101788-Workshop Session4.56
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
October 17,
19 88
The City
the City Manager's Conference Room of the City
4:00 o'clock P. M. on October 17, 1988.
Hall in the City of Sanford,
Commission of the City of Sanford, Florida, met in Workshop Session in
Florida, at
Mayor-Commissioner Bettye D. Smith
Commissioner Whitey Eckstein
Commissioner John Y. Mercer
Commissioner Bob Thomas
Commissioner A. A. McClanahan
City Attorney William L.Colbert
City Manager Frank A. Faison
City Clerk H. N. Tamm, Jr.
Present:
The meeting was called t6 order by the Chairman.
The City Attorney, Bill Colbert, introduced Bob Guthrie, Assistant City Attorney
for the City of Orlando. Mr. Guthrie discussed the advantages and pitfalls of starting a
redevelopment district. He stated that the Orlando Redevelgpm~ent Distr~' covered a
large area, including the heart of downtown, Lake Eola and West of town, twelve projects in
the downtown area, street scape, housing components, land acquisitions for three housing
projects by three bond issues. Also, Cocoa' on the other hand, works on a year to year basis
on the amount of tax increment generated between $130,000 and $136,000. The types of
projects done by Cocoa are similar to Orlando's such as parking lots, consultant fees for a
proposed marina on Indian River, individual grant for sewer lines, storm water run off,
roads, and sidewalks.
Mr. Guthrie stated the City Council can be the governing body or can appoint a
separate agency, and can also put certain limits on the agency such as plan approval by
City Council. There must be five to seven members on the board. Tax increment must be used
to fund 'the project, the City may contribute funds as well. If there are insufficient
funds, and the agency is dissolved, the City w~uld be responsible to pay off debt.
Pitfalls would be if the project undertaken is to large an area and the amount of
the tax increment cannot produce enough taxes, or the projections of growth are over
anticipated.
The City Attorney stated that the first decision would be to consider tax
increment financing, then to set up public hearings.
The City Engineer submitted a review of the proposal for One-Stop Permitting for
movie production as follows:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
City Manager
Director of Engineering and Planning
One-Stop Permitting for Movie Production
October 7, 1988
Mr. Faison:
Gary Winn and I have reviewed the material forwarded by
Industrial Development Commission of Mid Florida letter of
October 4, 1988. We have also consulted with Gretchen Mason
and determined that there are no present requirements for
occupational licenses relative to movie production. The
proposal for "one-stop" permitting appears to have great
merit, and it is recommended that City of Sanford cooperate
in such a program.
MINUTE S 4 5 7
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
October 17,
19 88
Two major steps are recommended. First is the adoption of an
ordinance relating to motion picture development, similar to
the ordinance adopted by City of Orlando on February 8, 1988.
Secondly, a single point of contact within City Government
should be designated for the operation of the ordinance,
internal to City Government, and for future external
coordination with the County-wide single point of contact
agent proposed by Industrial Development Commission. A
check-list of considerations and identification of
responsible City department should be developed under the
internal City Government single point of contact concept. If
well thought out, policy covering most potential requirements
will have been developed in advance so that the designated
single point of contact person will need few additional ad
hoc policy determinations relative to any specific motion
picture production permit application. The check-list and
application for permit form developed by City of Orlando will
be very helpful in developing these standard policies.
To avoid duplication of effort whereby the City develops a
system, only to have it over-taken by a County-wide system,
it is recommended that we promptly support the concept of a
County-wide system and encourage rapid movement in the
development of that system. In the interim, it is
recommended that the City of Orlando permit process and
forms be adapted for use within City of Sanford and'
that departmental review channels be identified to expedite
necessary approvals.
Cathy Savino, Industrial Development Committee of Central Florida, recommended
that no permit fee be charged, and stated that they production company would pay for any,
expenses incurred in using off duty police officers or fire rescue units.
The Commission authorized staff to proceed with the recommendation that the City
support the concept of a county-wide system and encourage county to proceed quickly. ~
The City Engineer submitted the -preliminary plat of Whippoorwill Subdivision
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 6, 1988.
The Commission approved same.
The City Manager submitted
system as follows:
a f~view
of the proposals to replace the telephone
October 13, 1988
MEMORAND~
TO:
Mayor and City Commission
FROM:
City Manager
SUBJECT: Telephone Purchase
RECOMMENDATION: That the Mayor and City Commission
authorize the City Manager to purchase a telephone system
from Southern Bell/Northern Telecom at a cost of $50,799
plus selected options at $9,670 to be financed over five (5)
years. Since the yearly cost to purchase is less than the
City is paying to lease the existing AT&T phone system,
additional funds are not being requested. 'Although not a
hardware purchase item, Direct Inward Dialing capability is
also recommended for approval.
BACKGROUND: Approximately three (3} weeks ago, the Mayor
and City Commission gave approval to "narrow'' the list of
proposed phone systems from nine (9) to three (3): Jarvis,
Executone, and Southern Bell/Northern Telecom. AT&T
subsequently amended their original proposal, paring the
cost enough to warrant further consideration.
TEC..~HNICAL ANALYSIS: With valuable assistance from a
telephone expert residing in the City, a spreadsheet,
included as Attachment 1, was developed from the original
proposals showing a comparison of technical features between
the systems. As the proposals were amended over time and
additional information and/or clarification of technical
features was obtained, the spreadsheet was updated. A
''point'' system was also established to weigh value of the
technical features within each of the systems.
458
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
October 17,
19 88
Although Jarvis and Executone submitted attractive
proposals, both .vendors included a type of telephone line
cost which, although low in cost today, could become legal
''sticky wickets''.
Highest in the technical analysis point rating showed a tie
between AT&T AND Southern Bell/Northern Telecom.
COST ANALYSIS: Updated cost comparisons between the phone
systems are included in Attachment %2. Notice that Southern
Bell/Northern Telecom is lower in price than AT&T's purchase
price. Also notice that Southern Bell/Northern Telecom's
five year cost which includes maintenance is likewise lower
that AT&T's. Both proposals cost significantly less than
retaining existing equipment under lease at one year and
five year proj%ctions.
Options: Both the AT&T and Southern Bell/Northern Telecom
proposals include certain features, which if purchased,
offer improvements intended to more effectively serve our
citizens. Depending upon the options selected, purchase
cost will need to be added into the basic purchase price.
Attachment %3 provides an overview of these enhancements.
Summary: A review of the analysis shows that both Southern
Bell/Northern Telecom and AT&T provide technical features in
their systems sufficient to .meet the City's telephone
needs...today and in the future. Given the fact that both
systems are highly rated, the decision to purchase rest upon
purchase cost and cost to maintain over time. Analysis of
these costs show Southern Bell/Northern Telecom's purchase
costs and maintenance being lower than AT&T's, resulting in
the recommendation to purchase the Southern Bell/Northern
Telecom system.
The Commission authorized the purchase for the new telephone system be placed on
the agenda of October 24, 1988.
The City Engineer submitted a memo on the impact fee program element for the
Jewett Lane Sewer Project as follows:
MEMORANDL~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
City Manager
Director of Engineering and Planning
Impact Fee Program Element - Jewett Lane Sewer
Project
October 12, 1988
Mr. Faison:
Ordinance 1845 established the present water and sewer impact
fees and adopted the Conklin, Porter & Holmes Water and Sewer
Impact Fee Study dated September 15, 1986 as the underlying
basis for computation and allocation of capital costs for new
improvements to be funded under the impact fee program. The
Impact Fee Study included requirement to up-grade the
existing Jewett Lane lift station and to install new 8" force
main for the Jewett Lane and Academy Manor lift stations, in
order to provide additional capacity to serve new development
in that area.
The attached letter of October 4, 1988 identifies the first
specific request for service which appears to require the
projected impact fee improvements. Paul Moore's memorandum
of September 26, 1988, attached, identifies various cost
elements associated with providing service in the area
requested by Mr. Seigler. Items 5 and 6 are the impact fee
fundable items. Item 4 is an over due repair of an existing
gravity line which at completion will provide capacity to
handle flows originating west of Airport Boulevard.
Discussions with Mr. 'Seigler indicate that his client is
willing to fund Items i thru 3 to collect and deliver
wastewater to our gravity sewer located east of Airport
Boulevard. Design as well as construction of facilities
west of Airport Boulevard would not be City responsibility.
MINUTES 4 5 9
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
October 17,
19 88
Based on the expressed requirement, it is recommended that
City Commission approve preparation of plans and
specifications for the up-grade of the Jewett Lane lift
station, and installation of a new 8" force main from the
Jewett Lane lift station to 13th Street, and repair by
replacement of the existing 10" gravity sewer line along
Jewett Lane east of Airport Boulevard. Plans and
specifications will be prepared under a consultant contract
to be approved by City Commission.
The Utility Director submitted a memo on the costs impact fee program dated
September 26, 1988 as follows:
MEMORANDUM
September 26, 1988
To: Director of Engineering & Planning
From: Utility Director
Re: Jewett Lane Sewer Project
Bill -
You had asked me to look at the costs associated with
providing sewer to the Jewett Lane/Bevier area. The existing
gravity sewer, lift station and force-main system on Jewett
Lane could be improved or expanded to provide additional
sewerage capacity in this area.
Preliminary investigation reVeals that the existing ten (10)
inch gravity main could be replaced and the existing Jewett
Lane lift station upgraded. We would also need to add a new
eight (8") inch force-main from the Jewett Lane lift station
to its discharge point at 13th Street and Persimmon Avenue.
Listed below is a summary of improvements with cost
estimates:
1) Addition of a City lift station $50,000
near the L.O.N. Building on Bevier
2) Installation of six (~") inch $24,000
force- main from lift station
to gravity line on Jewett.
(2000'6 $12/ft.)
3) Jack and Bore of Airport Blvd. $10,000
(100 ft. @ $100/ft)
4) Replace ten (10") inch gravity $42,500
sewer line on Jewett Lane
(1700 ft. @ $25/ft.)
5) Upgrade existing Jewett Lane $20,000
lift station
6) Install new eight (8") inch $60,000
force-main from Jewett Lane lift
station to 13th Street and
Persimmon (4000 ft. @ $15/ft.)
7) Site & Pavement restoration
$10,000
8) Engineering $20,000
9) Contingency (@ 10%)
$23,650
$260,150
This project would need detail engineering work with plans
and specifications. The completion of this work would add
sewer capacity of approximately 150 gpm and result in a lift
station at the L.O.N. site that could be expanded and
redirected in the future.
The action of the Commission was to authorize the impact fee for the Jewett Lane
Sewer Project be placed on the agenda of October 24, 1988.
460
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
October 17, 19 88
The City Engineer submitted a memo on the Mill Creek/loud Branch Drainage study~
as follows:
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM:
Director of Engineering and Planning
SUBJECT: Mill Creek/Cloud Branch Drainage Study
DATE:
October 13, 1988
Mr. Faison:
The subject study, financed by CDBG funds is now complete.
Excerpts from -the'study including summary and conclusions,
existing drainage patterns, and recommended correction
actions are attached. For each of the drainage basins
several individual but related types of corrective actions
are recommended. For the drainage to work correctly, all of
the corrections must be, over time, implemented. Actions
recommended include the following:
Channel cleaning and regrading, including future maintenance
as necessary..
Create on-line storm water retention/detention pond systems.
Piping of certain sections that are now open ditch. Correct
culvert road crossing sizes.
Opinions of probable cost of these various actions have been
developed and are included in the attached summary. Individual
projects have been prioritized to allow proper identification
of projects to be funded by Seminole County "Year 3" CDBG
funds $170,000, plus $10,000 carried over from "Year 2"
program. Design has started utilizing the $10,000 carry
over.
Estimated costs for total correction in these drainage
basins exceed $4.5 million, not including land acquisition
costs associated with retention facilities and rights-of-way
for drainage installation and maintenance. This cost is
clearly beyond our capability to fund as a single project, or
in increments over a reasonable period of time. On the other
hand, I believe we should move forward with preliminary
engineering, and preliminary exploration of possible land
acquisition of the recommended on-line retention pond sites,
in order to insure that improvements actually installed early
in the process are in fact correctly designed & appropriately
sized. (If it is determined that acquisition of some of the
recommended retention pond land is for any reason not
feasible, then the increase in design flows resulting from
less than planned retention/detention would probably result
in a requirement for larger pipes and culverts than specified
in the balanced program recommended by the study.) The scope
of necessary preliminary engineering and real estate
acquisition research goes far beyond that which would
normally be included in the limited design scope for the
structures to be corrected utilizing available CDBG funds..
It is therefore recommended that City Commission authorize
Staff to obtain an appropriate engineering services proposal
for preliminary engineering of the program as a whole, uti-
lizing funding from local option gas tax which has been ear-
marked for road and drainage correction in the Goldsboro area
and to contact owners of land recommended for retention
sites. Any actual contract or contract amendment to
accomplish the proposed engineering work will be subject to
subsequent City Commission approval prior to execution.
The City Engineer stated that the cost of maintaining the open ditches is
extremely high, and would like to request proposals for engineer fees at this time.
The Commission authorized the proposals for engineering fees for the Mill
Creek/Cloud Branch Drainage study be placed on the agenda for October 24, 1988o
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
October 17,
19 88
The City Manager stated that staff had put a package together for setting up
standards for free refuse pick-up. A proposed guideline and format verification would be
established by using HRS scale for medically needy, application for waiver, authorization
to verify income and income verification forms. The Sanford Scale for free assistance is
as follows:
CITY OF SANFORD SCALE FOR REFUSE COLLECTION FEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
POVERTY GUIDELINES
REFUSE COLLECTION FEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CITY OF SANFORD, FLORIDA
SIZE
GROSS GROSS
HOUSEHOLD MONTHLY ANNUAL
INCOME INCOME
1
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11+
480 $ 5,760
644 7,728
807 9,684
970 11,640
1,134 13,608
1,297 15,564
1,460 17,520
1,624 19,488
1,787 22,444
1,950 23,400
163 per person 1,956 per person
The Commission authorized said standards for mandatory free refuse pick-up be
placed on the agenda for October 24, 1988.
1/1/89
The City Manager stated
mandates for employee
that the
benefits
Tax Reform Act of 1986 Section 89, effective
is vast and complicated. The City staff will
initially try and do the revisions in house,
and that he would report back on their
progress.
The City Manager submitted' a memo on the hazardous chemicals communication
standard as set forth by O.S.H.A. as follows:
MEMORANDUM
October 11, 1988
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
FROM: CITY MANAGER
RE:
HAZARD'S (CHEMICALS) COMMUNICATION STANDARD ...AN OSHA
MANDATE
Enclosed for your review are highlights of the O.S.H.A.
Hazard Communication Standard. Fire Marshall Tom Martin and
Fire Chief Tom Hickson attended a recent seminar to ascertain
the needs and responsibilities of the City of Sanford.
The Fire Chief has been designated as the "responsible"
official for purposes of monitoring and advising on the
requirements of the act and the status of compliance by the
City (city employees, that is.) Studies are underway to
determine if this can be accomplished with existing staff or
if additional help will be needed.
A follow-up report will be forthcoming in about 60 days.
462
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
October 17 ~
19 88
The City Manager submitted a memo on the Mayfair Golf Course lease as follows:
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 12, 1988
TO: Mayor & City Commission
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Mayfair Status Report
Attached for your review is a spreadsheet (Attachment A)
concerning Items #2 "Rentals" and %16 ''5-Year Improvement
Plan'' contained in the lease. According to Item %2, Mayfair
is to spend annually on capital improvements in lieu bf rent,
5% of all gross-revenues With the exception of the Pro Shop.
In the event that no capital improvements are made, rent. is
to be paid to the City of Sanford. It is further agreed that
credits between the 5% gross amount and the capital
improvement amount actually spent may be carried over from
year to year. Mayfair has accumulated credits as of the end
of 1986-87 year in the amount of $88,166 (B7 & E6) per
attachment "A", minus the 5% of gross revenue of $79,017 (H7
& %8) leaving a credit balance of $9,149 to be carried into
subsequent year.
The five year improvement plan included in the lease
agreement (copy attached) has been completed according to the
terms of the lease leaving the 5% of gross revenues as the
issue to be resolved.
It is recommended that the City Commission disallow (not
prevent) any further capital improvements to golf course,
beginning with the 1987-88 report period. Based on current
trends monies due the City can be expected in the 1988-89
Fiscal Year. This will then place'in gear the mechanism for
the City of Sanford to begin receiving revenues from Mayfair.
The action of the Commission was to authorize the City Manager and City Attorney
to communicate to the lessee that the City is not willing to accept any more improvements
on the property as part of the rent, and that a percentage of the profits as stated in the
lease would be the amount of rent to be paid t8 the City.
Letter submitted from Ann W. Neiswender, member of School Board of Seminole
County, requesting a contribution in amount of $405.00 for six billboard signs to display
appreciation for the Seminole High School's State Track Champions.
The City Engineer submitted a memo regarding the newspaper article referring to a
$17,234. expenditure item in the CDBG Rental Rehabilitation Program.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
-' ~/MA Y 0 R
ATTEST: