Paladin was able to get the leaders from the Indian River Neighborhood Association, members of the Growth Action Committee, and the former Growth Task Force Committee to form a committee that actually got 100% approval from the Indian River Neighborhood Association, and has brought forward initiatives. He stated Mr. Paladin has dealt
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION, RE: GROWTH TRENDS ( CONTINUED)
with staff and naysayers and got them on board; the County, which was divided, became a County that was working together; and initiatives began to come out. Chairman Lowther stated they used to have a six-foot wall that was ugly; now they have berms and landscaping; and it has become an initiative for density as well. Commissioner Davis stated they were allowed to fight about it because it was done outside the sunshine.
Chairman Pritchard inquired how large was the group; with Chairman Lowther responding the Indian River Neighborhood Association evolved into a team of 4,000 to 5,000; and they were a vocal force when they came to the Chambers. Chairman Lowther described the situation with yelling and bantering; stated there would have been a moratorium; but Mr. Paladin pulled the people together; and the group now consists of 15 people. Chairman Pritchard stated he would be interested in having Mr. Paladin come to a Brevard Board of County Commissioners workshop to advise how it was done and how it might work for Brevard County. Chairman Lowther stated Mr. Paladin is also one of the lead men on affordable housing; there are two separate groups; and hopefully within the next month, they will come before the Board with recommendations. Chairman Pritchard inquired when Mr. Paladin might be available; with Mr. Paladin responding his daughter handles all of his appointments. Chairman Pritchard stated obviously Brevard County faces the same problems that Indian River County does; and outlined problems with people who move here but then want the door closed to others, do not want things in their backyards, or who live on seven units to the acre but do not want someone else to develop at one unit to the acre. He stated the situations are similar; and Indian River County’s approach may be what Brevard County needs to do instead of trying to piecemeal something. He stated the approach may provide direction to the coalition that Commissioners Carlson and Colon sit on; and it may help them with what they are trying to do.
Commissioner Colon stated right now the County is having annexation problems; that is where the Growth Management Task Force has come in; and they are trying to figure it out. She stated it is not so much dealing with particular neighborhoods or constituency for any district, but trying to get the communication between the cities and the County; and right now one of the city managers is going to be the middle man. She stated they are eager to receive ideas; Palm Bay alone is going to have 250,000 people; so it has its hands full. Chairman Lowther stated it sounds like the issues are the same as Indian River County has with Port St. Lucie.
Commissioner Neuberger inquired what is the population and how many square miles are there in Brevard County. Chairman Pritchard responded half a million; and the County is roughly 72 miles by 20 miles, but obviously there is a lot of water with the Indian River Lagoon System.
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
Brevard County Transportation Planning/MPO Director Bob Kamm stated he is going to focus on the four roads that connect Brevard County to Indian River County and highlight some of the issues that apply to each of those; and then he will go back and elaborate on the interchange
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED
and parkway concepts that were mentioned earlier. Mr. Kamm stated the goal is to maintain A1A as a two-lane road; and explained how density was calculated based on that goal and the
desire to not overload the road. He stated in terms of US 1, he is unaware of any program in the next ten to fifteen years, which in the transportation planning business is soon, that would require improvements to US 1 in South Brevard. He stated Florida Department of Transportation is getting the preliminary engineering study necessary to widen I-95; the funding at this point is programmed in FY 2012 for the actual widening; he would not be surprised if that is moved up; but the process has begun to widen I-95 from Malabar Road south to 512 in Indian River County. He stated Babcock Street is a two-lane rural road; Babcock north of Valkaria Road up toward Malabar Road is already approaching level of service F conditions on the two-lane section; and Babcock Street is important as it services Palm Bay. He stated Babcock Street is an arterial road into Palm Bay; it connects into Indian River County, so there is regional connectivity; and it also goes north up into Melbourne, so it is a regional facility. He stated Brevard County has not paid much attention to Babcock Street over the years; at one time the traffic count at the County line was 250 vehicles a day; but that is changing. He stated the southern section of Babcock Street is in very poor structural condition; the roadway was built fast and cheap; and the base under the road is starting to give way. He stated even if nothing else is done, that roadway needs to be reconstructed to maintain its integrity; there is additional traffic on the roadway; and they are combining a maintenance issue, a restoration issue, and a capacity issue; and it is very clear that they are going to have to pay more attention to Babcock Street. He stated they have been working with the developers that are moving forward with their plans to address issues on Babcock Street; and they are not at a point where they can say they are going to have to four-lane, but clearly the road is a very high priority when it comes time to discuss impacts from the developments that are coming online. He stated the fourth issue is the beltway and the interchange; in 1988 a ten-page justification report was dropped on his desk for an interchange at Micco Road and I-95; it was approved by DOT; and it went onto the MPO, which endorsed it under the prerequisite that it be a privately-funded interchange. He stated the area was extraordinarily rural; the road was traveled very little down there; and to put a large amount of public funds into an interchange at this location when there were other needs in the County caused the MPO to feel it should be a privately-funded enterprise. He stated the owners of the property in the area were a British conglomerate that wanted to develop the property; the group proposed the interchange and funded the study; but that development never happened and the property changed hands. He advised approximately once every six months he would get a call from somebody about the status of the Micco interchange; but nothing was happening. He stated about three years ago, a lot of acreage was purchased in the southern part of the County for the Environmental Endangered Lands Program; and now much of the footprint of the interchange is environmentally-sensitive land controlled by the County. He noted that does not necessarily mean the interchange could not be built there, but it would make it much more difficult and expensive, so it is not a preferred situation anymore. He stated concurrently they are hearing from a major developer who is developing in the south part of Palm Bay and has acquired property in the area; the developer is proposing an interchange on I-95; and it is being handled largely by the City of Palm Bay, which is doing the permitting for the development. He commented on reviewing the plans, bringing forward to the MPO and the
County, the concept of the interchange privately funded at the South Brevard location, and small area plan for the location; and advised to increase the utility of the interchange it would be a
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
good idea to have a connection on the east side of the interchange down to Micco Road. Mr. Kamm pointed out the interchange location and route on the map; and stated the interchange will be connected to the Palm Bay Parkway, which will go south of Palm Bay around the west side to US 192, and will even continue north to another proposed interchange north of US 192 that will connect to the Melbourne International Airport. He stated it is a very ambitious program; all County Commissioners sit on the MPO; and he is going to switch from his planner hat to his MPO hat. He stated the Legislature passed a new program last session called the Transportation Regional Incentive Program or TRIP; it is a 50/50 matching program to encourage localities to develop regional roadways; and the 50% match can be anything, including land, private funds, regular impact fees, or whatever because the State is very liberal on what the local match can be. He stated it does require an interlocal agreement between two adjacent MPO’s in order to qualify; Brevard County is talking to its neighbors to the west about an alliance for TRIP; and a similar alliance may be desirable between the Brevard County MPO and the Indian River County MPO because as private development comes online and as private commitments are made to Babcock Street for the Parkway, that money can be matched with State money to get more bang for the buck. He stated if there is a private developer that is willing to put in $20 million in private money for an interchange, that $20 million can then be matched by the State to develop other sections of the Parkway that the County would not otherwise be able to afford; and with the connection to Micco Road, there would be a corridor from northern Indian River County, up US 1, across Micco Road, to an interchange with access to I-95; there could be Babcock Street access to I-95 if desired; and the Parkway will continue west to US 192 so that would allow Indian River County residents to go to US 192. He advised of a workshop with the Orlando Area Expressway Authority in June 2005; stated he put forth the idea of a toll road connection from US 192 in the St. Cloud vicinity to the southeast area Greenway around Lake Nona; and they are building an interchange now for Lake Nona and are reserving land to continue that arterial road.
Commissioner Davis inquired where is Lake Nona; with Mr. Kamm responding looking at a map of the Greenway, it is the very southeast corner of where the Greenway swoops around the southeast quadrant of Orange County. Commissioner Davis stated it would be between the Turnpike and Narcoosee; with Mr. Kamm advising it would be parallel to Narcoosee from St. Cloud roughly toward the Airport. Commissioner Davis stated it would go straight north; with Mr. Kamm advising or straight south. Mr. Kamm stated he made that suggestion at the workshop; completely unknown to him, a very large delegation from Osceola County came forward at the workshop and made the same suggestion; and that would connect US 192 directly to the Greenway system around Orlando, which means the residents from Indian River County could get the whole way to the Airport, to I-5, or south without using the Beachline or SR 528. He stated Brevard County will be meeting with District 5 DOT next Tuesday to discuss the parkway and interchange concept as an eligible project under the new program; and DOT is very interested in this. He stated there is a similar opportunity at Babcock Street; but they should be working toward an interlocal agreement at the MPO to qualify for funding under the TRIP program.
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
Commissioner Carlson inquired how does that affect I-95 if they get that connection; and if there is a US 192/417 connection for Indian River County residents, who want to go into the middle of the State, and will they not have to use I-95. Mr. Kamm responded they have to use I-95 and there is no way around it.
Commissioner Davis inquired about the route; with Mr. Kamm responding he is having a map prepared for next Tuesday, but does not have one today. Commissioner Davis inquired if someone would have to get on US 192; with Mr. Kamm responding yes.
Discussion ensued on the route.
Commissioner Davis inquired if Brevard County would like to come to the Indian River County MPO to discuss this. Mr. Kamm stated that can be worked out at staff level; he has been talking to Phil Matson of the Indian River County MPO about this; and he requested he ask the Indian River County Commission for a resolution supporting the south County interchange; and that was done to help qualify it as a TRIP project. He stated that is the kind of cooperation they are going to have to think about; that is the way the rules of the program are; and both counties will have to start talking and doing joint planning things for mutual benefit. Commissioner Davis stated there is some support in the Roseland area for a South Brevard County interchange to relieve some of the pressures from Barefoot Bay going south. Mr. Kamm commented on the boundary between DOT Districts 4 and 5; stated he does not know anybody in District 4; his colleagues in the planning section of District 5 do not know anyone in District 4; and it is necessary to get these people talking together. He stated he can see some institutional problems; and DOT has to help if the program is going to succeed.
Mr. Keating stated he agrees with everything that Mr. Kamm said; and he will try to fill a few of the gaps. He stated one of the reasons they are talking about the TRIP program and interregional coordination is that the rules of the game have changed; DOT has new funding priorities for federal money; it is looking at allocating 75% of the federal capacity money to the strategic intermodal system (SIS); so that is leaving less money for arterial roadways within MPO areas. He stated DOT’s secondary focus is on regional roadways; and that is where the TRIP program comes in and the interregional transportation issues. He stated the TRIP program came out of the growth management legislation this year with Senate Bill 360, which says that the TRIP money is going to be distributed to the different Department of Transportation Districts; District 4 has indicated it is looking at getting approximately $50 million for the upcoming fiscal year; that amount is going to decline over time; and at the end of the program they are looking at getting $27 million. Mr. Kamm advised District 5 is getting $60 million and is looking for projects. Mr. Keating stated District 4 includes Indian River, St. Lucie, and Martin Counties as well as Palm Beach and Broward Counties; Indian River County is only three percent of the population of District 4; so it is not a big player. He stated to get TRIP funding, there is a 50% match for the cost of the roadway; TRIP money can be used only on regionally-significant facilities; and regionally-significant facilities are established by the entity that constitutes the regional transportation area, which needs to develop a regional transportation plan and it needs to set regional priorities. He stated the regional priorities need to be in a local government capital improvement program; according to Senate Bill 360, a
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
regional transportation area can be formed by interlocal agreement by two or more MPO’s; and there is no limitation on how regional transportation areas an MPO can be in. He stated Mr. Kamm mentioned Brevard County looking west for one and south for another; and Indian River County is looking to the north as well as south. Mr. Keating stated the regional transportation area needs to prepare a regional transportation plan; it needs to identify regionally-significant facilities; and then it needs to prioritize them. He stated identifying regionally-significant roadways is going on right now in the regional transportation area that Indian River County is looking at to the south; St. Lucie, Martin, and Indian River Counties are participating with District 4 DOT right now in identifying regional roadways; and it will do the same thing with Brevard County. He stated right now the regional roadways in the Treasure Coast are being done in conjunction with the joint Martin County-St. Lucie County long-range transportation plan; a consultant is supposed to be coming up with some concepts for regional roadways next month; and some draft concepts have been presented. He displayed one concept; stated they have seen concepts that they have not been happy about; but this is one of the better concepts as far as delineating a regional roadway, and shows A1A, US 1, CR 510 over to CR 512, and I-95, but not CR 507, which is not proposed as a regional roadway. He stated that is one of the advantages of looking at different directions to form regional transportation areas; roadways that may not be viewed as important or regionally significant from one group may be important in another group; and they are looking at that. He stated Mr. Kamm made an important point concerning the boundary of Districts 4 and 5; there is a huge gap there; the travel demand forecasting models are set up by districts; they use what is called external trips where district boundaries coincide; actually that is not the best way to do transportation planning; and they are dealing with some problems with that. He stated another advantageous reason why it would be good for Indian River County and Brevard County to set up a regional transportation area is that they represent two different pots of money; one does not infringe on the other; the regional roadways in Indian River County would be funded through District 4; and those in Brevard County would be through District 5, so they are not in a competitive situation whereas Indian River County may be in a competitive situation with Martin and St. Lucie Counties. He stated this is still in the first stages; DOT has come out with some model interlocal agreements that are being reviewed at staff level; and it is going to take some work, but Indian River County will be bringing a lot of this information to the MPO at future meetings. He stated he indicated they are going through the MPO doing the long-range transportation plan; right now they are at the stage of identifying the needs plan and looking at some of the future improvements; unlike US 1 in South Brevard, US 1 in Indian River County has more volume on it as it is more of an urbanized area with Sebastian and Roseland; and there is quite a bit of land use activity. He stated when they project out to 2030, they see some issues in north Indian River County; the volume on those roads could require some improvements; and there are three alternatives that have been identified. He stated one alternative would be to six-lane US 1 from County Road 512 to the County line; and another would be to four-lane Roseland Road.
Chairman Pritchard inquired which is Roseland Road; with Mr. Keating pointing out the road on the map. Commissioner Neuberger advised it is a shortcut to I-95. Chairman Pritchard advised people would travel from Barefoot Bay, to US 1, to Roseland Road, to CR 512.
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
Mr. Keating stated they looked at alternatives to address the congestion there; and exhibited maps showing the different alternatives; and advised they have to adopt their long-range transportation plan by the end of the calendar year. Chairman Pritchard inquired if CR 512 come into Sebastian; with Commissioner Davis responding yes.
Brevard County Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated he will be limiting most of his remarks today to impact fees and gas taxes with respect to transportation; the impact fee program within Brevard County is enabled by County Ordinance, and cities within the County can opt into the program or chart their own course; and they can also opt into any of the impact fee categories if they wish. He stated the County has transportation, fire rescue, EMS, corrections, libraries, solid waste, and education impact fees. He stated the education impact fee is new; it is less than a year; most of the impact fee categories are currently levied by the County at 100% of what the study indicated could be implemented; and the exceptions are transportation which is 31.5% and libraries. He stated the Cities of Melbourne and Palm Bay have chosen to chart their own courses with respect to the impact fees, especially with respect to transportation; and they operate more or less outside of the County’s impact fee program. He stated most of the growth occurring in the south portion of the County is in the City of Palm Bay or very near to the City of Palm Bay; and as a result, the County’s impact fee collections in that part of the County are fairly limited. He advised the County is divided into districts, three on the mainland and four on the beaches; all the funds collected within each of the districts have to be spent within the districts within a seven-year period of time; and as a result of that, the smaller the collections are, the more limited the options are to spend them. He stated the net effect of that is in the transportation arena; the types of projects that the County typically utilizes impact fees for are intersection improvements, signalization, construction of sidewalks, and purchase of right-of-way; but typically impact fees are not sufficient to cover right-of-way costs and have to be supplemented by another revenue stream such as gas taxes. He stated currently the local option gas tax is six cents levied out of a possible total of twelve cents; and there are different categories within the total of twelve cents. He stated in addition to the local option gas tax, there is also the constitutional gas tax; and the County has bonded that out to the year 2021 and is implementing a number of projects associated with that, 50% capacity projects and 50% major maintenance projects such as bridge improvements. He stated at this time the constitutional gas tax revenue stream is off the table and not available to solve new problems. He stated in Brevard County the formula that is utilized to divide the local option gas tax revenue results in the cities receiving 57% and the County receiving 43%; the County has recently used the funds for capacity improvements; and the cities primarily use the funds for maintenance of roadways. He advised the County uses quite a bit of the funds for maintenance as well; but the County is decreasing that use and increasing the use for capacity improvements. He stated the County will soon be looking for direction; it will be looking at possible bond issuance for some of those local option gas tax revenues for some new and old projects; so there will probably be $20 to $25 million available for Countywide projects through that source. He stated the way the impact fee comes in is unpredictable; it is not bondable; and therefore the revenue stream for transportation is committed. Mr. Denninghoff advised the City of Melbourne, while it does not participate with the County, has some interest in implementing joint projects with the County; but Palm Bay as yet has not indicated any interest in doing any joint projects with the County with its impact fee stream. He commented on annexations,
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
County roads, meeting the challenges that are coming, and traffic counts on Babcock Street, which are up to approximately 5,000 at the C-54 canal which is not quite the County line, but is close. Mr. Denninghoff advised people have discovered Fellsmere; and in response to a question from the Indian River County Commission, advised Babcock Street is a County road, and a sign indicating it is a State road is a remnant from when it was a State road. Mr. Denninghoff noted the revenue is so tight that the County has not updated all the signs; but it became a County road as a result of reclassification.
Commissioner Voltz stated the County is in the process of doing a joint planning agreement with Palm Bay; and inquired about splitting County and City impact fees. Mr. Denninghoff responded he has advocated the development of an impact fee structure; it would have to be supported with a study; and in order to meet legal muster, that would need to take a two tier system, one that would be an impact fee for County roads, and another impact fee for local roads, whether City or County. He noted the County roads in this particular reference would be more major roadways like Babcock Street or portions of Malabar Road, roadways that are arterials or connect arterials; that is what Mr. Feldman of Palm Bay is advocating because he thinks it would be a more fair way to do it; and that would create a scenario in which the cities within would be obligated and have the opportunity to turn funds over to the County to be able to utilize for the County road expansion purposes. He stated that has a certain amount of appeal; until they get a study done, they do not know what the results would be; however, that is the limit of what Palm Bay has indicated it is willing to partner with the County on with respect to impact fees. Commissioner Voltz noted it is further than the County has gotten with Palm Bay before. Mr. Denninghoff stated as far as existing impact fees, there are only two cities that have actually come across with the green; West Melbourne is the major one as it has done it repeatedly; and Rockledge has done it in the case of Barnes Boulevard. He noted there are some limited smaller municipalities on the beaches that have also participated on joint projects; but the magnitude is very small and is a very minor aspect of the whole program.
Commissioner Davis inquired when does Brevard County count its trips on roads for the concurrency test; with Mr. Denninghoff responding the concurrency test is examined at two different points in time for commercial development; one is at site planning; and the other is building permit issuance time, so if someone wants site plan or subdivision approval, there is a concurrency test. Brevard County Manager Peggy Busacca stated she thinks the question is when does the County vest; with Mr. Denninghoff responding it is at building permit. Commissioner Davis stated they want to count as early as possible but do not want to make it so a larger development can come in and purchase early in the stages and shut down all the rest of the development by buying concurrency. Ms. Busacca stated that is why Brevard County vests at building permit; but there is a relatively intricate process where when a road gets to a certain percentage of its threshold, 85%, there is a different set of standards for vesting so that someone cannot come in as Commissioner Davis suggests and take all the capacity. She stated the County then begins to ration out the capacity at 85%; then the County goes to even more sophisticated lengths as it gets higher; and she would be happy to provide that information. Indian River County Administrator Joseph inquired if the County allows prepayment before building permits; with Ms. Busacca responding the County does until it gets to 85%. Mr. Baird inquired if it is possible to vest before building permit; with Ms. Busacca
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
responding if it gets to 85%. Mr. Kamm advised there is language in the Code, but it happens very rarely. Ms. Busacca stated it is possible under the Code until it reaches 85% and then one cannot do it anymore, which is why it happens so infrequently.
Commissioner Carlson stated there was just an issue with concurrency between a city and the County because the city vested at site plan approval and had a lot of ghost trips on the road; the County vested at building permit time; and that is a big problem; but both agreed to hold off on putting more traffic trips on the roadway until they figure out just how much capacity there was on that main thoroughfare.
Commissioner Davis commented on getting fees in hand, putting improvements on the road, ghost trips tying up capacity, and vesting; and inquired when does Brevard County count and when does it vest. Mr. Denninghoff advised Brevard County counts at site plan, but it has an expiration date, so it gets added onto the trip count, but if the site plan expires, it is lost. Mr. Baird inquired do they get the vest before they pay as they do the site plan; with Mr. Denninghoff responding there is a sort of vesting, but the real vesting does not occur until they pull the building permit. Commissioner Davis inquired is it like a reservation; with Mr. Denninghoff responding in effect, it is a reservation; the one is temporary and will expire, but the other is permanent; and they do not actually pay the impact fee until they get the CO. Ms. Busacca stated there are cities in the County that do it at building permit, but the County is at CO. Mr. Baird inquired if Brevard County can allow them to vest for the capacity without paying; with Ms. Busacca responding that is correct. Commissioner Voltz inquired why does the County do that.
Mr. Baird stated staff mentioned school impact fees; with Mr. Denninghoff responding the education impact fee is new and is set at 100%. Mr. Baird inquired what does the impact fee run for the average single-family home; with Mr. Denninghoff responding $6,205. Mr. Baird inquired if Brevard County is looking at revisiting its impact fees; with Commissioner Voltz responding no. Chairman Pritchard stated that depends on who one talks to. Ms. Busacca advised the Board has asked staff to move forward to look at the potential of expanding impact fees to include utilizing the correctional impact fee for other facilities such as courthouses; that study is not back yet; and the Board may or may not choose to move forward on that, but it did ask for the information. Mr. Baird inquired if that would have to be a separate impact fee; with Ms. Busacca responding it would be intended that the correctional impact fee would be modified to expand it.
Mr. Denninghoff advised the transportation impact fee is based on a study that was done in 1998; and Solid Waste is even a little bit older than that. Commissioner Carlson inquired what percentage are the impact fees at; with Mr. Denninghoff responding the transportation impact fee is at 31.5% or $1,371.20 for a single-family home. Commissioner Davis noted it is double that in Indian River County. Mr. Baird inquired if the impact fee is graduated by square footage; with Mr. Denninghoff responding it is flat for single-family; but there are different categories for multi-family. Ms. Busacca advised commercial is based on a sliding scale that is based on the trip generation rate that would be expected.
Discussion ensued on impact fees.
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
Commissioner Carlson inquired if Indian River County’s impact fees are at 100% of the study it did; with Mr. Baird responding 85%, which runs approximately $5,000 for a house. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Indian River County has school impact fees too; with Mr. Baird responding yes, and the total, without water and sewer, is around $16,000.
Mr. Baird inquired if Brevard County is looking at doing the next six cents in gas tax; with Mr. Denninghoff responding the Board has asked not to do that. Mr. Baird inquired if Brevard County has the optional sales tax; with Mr. Denninghoff responding no. Chairman Pritchard stated he can see why Indian River County’s median housing price is higher than Brevard County’s. Commissioner Voltz stated they are about the same. Commissioner Colon inquired how long have the impact fees been in place; with Commissioner Davis responding they just passed them. Mr. Baird advised Indian River County had transportation, but it just put seven or eight others into effect. Mr. Keating stated the sewer connection and transportation have been in effect for quite a long time; and inquired if Brevard County collects impact fees on behalf of municipalities that do not have independent building departments. Mr. Denninghoff responded yes; and described the process where individuals come to the County to pay impact fees and get a voucher showing they paid, which they take back to the municipalities to get their building permits. Mr. Baird advised in Indian River County, the municipalities collect the fees for the County; with Mr. Denninghoff responding it is pretty much the other way around in Brevard County.
Mr. Keating stated Indian River County had traffic impact fees since 1986; and until about seven or eight weeks ago, that was the only impact fee it had, other than water and sewer connection charges. He stated somewhere along the line, water and sewer connection fees were classified as something different from impact fees; they are impact fees, but no one calls them that; they are capacity charges; and they have been in effect since the early 1980’s. He stated they have not been able to increase the traffic impact fees fast enough; they were increased in 1999, 2004, and a few weeks ago; and about a year and a half ago, the Commission asked staff to do a study as to what kind of impact the other local governments were imposing. He stated staff did a study and brought that information to the Commission; consequently the Board directed a study be done and imposed eight separate impact fees; they were told to fast track it; and if the hurricanes had not come, they would have been faster. He stated all the new fees went into effect on July 1, 2005; every time they change fees, it kills them; but they are fortunate in that all five municipalities in the County participate completely on impact fees. He stated of the eight new impact fees, five are Countywide; Fire and EMS are Countywide except for the Town of Indian River Shores because it does not participate with the Emergency Services District and have its own public safety staff; and then two fees are collected just in the unincorporated county because law enforcement and parks are provided just in the unincorporated county as each municipality has its own. He stated each municipality collects the fees; the County set up some computer programs for them; and the municipalities write the money and a report once a month. He noted they have only had to do it once so far because the fees just went into effect on July 1, 2005, so they are still working out the bugs. He stated Indian River County has three categories of single-family houses, under 1,500 square feet, 1,500 to 2,500 square feet, and over 2,500 square feet; and displayed a slide showing the impact fee amounts. He advised the impact fee amounts are cumulative and do not include water or sewer connection charges,
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
which add another $4,000, so they are talking about between $8,000 and $11,000 for the new impact fees. Mr. Keating noted except for the smallest house, more than half is traffic. He stated one of the observations they had is that they are already too low even though they just went into effect seven or eight weeks ago.
Commissioner Carlson inquired how did the County assess the fact that they are too low this quickly; with Mr. Keating responding because of land costs. Mr. Keating advised they knew some of them were too low as they were imposing them; with land costs escalating 20% to 30% a year, it is difficult to get good numbers; and one of the problems they had was with school impact fees. He stated the consultants were conservative; and that is appropriate because the builders and their lawyers were looking over their shoulders.
Mr. Keating stated when they did the school impact fee analysis, they were looking at comps for 20, 40 and 80-acre school sites in the urban service area; they could not find too many sales of properties that size; and they could not take a five-acre tract, look at the square footage cost of land, and then interpolate the 20, 40, or 80-acre site, which is what the School Board is looking at. He stated the County agreed to the School Board’s request to revisit the school impact fees within a year when it can get good comps. Commissioner Davis stated the School Board just bought 150 acres last night for $95,000 an acre. Mr. Baird advised they had to use the historical costs because they could not find any other comparisons. Commissioner Bowden stated typically for the school system, they go above and beyond what is normally land for an elementary, middle, or high school. Commissioner Davis advised it is 80 acres for a high school, 40 acres for a middle school, and 20 acres for an elementary school. Mr. Baird stated construction costs have gone up, especially in roads with fuel costs; and all bids for roads are coming in a lot higher than they anticipated.
Chairman Pritchard inquired about revenue from permitting for construction. Mr. Baird responded the Building Department brings in approximately $3.8 million just in fees; the Building Department is Vero Beach and the unincorporated area; and the Commission has asked to increase land development, fire prevention, and site plan fees to try and recapture all those costs so none of them are burdens on the ad valorem taxpayer. He stated they revisited those in the last year; they are probably bringing in about $6.4 million total; and that is what they have budgeted. Mr. Keating stated as far as impact fees, just traffic last year was approximately $10 million; and they just increased those significantly so they are probably looking at $15 to $20 million in traffic impact fee revenue for the coming year, assuming construction stays at the same level. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the impact fee is based solely on the relationship of land costs; with Mr. Keating responding no, each of the impact fees is calculated differently. Mr. Keating explained how the roads formula is calculated. Chairman Pritchard inquired what is the transportation impact fee; with Mr. Baird responding $5,800 per single-family home. Chairman Pritchard inquired if that is a home more than 2,500 square feet; with Mr. Baird responding yes. Chairman Pritchard inquired why is it based on square footage; with Mr. Baird responding the Commission wanted to do that to get affordable housing; initially it was not done that way; but the Commission wanted to try to help those who were building smaller houses, so that was revisited. Mr. Kamm stated generally the larger the house, the more affluent the family, and the more trip making and impact on the roads, so there is technical justification beyond just public
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
purpose. Chairman Pritchard stated he has been by some very small houses with six cars out front, so he is not sure about that; and inquired about the County budget. Mr. Baird advised the Indian River County budget is $287 million. Chairman Pritchard inquired how many personnel does Indian River County have; with Mr. Baird responding 980 employees under the Board of County Commissioners without the Constitutional Officers. Chairman Pritchard stated Brevard County is at 2,200 without the Constitutional Officers; and the budget is $1,003,000,000. He inquired what is the total taxable base for Indian River County; with Mr. Baird responding a little over $14 billion. Chairman Pritchard advised Brevard County is at $50 billion; and inquired about total ad valorem revenue. Mr. Baird responded Indian River County is around $90 million; and advised of the four revenue sources. Commissioner Davis inquired what is the millage rate; with Mr. Baird responding the millage rate is a little over 3 mills in the General Fund; it is 1.3 mills in the MSTU; and it is a little over 2 mills in Emergency Services District. Chairman Pritchard inquired about total millage; with Mr. Baird responding it depends where someone lives; and he can send that information to Chairman Pritchard. Mr. Baird advised it runs anywhere from $18 to $24 per 1,000 depending on where someone lives; and unincorporated is 5.6 mills. Chairman Pritchard inquired if that excludes schools; and advised Brevard County averages approximately 18 mills overall. Ms. Busacca advised that includes the St. Johns River Water Management District and schools. Chairman Pritchard stated it is all relative; Indian River County has fees because it has low millage; one has to be weighed against the other; and when a County has 6.2 mills, it is going to have higher impact fees because somebody has to pay the freight. Commissioner Neuberger stated the impact fees are too low and they were just implemented two months ago. Mr. Baird stated the Indian River County Commission has the philosophy it wants development to pay for itself and not have the existing ad valorem taxpayer carry the burden of growth. Chairman Pritchard stated the only problem from his perspective is that if someone sells his house and builds a 2,500 square-foot house, he will be paying an $11,000 impact fee; and all he is doing is moving across the street. Mr. Baird stated worse than that, he would have to pay his ad valorem tax because he lost his homestead. Chairman Pritchard advised it is a trade-off; he understands Indian River County is trying to keep its tax base as low as it possibly can for the people who live there; and the folks that are paying the freight are the ones with new houses. Commissioner Davis stated the thought process according to the consultant is that whenever someone has a family that moves from a house to next door, they are taking their children with them, but other person who moves in may have children who will move into the schools at that time. Chairman Pritchard inquired what percent of the growth comes from within the County; with Commissioner Davis responding not very much as most are moving from South Florida. Commissioner Bowden stated they are vacation homes. Commissioner Davis inquired if there are any figures on that. Mr. Baird stated if he sells his house and has an impact fee, it is built into the market value, so he would not be paying it twice; and it artificially inflates the price so when someone sells their first house to move to the second house, it does not hurt them as it is built into the market value. Commissioner Davis stated if a house is $300,000, what is another $10,000. Chairman Pritchard stated that is one way to look at it, but it is creating a three-tiered structure; there are three levels of payment; and it is not ad valorem related. He stated he understands what Indian River County is doing to try to keep taxes low for people who live there; but it is putting the freight on the people who are coming in. Commissioner Neuberger stated they are the ones who are putting the demand on facilities; he has lived there for 40 years; he has paid his share
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (CONTINUED)
of the roads, sewer plants, and all that sort of stuff; and someone coming from New Jersey has to buy in. Chairman Pritchard stated he finds the vast majority of the people are not paying their fair share; the consultant came up with a dollar value based on assessment, cost, and this and that, and found out that if someone’s property is not in the $190,000 assessment range, then they are not paying their fair share of what the new construction costs are; so if someone’s property has an assessed value of $80,000 or $90,000, they are paying $800 or $1,200; whereas, it takes $2,200 to pay ones fair share, and those are the folks that are carrying the load while the others are coming away at a much lower rate. He stated he hears the same argument for the school impact fee, roads, and this and that; when people come before the Board, he writes down their names and checks them out; he had a lady yesterday who made a lot of claims and every one of them was wrong; and he finds that some are only paying $80, $140, or $600 a year in taxes when the cutoff is more like $1,900 a year; but he understands what Indian River County is doing is working for it.
Commissioner Voltz inquired what percentage of people who buy new homes in Brevard County are Brevard County residents; with Chairman Pritchard responding 66% of the County’s growth comes from within. Commissioner Colon advised the School Board gets about 1,000 new students a year; with Commissioner Voltz advising there are 700 less than there have been. Commissioner Bowden stated years ago when the Cape was really big there were impact fees brought to the school system from the Cape; and Brevard County had the best schools there were. Chairman Pritchard stated the point is that somebody pays the freight; and if someone is here, they want the newcomers to pay it. Commissioner Carlson advised there is no free ride. Commissioner Neuberger stated if someone came after 1962, they have to go home because they are the problem. Chairman Pritchard inquired why 1962; with Commissioner Neuberger joking because that is when he came to Florida. Commissioner Davis stated he has been in Florida since 1970. Chairman Pritchard advised he came to Florida in 1956; and Ms. Busacca advised her family moved to Florida in 1946. Chairman Pritchard stated what Indian River County is doing is the same type of juggling that Brevard County is doing. Mr. Baird stated it is a philosophical decision on how to pay for infrastructure. Chairman Pritchard reiterated somebody has to pay the freight; and inquired if Indian River County bases its impact fee for schools on student stations; with Mr. Baird responding yes, and the schools review their own part of the impact fee.
The meeting recessed at 3:17 p.m. and reconvened at 3:27 p.m.
DISCUSSION, RE: EMERGENCY SHELTERS
Brevard County Manager Peggy Busacca stated she will make this presentation because staff is busy in the EOC right now with the storm coming; Brevard County currently has approximately 21,000 in the Barefoot Bay area; and every hurricane season they are evacuated. She stated the closest shelter in the south mainland has a capacity of 400 people, which means that inevitably some people are coming south to Indian River County; and she is sure Indian River County is already aware of that. She stated the special needs shelter in Brevard County is
DISCUSSION, RE: EMERGENCY SHELTERS (CONTINUED)
approximately ten miles north of Barefoot Bay; right now there is adequate sheltering in Brevard County; but there is not adequate sheltering in the south end of the County to handle the number of people who evacuate from Barefoot Bay; and requested the opportunity to communicate formally with Indian River County annually prior to hurricane season. Ms. Busacca stated the Indian River County and Brevard County Emergency Management Directors can sit down and talk about what is expected as far as additional hurricane shelters and points of distribution; last year the road between the two counties was closed for about five days and people were driving trucks over the railroad tracks to get south to the point of distribution for water and ice; and while coordinating might not resolve that issue, she knows that people were quite desperate to get water and ice. She requested Indian River County communicate with Brevard County when it plans to evacuate and vice versa; stated that way Indian River County will have an idea when it will begin to see people heading south; and inevitably some people from Barefoot Bay and South Brevard County will be doing that. She stated during hurricane events the County establishes at least two daily briefings at set times with municipalities; and suggested doing that with Indian River County. She stated together they can discuss whatever issues need to be discussed; sometimes those briefings are five minutes long, sometimes much longer; and suggested setting an established time at 8:15 a.m. to talk about any issues in common to do a better job of coordinating because Brevard County is aware that some of its population ends up in Indian River County.
Indian River County Administrator Joseph Baird advised during the storms, Indian River County did coordinate with Brevard County’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC) by conference call; and stated there is a conference call scheduled today at 5:15 p.m. Ms. Busacca inquired if that is Statewide; with Mr. Baird responding Indian River County was in contact with Brevard County during the last storm. Mr. Baird stated representatives from Indian River County visited Brevard County’s EOC because it is looking at building one. Ms. Busacca stated she knew they do Statewide calls because she spent a lot of time last year in the EOC; but it may be worthwhile to have one just between the two counties to coordinate issues because the evacuation issues overlap, perhaps more with Indian River County than other counties Brevard County deals with.
Indian River County Emergency Services Director John King stated he communicates with Brevard County EMS Director Bob Lay quite a bit because there are some issues with northern Indian River County and southern Brevard County. He stated the phones have been ringing; there is a storm off the coast; they do not know how big it is going to be, but are hoping for the best and planning for the worst; and displayed a slide illustrating the hurricane season of 2004. He stated when Hurricane Charley went through, Indian River County opened some shelters because they expected to have problems in the north part of the County; it was a very narrow storm that crossed the State; and they had fire and EMS staff ready to respond and support Brevard County’s field operations. He described the path of Hurricane Ivan; stated the County got five inches of rain the second time the storm crossed the State; and after Hurricanes Frances and Jeanne it was wet everywhere because there was no way for the water to drain off fast enough and they were without power for an extended period of time. He stated they follow government the way they read about in when they were in civics class, with the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government; however, every state has a piece of legislation that talks about emergency government; and emergency government is the one that is only
DISCUSSION, RE: EMERGENCY SHELTERS (CONTINUED)
used when there is a local declaration of emergency, and hopefully it is supported by a Governor’s Executive Order. Mr. King stated at a local level, he has a good relationship with the schools; he and Mr. Baird can call for an available school to put people in a minor disaster; but the school district can give them a hard time; and that is why it is important for the Governor to get in early to make an executive order that will open the schools. He stated the school district is probably the only taxing authority that impacts everybody; there are places in the State where there are community centers built in municipalities, and only local people can go there during times of needing shelter, but not everybody else in the county who did not pay into it; and the school districts have solved that problem in that everybody pays and everybody should have a right to use the facilities. He commented on Presidential declarations, reimbursements, sizes of storms, and expenses of opening shelters. He stated Statute 252 talks about emergency government; and read from the Statute concerning the intent of the Legislature to prepare for efficient evacuation and sheltering of threatened or affected persons. He stated every county has to have shelter plans; Indian River County’s shelter plans are based upon behavioral analysis; and although they do not use concurrency in emergency services, there is a kind of concurrency issue to deal with. He stated they are supposed to have enough shelters to take care of the population that is going to evacuate; in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, they had approximately 10% of the people go to shelters; after Hurricane Hugo in 1989 and Hurricane Andrew, which was 13 years ago today, an analysis came out that said 18% of the population was going to shelters; and then someone said there were not enough shelter spaces for 18% of the population to go to shelters, so they came up with a “threat area.” He commented on threat areas, going from 40 square feet per person in shelters to 20 square feet per person, and planning for those people in storm surge areas. He stated they did not want to include people who live in substandard housing or areas where ponding water would occur; subdivisions built in the 1950’s slab on grade were going to have two feet of water in the house because of a low elevation; and there was a great outcry that this did not make sense. He stated that was an attempt to lower the population of people going to shelters to meet concurrency so the County did not have to spend any money to improve shelters; but in 2002 they did another shelter study, and it suggested that there were areas where there were deficiencies. He stated the State has made available certain monies to enhance schools typically; a lot of schools have glass on both side, but they can be made viable areas to house people as long as window protection is provided; and it is cheaper to provide window protection that it is to build stand-alone shelters that are dark spaces when they are not needed as shelters. He stated current shelter plans, as adopted by the State and approved in the 2002 Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, were based on a 1994 behavior analysis that says 19% of the people are going to go to a shelter, so the County is still wrestling with how much is enough, how much is too much, and who is going to pay the freight to get there. He stated Ms. Busacca made some good comments; pointed out the Indian River County and Brevard County boundary line on the map; and stated in south Brevard there are a large number of people who have manufactured homes. He stated there are a large number of people who actually come to Sebastian; they have a post office box there to get their mail; they buy groceries there; they go to the Sebastian Medical Center for services; however, they live in Indian River County, and some of them are not sure if they are residents of Indian River or Brevard Counties. He stated in terms of shelter capacity, in Category 1 and Category 2 storms with winds less than 130 mph, he has 8,806 shelter spaces; for Category 3, 130 mph and inching up, he has 5,464 shelter spaces; and that
DISCUSSION, RE: EMERGENCY SHELTERS (CONTINUED)
accommodates 19% of his population so he has no extra. Mr. King stated he has one shelter in north Indian River County that is rated for Category 3 and above; the rest are in south Indian River County because 80% of the population lives south of Sebastian; and the shelters are the newer schools in south Indian River County. He stated he does not have any really new schools built after 2002 to the new wind loading standards; the schools are built under the old wind loading; someone building a house now has to build it to 140 mph; but a house built eight years ago only had to be to 110 mph; and if he built 30 years ago, the standard was about 95 mph. He stated they are telling people that build on the barrier island or who live in areas where there may be ponding water to either leave the area well ahead of time and go stay with a friend in a safe place or that the shelters are better than what they are coming from, but that they should not expect the limo to pick them up and drop them off next to the Tiki Hut where there will be water waiting for them because that is not going to happen, although there was an expectation from a lot of people that was what they were going to find when they went to public shelters. He stated they had two storms, three weeks apart, so he and Brevard Emergency Manager Bob Lay were on the phone a fair amount of time trying to resolve some of the issues. He stated they have a special needs shelter; they try to pre-register everybody who intends to go to the special needs shelter; that is a full-time job for one person because applications are screened; some people think if they qualify for separate needs, they will have a separate room with a private bath and all they have to do is show up; but from a realistic perspective, they go through the obituaries every day to take people off the special needs list to make space available for someone who is just coming on the list. He stated they work closely with the home health care agencies, hospice, and the rest; it is a monumental task; and they have more than twice as many who want to go into special needs than they have pre-registered. He stated at the special needs facility, they have a pharmacy; a whole shift of paramedics came off the road to help the Health Department staff up special needs; and it is not a hospital, but it is pretty close to one. Ms. Busacca advised one woman called the County between Hurricanes Frances and Jeanne to ask if she could have the same room she had during the last hurricane. Mr. King stated it is a monumental task to get their arms around; there is a storm off the coast now; it is easy to be a Monday morning quarterback; if it comes to the County and does a bunch of damage and they do not have the shelters open, someone will ask why did they not know; but if they close the schools to open up the shelters and the storm does not come, then people are going to say they are wasting the taxpayers’ dollars, so it is always a balancing act as to what is the best interest of the community and what the expectations are. He stated life has a lot to do with what one’s expectations are; the shelters have a deficit; they are not perfect; but they are doing the best they can with what they have.
Commissioner Voltz inquired if people from Barefoot Bay came down to one of the Indian River County shelters, whether special needs or not, would they be turned away. Mr. King stated this is a Statewide problem; when Hurricane Frances was off the coast, there were people from Palm Beach who drove one hour north, got off the Interstate, and went to the nearest shelter; Indian River County had not even announced it was evacuating any areas or opening shelters and people were beating on the school doors; and at the end of the evacuation cycle at the school in north Indian River County that is rated for Category 3 storms and has a population capacity of 1,499 folks, it was standing room only and they did not say no to anybody. He stated they encouraged everybody who had time to go somewhere else; and he has worked
DISCUSSION, RE: EMERGENCY SHELTERS (CONTINUED)
with Brevard County on a number of issues over the years including encouraging South Brevard County to go north because Indian River County gets evacuees from Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin Counties. Mr. King stated last year people were north of the Georgia State line and still had no place to stay; nobody from Montana who had theme park tickets and had been planning a vacation for a year canceled their reservations in Orlando because a storm was off the coast; the way the tourist industry in Central Florida stays in business is to operate at 90% occupancy all the time; and there may be 10,000 rooms, but there are not 10,000 rooms that are available. He stated they have to deal with those kinds off issues; and they have conference calls regionally.
Mr. Kamm inquired if Indian River County has a pet shelter; with Mr. King responding no. Mr. Kamm stated there is one in Brevard County that has been very successful. Mr. Baird advised the Humane Society does it and does an excellent job; and there is a private non-profit agency that does an excellent job. Mr. King stated they prearranged as much as they could with them; they work with the local veterinarians who have been very good about taking in as many of their clients as they can; and there have been some changes in the past year in terms of ADA requirements for people who have service animals, which is another issue they are trying to deal with. He stated they have never denied a service animal; but pets to some people mean kitties and puppies while to others it is snakes, lizards, and all kinds of things; and they do not always mix well with the general population.
Ms. Busacca advised they also had to deal with what to do with sex offenders. Mr. King stated he had a couple of conversations with some of the Sheriff’s staff about this issue. Ms. Busacca stated Brevard County was lucky to have found a place to put them, but it has been a big issue because they did not want to move the general population. Commissioner Voltz inquired if that is in jail; with Ms. Busacca advising they are held in the holding cell in Titusville.
DISCUSSION, RE: EMERGENCY RADIO COMPATIBILITY
Chief Dennis Neterer commented on rural areas becoming developed, dialogues with other counties, and growth in South Brevard and North Indian River Counties. He stated Mr. King has the luxury of being the head of the only fire department in Indian River County other than the one in Indian River Shores, but Brevard County has approximately 14 municipalities, several which have their own fire departments; and over time the interoperability issues on scene have become greater. He stated the County’s fire trucks and the cities’ fire trucks are both showing up on scene; they are trying to go to a mutual aid channel within the radio system; and it is causing issues. He stated through the Space Coast Fire Chiefs’ Association, they have agreed on certain tactical frequencies they will chat on, and it has worked well; and they approached Volusia County and worked out a pretty good deal with it. He stated in the early 1980’s they used VHF radio; he would talk into his radio, which would power up and transmit; and if Jim in the back had a radio, he could hear it; and that is how they went back and forth. He stated the further away they got from each other, the worse the signal got; and in some cases because VHF was so strong, he could hear Palm Beach or Pinellas County, so the possibility of a firefighter losing communication because he was being “walked on” by someone else not in the
DISCUSSION, RE: EMERGENCY RADIO COMPATIBILITY (CONTINUED)
area of functionality was great. Chief Neterer stated they then came up with the 800 MHz trunk radio system, which is a closed system; they have four power sites; when he keys his radio, it does not transmit to Jim’s radio in the back, but goes to a tower that re-transmits it a lot stronger so Jim is then able to hear it; and it is great because there is no static or squelch, and you do not hear anybody else other than authorized users of the radio system. He stated he and Mr. King love their 800 systems; but each is a trunk system so the problem is how to make them talk to each other. He stated there are conventional radio channels outside the trunk arena; but that goes back to transmitting on a radio and hoping those signals are trained so somebody else can hear them. He stated they have agreed to give Volusia County some spots in their computer system for their radios, and vice versa; and they would like to partner with Indian River County.
Commissioner Davis stated that would be very important for Brevard County is there was an emergency like last time. Chief Neterer advised with Barefoot Bay right there, it could be a real issue. He stated the 800 system for Fire Rescue is a pretty robust system; it did pretty well in the last storms; there were some power outages in a couple of the towers, but they were able to overcome them; and it is a very sophisticated system. He stated there is a lot of hardware, so there is a tendency for it to break; so they have built a backup radio system using the VHF frequency. He stated they still maintain the licenses for those radios for that operating frequency so they have been stockpiling their VHF infrastructure; and if a storm came through and knocked out the 800 system towers, they would still be able to talk to each other and survive until the full system was up and operational.
Mr. King stated what they have in Indian River County is every municipality is on the same radio system for everything from Public Safety to Public Works; in the old days if a Public Works person went from one city to another to assist them, that person would talk to the dispatcher, who would make a phone call to a dispatcher, who would talk to another Public Works person about how to communicate; but now they just crosspatch it. He stated today their system is great; they have three tower sites with a fourth site on standby; and they are going to be building another site with one-cent sales tax after October. He noted they are still working on that with FEMA reimbursements. He stated their 800 system was the only one that survived the hurricane season; they lost everything else; and it was the only thing that worked. He noted in the Gulf War 15 years ago, the first thing they did was to bomb the communications sites; when crews cannot talk to each other, they cannot provide services; they did have some damages in the storms; but they have the same vendor as Brevard County, and that vendor was in the EOC and at the communications sites all during the hurricanes, 24 hours a day until everything was fixed. Chief Neterer advised the vendor dropped a 400-foot tower and raised it after the winds. Mr. King stated the vendor did the same for Indian River County; and the vendor is close and provides good service. He stated cellular phones were lost within hours after the commercial electrical service was lost; there were battery backups, and when the battery power plants went, they lost cellular; and a lot of agencies moved off the 800 systems to cell phones because they were a little cheaper; but they were not worth much for a month after the storm. He stated in terms of mutual aid channels, they lost a lot of satellite dishes, which was the connection to the outside world; but Internet solved a lot of that for them as they had tens of thousands of contacts on the webpage with people asking what shelters were open or where they could get
DISCUSSION, RE: EMERGENCY RADIO COMPATIBILITY (CONTINUED)
food or essential services. He stated people ten counties away could go to a library if they did
not have a computer and check to see if they could come back into the County and if the power was back. Mr. King commented on amateur radio, mobile command vehicles, and damage to a 911 center, which lost part of a roof. He stated they went back to some very simple communications and made everything work relatively quickly; BellSouth came in and was with them 24 hours a day, interacting with call taking equipment; the Division of Communications from the State loaned them some communications towers and microwave links because they had miles of fiber connecting sites, and what was not taken down during the storm was taken down by people trimming trees. He stated they brought in a COW, which is communications on wheels; Nextel came in and brought some sites for them and the local radio station; and they had a local radio station that was on 24 hours a day with them, which was pretty impressive. He stated communications are important; the 800 system is not perfect, but it has been tested; it is consistent with what is being done in neighboring counties; and they are happy with their current system compared to what they had before.
not have a computer and check to see if they could come back into the County and if the power was back. Mr. King commented on amateur radio, mobile command vehicles, and damage to a 911 center, which lost part of a roof. He stated they went back to some very simple communications and made everything work relatively quickly; BellSouth came in and was with them 24 hours a day, interacting with call taking equipment; the Division of Communications from the State loaned them some communications towers and microwave links because they had miles of fiber connecting sites, and what was not taken down during the storm was taken down by people trimming trees. He stated they brought in a COW, which is communications on wheels; Nextel came in and brought some sites for them and the local radio station; and they had a local radio station that was on 24 hours a day with them, which was pretty impressive. He stated communications are important; the 800 system is not perfect, but it has been tested; it is consistent with what is being done in neighboring counties; and they are happy with their current system compared to what they had before.
DISCUSSION, RE: SOLID WASTE
Chairman Pritchard stated he does not know if Indian River County has received its full FEMA reimbursement, but Brevard County is still owed some money; and he thinks the money went to Dade County.
Brevard County Utility Services Director Dick Martens advised Euri Rodriguez who is the Solid Waste Manager and expert is also present; and they did not come to talk about FEMA reimbursement, but they certainly can. He stated Brevard County is 72 to 73 miles long; in the garbage business there are couple of things that are important; and first is when hauling garbage over some specified distance, it becomes economically more efficient to have transfer stations. He stated the other thing is to make disposal of special waste or non-household garbage more convenient for the citizens; last week they got direction to start looking at sites in the south end of the County; and they are looking for sites for a possible future transfer station and a specialty waste center south. He stated in Titusville there is a very popular facility that is not a transfer station, but is a mulching facility and disposal of household hazardous waste, white goods, and a number of services for citizens; there will be a need for that type of service in the south end of the County in the future; and at some point there will also be justification for a transfer station. He stated that is something they will be moving forward with; they will be looking in the area south of Palm Bay for a site; the City does not want anything like that in the City; so they will move south and look for some place else.
Commissioner Neuberger inquired where is the southernmost transfer station; with Mr. Martens responding in Melbourne. Commissioner Neuberger stated Indian River County does not mind Brevard County residents coming to the shelters, but the garbage will have to stay in the County. He stated there is a transfer station in Roseland; and there are people coming from Brevard County all the time. Commissioner Voltz stated they are looking for something in the south part of the County where they may be able to have mutual use. Commissioner Davis
DISCUSSION, RE: SOLID WASTE (CONTINUED)
inquired if Brevard County has mandatory pickup; with Mr. Martens responding yes, so he does
not see why anyone would be taking household garbage further south, and there is also mandatory yard waste collection in the unincorporated area.
not see why anyone would be taking household garbage further south, and there is also mandatory yard waste collection in the unincorporated area.
Discussion ensued on mandatory pickup, why people go to Indian River County, and staging areas during hurricanes.
Mr. Martens stated he and Mr. Olson had this conversation; Mr. Olson advised Indian River County was having these issues; siting a facility further south will help with yard waste and mulching, but most citizens have garbage and yard waste pickup; all they have to do is put it at the curb and the contractor takes it; and the citizens already pay for that.
Commissioner Bowden inquired how many days a week is waste collected; with Solid Waste Management Director Euri Rodriguez responding two days a week for garbage, one day a week for yard waste, and one day a week for recyclables, with no limit on volume. Mr. Martens noted as far as construction and demolition debris, people can put it in their garbage can, and nine times out of ten, the contractor will take it. Chairman Pritchard inquired why would Brevard County residents be taking their trash to the Indian River County facility; with Commissioner Voltz advising it is closer. Mr. Baird advised he does not know, but they get complaints; and they do not have time to really enforce it. Commissioner Voltz advised there is Countywide curbside pickup with no limit on how much they take.
Commissioner Voltz suggested going to the Micco Homeowners Association to do a presentation; stated the residents do not need to be taking their stuff to Indian River County; she knows the expense if people from other counties start bringing garbage to Brevard County; she does not want to see that; and she will do whatever she can to try to eliminate that as much as possible.
Mr. Martens stated the Mockingbird Road facility is not a C&D facility, but it does provide that service for residential people; and if the County builds a facility like that in the south end of the County, it will have that capability where if a homeowner tears out his rugs or pulls out a bunch of wallboard, and it is too much to put in the garbage, there will be a facility. Commissioner Voltz stated that is what they were hoping to locate far enough south to facilitate both counties because there is not enough growth right now in South Brevard to do anything; she does not know how co-mingling the funds would work; but it is something they might want to look at.
Commissioner Neuberger inquired why does the County have transfer stations if it has mandatory pickup. Chairman Pritchard responded it is for the trucks because Brevard is such a long county; and there is a landfill in Melbourne and one in Cocoa, so the routes are such that most trucks have to make two trips to the dump every day. Commissioner Neuberger inquired if the transfer stations are for the trucks, not the people; with Commissioner Voltz responding yes, they dump it all at the transfer station and then all that stuff is put into big 53-footers. Commissioner Neuberger stated Indian River County’s transfer stations are for people to deliver the garbage and trash. Commissioner Davis advised they have optional garbage pickup. Chairman Pritchard inquired if people load up their trunks with trash and take it over; with
DISCUSSION, RE: SOLID WASTE (CONTINUED)
Commissioner Davis responding yes; Indian River County calls them convenience centers; and the people love them.
Discussion ensued on door-to-door pickup and location of convenience centers.
Indian River County Utility Services Director Erik Olson stated they are going to look at commonality issues with Brevard County; what is different is that Indian River County does not have mandatory pickup that Brevard County has; and commented on the issues with Roseland and Fellsmere. He stated there are five convenience centers across Indian River County, two in the north end in Roseland and Fellsmere; they are set up for residential convenience; they do not accept construction and demolition debris; they are covered under the Countywide assessment process; and they are small. He stated some of the issues the two counties will talk about will include lessons learned from the hurricanes; Indian River County had contracts in place that allowed it to use larger contractors for debris pickup; they set up sites for pickup in the north and south ends of the County; and in general there are some issues that the counties will be talking about. He stated there are some differences between the two counties, primarily the non-mandatory/mandatory pickup issue; and whether they go to mandatory pickup in the near future is a tough way to go, but trendwise it may get into that. He stated he and Mr. Martens will get together and talk about other issues. He stated he would like to recognize Polly Kratman who is the Director for the Solid Waste System; and stated she is the one who faces the daily pain of these issues.
DISCUSSION, RE: TRANSIT SERVICES TO SOUTH BREVARD COUNTY
Commissioner Voltz stated a lot of people from Barefoot Bay go into Indian River County to do their shopping; they would like Brevard County to take its bus system down into Indian River County; but Brevard County does not allow the bus system to go over the County line.
Commissioner Neuberger inquired if Indian River County buses go north of the County line; with Mr. Baird responding no.
Discussion ensued on veterans; and Mr. Baird advised the veterans have worked it out, but there is an issue with different regions.
Brevard County Transit Services Director Jim Liesenfelt stated they tried to work it out through the Vanpool Program; they tried to do it with DOT rural money; and he talked to Glenn McGuffie, who is the Veterans Services Director, and they have worked it out so the veterans in Barefoot Bay area that want to go to Palm Beach can get a ride down there. Mr. Baird stated it is through a volunteer program.
Commissioner Voltz stated she is glad that is worked out, but beyond the veterans there is an issue with taking people from Barefoot Bay down to Indian River County for shopping. Mr. Liesenfelt stated they can sit down with staff; they tried over the years; the transit development plan for 1997 had a suggestion to cross the river to go to Wal-Mart; Indian River County has the
DISCUSSION, RE: TRANSIT SERVICES TO SOUTH BREVARD COUNTY (CONTINUED)
shopping; Brevard County has the people and the hospital; and the newspaper picked up the
issue and it became controversial. He stated they have tried several different things; but nothing generated a lot of ridership, so they are back to dial-a-bus. He stated one idea that is in
the transit plan is for the Council on Aging to come up to Barefoot Bay; they do not have a major issue with that; and there may be a way to coordinate. He stated he just wanted to see if everyone was open to the idea of one of the two systems crossing the river.
issue and it became controversial. He stated they have tried several different things; but nothing generated a lot of ridership, so they are back to dial-a-bus. He stated one idea that is in
the transit plan is for the Council on Aging to come up to Barefoot Bay; they do not have a major issue with that; and there may be a way to coordinate. He stated he just wanted to see if everyone was open to the idea of one of the two systems crossing the river.
Commissioners Neuberger and Davis indicated they had no problem with it.
Discussion ensued on ridership, survey responses, possibility of Barefoot Bay bus line, lack of response, vanpools, and Dial-a-bus.
Commissioner Neuberger stated it seems to be a non-issue. Mr. Liesenfelt comment on the controversy in 1997. Chairman Pritchard suggested doing another survey to see who would use the transit service to go to Indian River County.
Mr. Keating stated they looked at the issue with the recent transit development plan (TDP); TDP’s are prepared every three years, with a major update every three years and a minor update in the interim years; and for a small county, Indian River County has an ambitious transit system. He stated there are nine routes; all routes operate Monday through Saturday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; and they have made a number of improvements to the system over the last three or four years. He stated they instituted Saturday service with a grant from DOT; they built a downtown transit center; and they added a new route to serve the Wabasso area. He stated the ridership is approximately 250,000 on an annual basis; and displayed a chart showing ridership by route. He displayed charts showing trips per mile on each of the routes; stated there is a threshold that says each route should have a minimum of .25 rider per mile; and currently routes 5 and 9 are under that, so the Sebastian route has been underperforming. He stated as part of the TDP major update, they analyzed routes 5 and 9; with route 5, they looked at three alternatives, the first being keeping the status quo, the second was a realignment to the north and west, and the third was realigning to the south. He stated they picked the second option; route 5 will now go to Fellsmere because there is more demand; they also looked at the option of serving the Little Hollywood/Barefoot Bay area; but that would have produced only .08 rider per mile, which is under the threshold. He stated they are looking at an operating cost of $89,000 per year; there are some factors that make it something to consider in the future; but right now all entities did not think this is a viable service to be established in the near future. He stated they will continue to look at the demand there.
Commissioner Voltz expressed appreciation for the information. Mr. Keating stated in the future if it gets to the point where they think it may be fun to try it again, they can do another MPO joint agreement and possibly get some grant money to go over the bridge.
DISCUSSION, RE: LIBRARY INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS
Commissioner Neuberger inquired what is the southernmost Brevard County Library; with Library Services Director Catherine Schweinsberg responding Barefoot Bay. Commissioner Neuberger inquired if it is a full-service library; with Ms. Schweinsberg responding yes.
Ms. Schweinsberg stated Brevard County currently has interlocal agreements for library services with Orange, Osceola, and Volusia Counties; the Agreements state they will enhance and facilitate library services in the Central Florida region; it is recognized that many residents work in one County but live in a neighboring one; and the Agreements allow users to visit neighboring libraries, which may be more accessible based on their work location or commuting patterns. She stated an agreement with Indian River County would allow registered borrowers from Brevard County to become registered borrowers of the Indian River County library system without payment of a non-resident borrower fee and vice versa. She stated the agreements are simple in nature; they do not impact a lot of people; but the people they do impact are very appreciative. She stated if people live in a neighboring county and are on their way home, they can stop and get a book; there are approximately 240 to 300 participants for Orange County; and for those people, it is a wonderful service. She stated they are getting to the point where there are no visible boundaries for services.
Commissioner Voltz inquired if Indian River County is open to that. General Services Director Tom Frame stated revenue for non-residents is approximately $2,300 a year; and he spoke briefly to Indian River Library Services Director Mary Snyder. He stated in the past they have been resistant principally because of problems getting books back; they did not have a means to pick the books up; but that is not a major problem now. He stated the same issue came up with St. Lucie County; and they are looking into that. He stated it is not a big revenue issue; if they had agreements they would still be collecting on out-of-state residents; and it is probably something they could work out the details on; but they would want to take a closer look at it. He stated he got a copy of the interlocal agreements; and hopefully in the near future, they can report back to their Board.
Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
_____________________________________
RONALD PRITCHARD, D.P.A., CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK
(S E A L)