Loading...
01-05-98 v1/11) MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING MEETING HELD IN CITY HALL, 800 SEMINOLE ROAD, AT 7:15 PM ON MONDAY, JANUARY 5, 1998 Present: Mayor Suzanne Shaughnessy Commissioner Richard Beaver Commissioner Mike Borno Commissioner John Meserve Commissioner Theo Mitchelson Also: City Manager James Jarboe City Attorney Alan Jensen City Clerk Maureen King The meeting which was held for the purpose of hearing and considering the views of the public concerning drainage improvements in the core city area, was called to order by Mayor Shaughnessy. The City Manager gave a brief overview of the project and explained the process which had been used thus far to come up with the proposed design. He reviewed some of the recommendations presented by the committee which was appointed to review the project and recommend options which would not negatively impact Howell Park; recommendations which had been presented by the city's Public Works Department; and the amendments which had been suggested by the design engineers, England, Thims& Miller. Mayor Shaughnessy indicated her primary goal was to address the drainage problems and her second goal was to preserve Howell Park* She then opened the floor for a public hearing and invited comments from the audience. The following is a summary of the speakers and their comments. John Finotti,376 Fourth Street: Opposed to swales on Fourth Street. Indicated that there were several rental properties on this street and he felt that the ditches would not be maintained by renters. Mr. Finotti also felt that swales would have a negative impact on property values. Stephen Fouraker, 387 Sixth Street: Reported that Howell Park was originally called Atlantic Beach Environmental Park and felt that, in addition to a park, this area provided a natural wildlife which should be preserved. He felt that while there was a serious drainage problem, there were design alternatives which would address the drainage issues without impacting the park and these alternatives should be considered. He was concerned that the city had not sought the services of an unbiased consultant to review all the alternatives presented, and urged the City Commission to consider hiring such an individual. Stephen Kuti, 1132 Linkside Drive: Supported the plan suggested by the City Manager and staff Revise location of ponds in Howell Park under current design to use existing open area;utilize baffle boxes,reroute discharge to Plaza and Howell Park- See Minutes of workshop held on December 23, 1997, Exhibit A). He suggested the city look for individual solutions for homes which experience chronic flooding. He felt it was important to control the incoming tide waters and suggested the amend the minutes to add the following: In 113, page one, insert the words "as a public trust" at the end of the first sentence and add the following as the second sentence, "She stressed seeking solutions which will address both items and both issues". (As amended during the January 12, 1998 Commission Meeting) . Page Two Minutes -Public Hearing Meeting January 5, 1998 addition of a pump station. He indicated that there were retired engineers in the city with the expertise to design such a pump station. J.P. Marchioli, 414 Sherry Drive: Reported he had been out of town for two months and was disappointed that more progress had not been made during that time. Donald Phillips, 1566 Park Terrace West: Referred to a pumping facility at Marsh Landing and suggested the city construct a similar pump station at Fleet Landing. Mr. Phillips presented a written report dated January 5, 1998 with information regarding the Marsh Landing pump station, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Joe Posch, 142 Magnolia Street: Felt the England, Thims and Miller (ETM) design was not in compliance with the city's Request for Proposals. Mr. Posch presented a written report dated January 5, 1998, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Alan Potter, 374 Second Street: Felt the pipes in the ETM were oversized and that reduction of the pipe size could save $600,000. Mr. Potter presented a letter dated January 5, 1998, which is attached hereto as Exhibit C. Steve Rosenbloom, 1417 Beach Avenue (Former City Commissioner): Pointed out that the matter of retention ponds was brought before the City Commission by the engineers in the early stages of the design process and that every step of the ETM plan was approved by the City Commission. He felt the ETM engineers had designed the project as they had been directed by the City Commission. It was his opinion that everyone wanted to save the park, but he felt that City Commissioners were elected by the people to be community leaders and it was time to make a decision and move on. He felt that swales would turn the historic area of the city into a retention area and were totally inappropriate for the core city. Cindy Corey,394 Eighth Street: Felt that someone with the technical knowledge and an unbiased viewpoint was needed to assist the city in making an intelligent, responsible decision for the city's stormwater management. She presented a letter dated January 5, 1998, which is attached hereto as Exhibit D. Betty Eilers,369 Third Street: Reported she had experienced frequent flooding for several years. She said the city has resurfaced the street several times, thus raising the level of the street, and has installed a sidewalk and the run-off now runs onto her property. She indicated she had spent thousands of dollars to keep the flood waters out of her home, including raising the floor level in her home. She said she has spoken to various city officials over a period of years and they have always indicated that something would be done, however, the flooding problem continues. She urged the City Commission to make the necessary decisions and move ahead with this project. Page Three Minutes - Public Hearing Meeting January 5, 1998 George Dyer, 320 Fifth Street: Indicated that Fifth Street has had flooding problems for years. He indicated that residents had tried to solve the problem themselves by digging swales, raising driveways, and other similar measures. He felt the existing ETM design with curbs and gutters and lowering the streets seemed to be a good plan. He indicated he would be in favor of the alternate plan to relocate the retention pond in Howell Park in order to save trees. He felt that a lake in the park could enhance the aesthetics of the park. He felt the city had carefully considered the qualifications of engineers who responded to the RFP and had selected a well qualified firm for the project. He urged the City Commission to approve the plan for a retention pond in the park, curbs and gutters in the core city, and move ahead with the project. Dorothy Kerber, 365 First Street: Appreciated the fact that changes to the original design would cost additional money but felt it would be worth the extra cost to save the trees. She also supported the addition of a storm water pump station and felt that measures needed to be taken to stop the incoming tide waters. Tom Martin, 301 Pine Street: Reported that he has had up to two feet of standing water at his home. He expressed concern that any plan which would increase the flow of stormwater into Howell Park could exacerbate the flooding in his area. He urged the City Commission to consider the construction of a pump station at Mayport Road. Richard Moore, 376 Ninth Street: Reported that he has experienced flooding at his home and hoped the city would adopt a plan which would address the flooding problems. He felt that the number of trees proposed to be removed was relatively small,probably not more than .1% of the trees in the city. Pete Dowling, 113 Fourth Street: Felt that growth must be handled in a more creative way. In view of the flooding problems reported this evening, Mr. Dowling felt the City Commission needed to declare the most severe problems an emergency, and hire a consultant to analyze the recommendations presented. Alan Potter read a letter from Richard Hilliard, 338 Eleventh Street: Mr. Hilliard expressed opposition to parts of the stormwater drainage plan. He felt that it would be necessary to address the reverse tidal actions. Mr. Hilliard's letter is attached hereto as Exhibit E. Eddie Hilliard, 338 Eleventh Street: Opposed to swales. Mr. Hilliard indicated he had no problem with losing a few trees, if necessary. He supported construction of a pump station. He felt the project should be done right and if necessary, start the design process over. Page Four Minutes - Public Hearing Meeting January 5, 1998 Carolyn Woods, 303 Sixth Street: Felt that this was a complex problem and that this project required a design team which had the technical expertise to solve the drainage problems and the ability to work with a multi-faceted community. There being no further comments from the audience, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. Mayor Shaughnessy indicated she would not rush this project through but would ensure that the City Commission was properly informed before making a final decision. She felt that she did not have adequate information at this point and requested that a workshop meeting be scheduled for the City Commission and the Howell Park Review Committee to discuss the various options which had been proposed. Mayor Shaughnessy indicated she had discussed with the City Manager the possibility of asking the City Commission to waive the bidding requirements and asking some of the talented engineers in the community,if they would be interested,to design, seal and permit, a pump station if it could be done within the confines of a $350,000.00 cost. She requested that this matter be placed on the agenda for the January 12, 1998, meeting. Commissioner Beaver indicated that the Eilers, Dyers and the Isaacs families, all long time residents of the city, have experienced serious flooding problems which have been caused, in part by the city. As adjoining properties were filled in and developed, the run-off from the newly developed properties created major flooding problems for these families and he felt the city needed to give special consideration to their problems. Commissioner Mitchelson indicated he had several questions regarding cost estimates for maintenance,down stream impact, pipe sizes, etc., which he would present in written form to allow time for staff and/or the engineers to research. He also felt the matter of underground electrical service needed to be revisited. It was suggested that commissioners submit questions in writing and staff and engineers would have responses at the workshop meeting. Mayor Shaughnessy suggested that commissioners listen to the tape of engineer, Mike Schmidt's presentation to the Howell Park Review Committee which she felt they would find beneficial. Hugh Mathews, project engineer, indicated his firm had been hired by the city almost two years ago and had assigned a team of professionals including environmental engineers, to this project and had worked closely with CH2M Hill, who had drafted the Stormwater Master Plan. He pointed out that various alternatives were presented to the City Commission during the preliminary engineering stage. When the decisions were made the engineers then proceeded to design a cost effective system which had the ability to be reasonably maintained, could be constructed for a reasonable price, and which could be permitted. As the city's consultant, he indicated he would design any option the city Page Five Minutes -Public Hearing Meeting January 5, 1998 chose,but he felt it was his job as the city's consultant to inform the city of the consequences of its decisions, whether budgetary, affecting life style, etc., and to suggest alternatives which may be available. There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 9:21 PM. Suzanne Shaughnessy MAYOR/PRESIDING OFFICER ATTEST: M reen King CERTIFIED MUNICIPAL CLERK Donald L. Phillips 1566 Park Terrace West Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 January 5, 1998 EXHIBIT A City Commission PUBLIC HEARING - JANUARY 5, 1998 City of Atlantic Beach 800 Seminole Road Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 ATTN: Mrs . Suzanne Shaughnessy, Mayor Mr. John Meserve, Commissioner Mr. Mike Borno, Commissioner Mr. Theo Mitchelson, Commissioner Mr. Richard Beaver, Commissioner Subject : Discussion of Howell Park Review Committee Recommendation 12, "Add Pump Station at Fleet Landing" Dear Commissioners : As you know, the main emphasis of the efforts of the Howell Park Review Committee, appointed by Mayor Fletcher and chaired by Commissioner Mike Borno, was to identify alternative ways to handle stormwater pollution without impacting the natural environment of Howell Park via destruction of trees for a stormwater retention pond. Although I was not a member of this committee, I did attend practically all of their meetings and I assure you, the problems of residential flooding was always on their minds and they worked very hard to develop timely, workable, and cost-effective alternatives to the destruction of Howell Park. The committee did, in fact, succeed in identifying improvements to the England- Thims and Miller (ETM) contract plans which would (1) avoid major impact to Howell Park, (2) offer potential cost savings to the City, and also (3) meet acceptable permitting requirements of the St . Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) . The final report of this committee presented twelve recommended improvements to the ETM contract plans . This document addresses only the twelfth recommendation which was- ADD. PUMP STATION AT FLEET LANDING. Over a year ago I urged this Commission to evaluate a stormwater pump alternative similar to the pump facility serving Marsh Landing. Some of the particulars of the Marsh Landing pump facility (including pictures) are attached to this document . I don' t plan to discuss the Marsh Landing pump facility in detail, but I do want to mention some of the features of a stormwater pump facility and point out some of the positive and negative factors of a stormwater pump facility. First the features of a stormwater pump facility - The Marsh Landing pumping facility is relatively simple and consists of a collection basin, the pumps, and an out-fall basin. The collection basin at Marsh Landing is basically a small pond, approximately 8 feet deep. The sides and bottom are lined with an inexpensive concrete fabric liner to easily remove sedimentation. There are three pumps, two 30" diesel driven pumps and one 24" electric driven pump, housed in a simple, but attractively landscaped wood frame building. The out-fall basin is primarily an open drainage ditch approximately 40 feet wide and 8 feet deep. Concrete fabric liner is also used to line the sides and bottom of the out-fall basin to prevent erosion. The pumped water ultimately drains into the intracoastal waterway. Flood Control Gates are also frequently installed, although flood gates are not a part of the Marsh Landing facility. The cost of the Marsh Landing facility was under $300, 000 . It is not unique . Many small developments along the east coast of Florida manage their drainage and flood control via a control pump facility similar to the one serving Marsh Landing. The deep Selva drainage ditch located below Fleet Landing would be an ideal site for a simple, low cost pump facility. Mayport Road serves as a natural dike (levee) to protect Atlantic Beach from high tides during hurricane seasons . The deep drainage ditch with steep sides adjacent to Mayport Road could serve as a natural collection and out-fall basin. Positive and negative factors of a stormwater pump facility are described in detail in your attachment . However, please permit me to mention some of these positive and negative factors . POSITIVE FACTORS : 1 . ELIMINATES TIDAL INFLUENCE ON THE CITY' S STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM. Control of the tide level of Selva Lagoon increases the hydraulic gradient of the drainage area and improves the efficiency of the entire drainage system. An increased hydraulic gradient permits the use of smaller, less expensive, drainage pipes . 2 . PERMITS PRO-ACTIVE CONTROL OF STORM WATER RELEASE . This is extremely important to down-stream areas ! Where a "fixed or passive pipe/ditch-only system, as designed by ETM, offers no adjustment capability in the release of stormwater, a pump facility permits water to be stored during critical (high tide) periods and released downstream during non-critical (low tide) conditions . 3 . OFFERS A MEASURE OF PROTECTION AGAINST HURRICANE STORM SURGES . Mayport Road serves as a natural dike capable of protecting the core city of Atlantic Beach from flood damage due to extreme high tide storm surges caused by hurricanes . 4 . ELIMINATES THREAT OF FLOODING TO PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO SELVA LAGOON. The ETM plan provides no improvements to downstream problems, particularly high tides, which is a major contributor to the flooding problems of the residents living adjacent to Howell Park and the Selva Marina Lagoon. In fact, the improvements proposed by ETM will move a greater volume of stormwater to the waters of the Selva Lagoon more quickly and, without some control of tidal influences, will cause greater flooding problems for property adjacent to Selva Lagoon. Selva Marina Country Club, the largest land owner of property adjacent to the Selva Lagoon supports a stormwater pump facility. 5 . WOULD PROBABLY BE APPROVED BY ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT. It is important to understand that a stormwater pump facility would serve as an intermittent emergency cgnt;ol facility and would be operational .only during periods of extree high tides and/or periods of unusually heavy rainfall . At all other times the flood control gates would remain open to allow Selva Lagoon to drain naturally as it does now. Discussions with Ken Johns St . Johns River Water Management District SJRWMD) indicated that SJRWMD would probably have no objection. as long as the facility were used for intermittent control Qf the level of the lagoon. NEGATIVE FACTORS : 1 . COST Design and construction cost of a storm water pump station would be an added cost . However, costs could be offset by savings to other areas see positive factor 1, above) . 2 . MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND SECURITY Pump station facility would add to the management, maintenance and security responsibilities of Public Works . During the 23 December stormwater workshop comments to the Stormwater Review Committee Recommendations were furnished by both the City Engineer and England Thims & Miller. Their exact comments relating to Recommendation 12 ADD PUMP STATION AT FLEET LANDING" are attached to this report . Please carefully evaluate some of the issues identified in their comments . 1 . CONCERNS ABOUT DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS . CITY- Any pump station design must consider downstream impacts, and will be expensive. ETM- Extensive downstream improvements (as discussed in "The Why" section below) would also be required prior to installation of the pump station to prevent increasing downstream flooding. FACT- Downstream flood impact could be reduced. A pump facility permits water to be stored during critical high tide periods and released downstream during non-critical low tide conditions . FACT- The ETM plan provides no improvements to downstream problems, particularly high tides . In fact, under the current plan the downstream impacts" should consider the Selva Lagoon and the ETM plan moves a greater volume of stormwater to the waters of the Selva Lagoon more quickly and will cause greater flooding problems for property owners adjacent to Selva Lagoon. 2 . COST CITY- Preliminary estimated costs for pump station were $450, 000, including flap gate . Other items do not increase costs of base project . ETM- Anticipated cost is in excess of $1 million. FACT- The cost of the Marsh Landing stormwater pump facility was under 300, 000 which excluded property costs . The City' s estimate of 450, 000 therefore seems reasonable . ETM- The City does not currently have ownership over most areas of the Lagoon, which would require condemnation proceedings and associated costs to obtain easements . FACT- City attorney should investigate the need of an easement . However, because of long-term continuity of public usage of Selva Lagoon and out-fall canal for public purposes, including periodic maintenance, the City of Atlantic Beach does, in fact, possess a "Prescribed Easement" for continued use . Also, residents adjacent to the Selva Lagoon have the most to gain from a facility capable of eliminating flood problems to their property due to extreme high tides and would probably welcome City management and maintenance of a stormwater pump facility. 3 . CLASSIFICATION OF SELVA LAGOON CITY- No mention of classification. ETM- This option would change the state classification of the Lagoon from the existing designation of Class III waters to a designation of stormwater treatment pond, which would prohibit fishing, boating, etc . We believe that it would not be possible to obtain agreements from all adjacent property owners on this issue. ETM- The Lagoon is currently classified as "Waters of the State" and therefore providing treatment in this area will require mitigation of degradation of State waters . FACT- Selva Lagoon would not serve as a stormwater treatment pond and SJRWMD would not consider it as such. Treatment would be accomplished by baffle boxes or other treatment features prior to water entering Selva Lagoon. There would be no change in the current condition of the waters of Selva Lagoon. It is important to understand that the stormwater pump facility would serve only as an intermittent emergency control facility and would be operational only during periods of extreme. high tides and/or periods of unusually heavy rainfall . At all other times the flood control gates would remain open to allow Selva Lagoon to drain naturally as it does now. In closing, let me thank you for allowing me the opportunity to express my concerns relative to the difficult decisions facing you in the evaluation of this controversial project . As elected officials you shall decide the fate of this drainage project . Has the engineer furnished the City with his best stormdrainage plan? Are his cost estimates for implementing the various stormwater treatment recommendations reasonable? Are the pipe sizes realistic? Did he use the correct "Concentration Time" and "Coefficient of Runoff" in his determination of "Runoff Volume"? Has he provided flood protection for a 2-year storm for the core city, including property adjacent to Selva Lagoon? Has he demonstrated a high level of competence and integrity in his coordination of this project with the Citizens of Atlantic Beach? Has he included features in his plan to reduce the impact of flooding due to extreme high tides? I dont know what your answers would be to these questions, but my answers would be NO TO ALL OF THE A$QVB . Respectfully yours, pepiliamare4) Donald L . Phillips cc : Ms . Maureen King, City Clerk Attachments : 1 . Marsh Landing Main Pump Facility 2 . Positive and Negative Factors of a Stormwater Pump Facility 3 . Howell Park Review Committee Recommendation 12 (Pump Station) Marsh Landing Main Pump Facility This is a brief description of the stormwater pump facility serving the Marsh Landingdevelopment, as explained to Don Phillips on 11/7/96 by Mike McInerney, Marsh LandingDrainageSupervisor. (Note: Mr. Don Wright, phone 273-3033 now serves as Marsh LandingDrainageSupervisor) Marsh Landing encompasses about 1700 acres, of which approximately 80% is subject to flood control . Flood Control in Marsh Landing is accomplished primarily by a pumping facility which is able to control the water level of a number of holding ponds or small inter-connected lakes located throughout the development. In addition to it's ability to handle storm drainage the pump facility is also able to provide a measure of protection from extreme high tides caused by northeasters and/or hurricane conditions . The main pump facility consists of two 30" diesel driven pumps and one 24" electric driven pump. Most of the control is accomplished by the 24" electric driven pump except during extreme conditions or during periods of electrical power outage. The provision of two diesel pumps also serve as a measure of backup in the event a pump may be inoperable. During the period 2-8 October 1996 (a 10-year storm) , when this area experienced heavy rains, high tide conditions, and strong northeasterly winds, Mr. McInerney said he was able to control drainage and flooding in Marsh Landing by lowering the level of the holding ponds and lakes by one foot. During a relatively dry month he runs the 24" electrical pump only about 5 to 6 hours. The Marsh Landing pumping facility is relatively simple and consists of a collection basin, the pumps, and an out-fall basin. The collection basin is basically a small pond, approximately 8 feet deep. Concrete fabric liner is used to line the sides and bottom of the collection basin to facilitate removal of sedimentation. The three pumps, mentioned above, are housed in a simple, but attractively landscaped wood frame building. The out-fall basin is primarily an open drainage ditch approximately 40 feet wide and 8 feet deep. Concrete fabric liner is also used to line the sides and bottom of the ditch for a distance of approximately 80 feet to prevent erosion. The pumped water ultimately drains into the Intracoastal waterway. Flood Control Gates are also frequently installed, although a flood control gate is not a part of the Marsh Landing facility. The cost of the Marsh Landing facility was under $300,000. It is not unique. Many small developments along the east coast of Florida manage their drainage and flood control via a control pump facility similar to the one serving Marsh Landing. The area below Fleet Landing would be an ideal site for a simple, low cost pump facility for the City of Atlantic Beach. Mayport Road serves as a natural dike (levee) to protect the core city from high tides and hurricane storm surges. The deep drainage ditch with steep sides adjacent to Mayport Road could serve as a natural collection and out-fall basin. Commissioners! Please carefully evaluate the positive and negative factors of providing a stormwater pump facility to protect our City! 7.. A j, 4 ,6 -i.; -'. •Fth '.' IltiN170k.1 r.: if' 4 1 ._ i• k . 1 . 44- -..., •;1 4,- , , 4 AI- _.-.A 1 , I, ' I - 2, i i 9 21 I• 1 ...'-1 Marsh Landing Collection Basin and Front (street ) View of Wood Frame Pumping Station R e.' • 4'1 '• 1 ...1,`' /-/Z: - ---....._. _,..... 4.,._..„ :"'---_,-----...= t- g,i •.• / 1 ' i It / ''''rt:,,..-.. ....-- . . W-_:------ . .2; • it \ 0 1z7`2=r, ,. /..,,.."' ,..... 1. 1r--:•._•_-.."--- ` 1-s, t A, ad 1 : "Itt. ., : ..,-4,, 3 -- V.---7.---..'"------`---;..' It 1, 't r. , f, --7.- "'-----"" """ •••••=..... . .- ' --- _. 7-----... :7-- •if 4.; ,' , 1 11141'SA64' 1 11‘ El raj-- — t'.1 i ', 4% ,. „rrr,.),i A t„ i: lir Nam—a IN .. .„,,%..,,•It'."Itz.' r.:,.,,-;.• 4, 4....v.-- 4 .•.r ( TI" L.«.- -•`, "'":..e ';'-;•-'2 4.11" 4 -'' ‘. - 1;4: 4 ' , ... 2:.4 ,.,,1,' ... -, • , ,. 4,, ,, • 4.„,:ei.,e,.';',,4,2 lat24.-?;., • -4;5:.--46, JVA....4t-. •'"' 22-2-* .. . •• ..'•' ...' '',..'-'`'.-.1".1e0.42'.•I- • ee' -,. ....,,,,7- Ir• A..,;.;'4 ;Nei . 4'. . 1 - •4-1-!,-"..":••-... • ._ Niii.d .........1,..:,...‘,cA i i"II 1/•6 111/01.1.11.. 1,•••,,,70/•.-*.::-..;:.. - ,_ e,.,,.: 14,4,„ , t 11\ . 44' ....-''...."' r-, 1- 2.- ..4....- ...-'.°17:•••.PC:12Mt;_,„ . . .'''''2 ' 0``-.2-.144". . ....,--,_"-• .-',,- ---S e' e-.'",-,•1--4- - 4......•:-..sm......, i- .-.2„,-. :`;!..1%,,,i-1••!"-S, e-i,..,4-ir 2-2.--4-2...:2-42i4.-..),..2.f,,-,-•... 2.) r .4.4• 22-,:•2`,, . 2• , 4 2.. " Rear View of Pump Station and Out-fall Basin POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE FACTORS OF A STORMWATER PUMP FACILITY POSITIVE FACTORS: 1. ELIMINATES TIDAL INFLUENCE ON THE CITY'S STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM. The ability to control the level of Selva Lagoon during periods of extreme high tide increases the hydraulic gradient of the drainage area and improves the efficiency of theentiredrainagesystem. An increased hydraulic gradient Rermits the use of smaller. less expensive. drainage pipes and also minimize conflicts with other sewer lines and/or underground utility systems. 2. PERMITS PRO-ACTIVE CONTROL OF STORM WATER RELEASE. This is extremely important to down-stream areas ! Where a "fixed or passive pipe/ditch- only system, as designed by ETM, offers no adjustment capability in the release of stormwater, a pump facility permits water to be stored during critical high tide periods and released downstream during non-critical low tide conditions. 3. OFFERS A MEASURE OF PROTECTION AGAINST HURRICANE STORM SURGES. Mavport Road serves asa natural dile capab1e of protecting the core city of Atlantic Beach from flood damage due to extreme high tide storm surges caused by hurricanes. Designing a stormwater pump facility near Fleet Landing to take advantage of this natural dike would provide additional security and benefits to the residents of Atlantic Beach. 4. ELIMINATES THE THREAT OF FLOODING TO PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO SELVA LAGOON. The ETM plan provides no jmprovements to downstream problems. particularly high tides, which is a major contributor to the flooding problems of the core city and of greater concern to the Selva Marina Country Club and the residents living adjacent to Howell Park and the Selva Marina Lagoon. In fact, the improvements proposed by ETM will move a greater volume of stormwater to the waters of the Suva Lagoon more oyicklyand. without some control of tidal influences. will cause greater flooding problems fpr property adjacent to Selva Lagoon. Selva Marin Country Club. the largest land owner _of property adjacent to the Selva Lagoon supports a stormwater pump facility. 5. WOULD PROBABLY BE APPROVED BY ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT. It is important to understand that a stormwater pump facility would serve as an intermittent emergency control facility and would be operational only during periods of extreme high tides and/or periods of unusually heavy rainfall . At all other times the flood control gates would remain open to allow Selva Lagoon to drain naturally as it does now, Over a year ago (11/22/96) , four professional engineers met with Mr. Ken Johns and Mr. Patrick Victor of the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and discussed the possibility of controlling the level of Selva Lagoon with a pump facility located below Fleet Landing. It was Mr. John's opinion that SJRWMD _would probably have no objection. as long as the facility were used for intermittent control of the level of the lagoon. NEGATIVE FACTORS: 1. COST Design and construction cost of a storm water pump station would be an added cost to the Atlantic Beach Storm Water Management System. However, some costs could be offset by savings to other areas (see positive factor 1, above) . Also, the possibility of providing for "pro-active" protection against hurricane driven tide surges and storms exceeding a 2-year level should merit dollar benefits to the residents of Atlantic Beach. 2. MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND SECURITY Pump station facility would add to the management, maintenance and security responsibilities of Public Works . Nowell Park Review Qommittee Recommenatioq 12 (Pump Station) TWELFTH RECOMMENDATION (AS STATED IN HOWELL PARK REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT of 12/1/97) ADD PUMP STATION AT FLEET LANDING Benefits: Increase and maintain water flow within this system. Increase by Fleet Landing weir the ability to increase the holding capacity of Selva Marina Lagoon - This becomes the sump needed for utilization for one or more pumps to be utilized depending on storm water flow and tidal conditions to move the volume of water necessary so that Selva Marina areas and Howell Park areas do not go into a high water flood condition. Concerns: That the existing sump area at Selva Marina Country Club currently uses for irrigation pump suction be maintained and/or increased in capacity size during this engineering phase. COMMENTS BY CITY STAFF The City Staff offered the following analysis of a pump station at Fleet Landing: Any pump station design must consider downstream impacts , and will be expensive. Other methods must consider impacts to Selva Marina Golf Course, and pump system operation and maintenance. Flap gate may be necessary to control high tide levels. Preliminary estimated costs for pump station were $450,000, including flap gate. Other items do not increase costs of base project. COMMENTS BY ENGLAND-THIMS & MILLER (ETM) ETM's response to a pump station at Fleet Landing was - We agree that constructing a stormwater pump station would reduce flood stages in the Selva Marina Lagoon. Extensive downstream improvements (as discussed in "The Why" section below) would also be required prior to installation of the pump station to prevent increasing downstream flooding. Anticipated cost is in excess of $1 million. However, this would not result in smaller pipe sizes in the Core City area, since the selection of the 2-year design storm anticipated that at some point in the future improvements may be made that would lower the tailwater, which would bring the proposed system closer to the accepted 5-year storm. The Why" items" - The Selva Marina Lagoon option was explored early in the design process and discussed with the St. Johns River Water Management District, but was eliminated for the following reasons: The City does not currently have ownership over most areas of the Lagoon, which would require condemnation proceedings and associated costs to obtain easements. This option would change the state classification of the Lagoon from the existing designation of Class III waters to a designation of stormwater treatment pond, which would prohibit fishing, boating, etc. We believe that it would not be possible to obtain agreements from all adjacent property owners on this issue. The Lagoon is currently classified as "Waters of the State" and therefore providing treatment in this area will require mitigation of degradation of State waters. EXHIBIT B PUBLIC HEARING - JANUARY 5, 1998 January 5, 1998 Joseph E . Posch 142 Magnolia Street Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 City Commission, City of Atlantic Beach 800 Seminole Road Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 RE: Capitol Improvement Project ATT: Mayor Suzanne Shaughnessy Honorable Commissioners Beaver, Borno, Meserve,Mitchelson City Staff Jarboe, Jensen, Kosoy, King Dear Commissioners : Thank you for conducting a Public workshop to discuss the very important Atlantic Beach Stormwater Improvement Project. There is a lot involved in this undertaking, and public relations is a good start . In my opinion, we are being invited to discuss and offer alternative solutions to the ETM plan. This Plan is not complete and is not in compliance with the REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS . My personal comments will be brief, concise and to the point. A more detailed letter is included and a part of this presentation. (reading pagesl&2 -- pages 3, 4, 5, 6 are attached. ) FLOOD QUALITY LEVEL OF SERVICE ( FQLOS ) The Commission is being asked to approve a part of the FLOODING SOLUTION, before being presented the overall FLOODING PROBLEM. The ETM plan that you are being asked to approve is designed to bring more stormwater into Howell Park and the Selva Lagoon. The Plan may solve some flooding problems; however, it will INCREASE Downstream Flooding This plan is not complete. Any Plan must include the impact on our downstream neighbors . The Stormwater Master Plan dated February 1995 : Page 3-7 indicates the storm design conditions for Selva Marina Canal PEAK ELEVATION (msl ) from Selva Marina Country Club to Howell Park is elevation 5 . 70, during a 2 year storm. Page 5-14 fourth paragraph describes, water level controls must be carefully maintained for the Golf Course. Perhaps below elvation 3 . 00 . Any plan that you approve should include the full knowledge, understanding and approval of the Country Club. Page 3-1 thru 3-4 Historical Information describes the flood happenings . The second paragraph on page 3-4 recommends the installation of gages and other recording devices to enable the City to gain better information in order to establish a plan to control flood water. This needs to be done. WATER QUALITY LEVEL OF SERVICE WQLOS ) The Stormwater Master Plan dated February 1995 Page 3-9 Fourth paragraph discusses Atlantic Beach water quality to include street sweeping, and infiltration/seepage-based systems . A well formed WQLOS methodology is recommended. Online or offline detention storage or wet ponds are NOT INTENDED FOR ATLANTIC BEACH. Page 3-11 Fourth paragraph addresses water quality design critera for Atlantic Beach. Page 3-12 Describes the goals that we should establish. Source removal methods ( street sweeping, leaf collection, good housekeeping, swales, grit removal inlets etc. ) , are recommended and need to be developed. Curbs could be included where swales are not feasible or desired. No Ponds . There appears to be a double standard with the ETM DESIGN and the SJWMD approval of this design. No water quality treatment is planned or provided for Plaza and all of the streets north, Exotic treatment is planned for Eighth Street and all of the streets south. We can and should develop a plan that provides a good, reasonable level of treatment for all parts of the City, given technical constraints and socioeconomic factors ( page 3-12 ) . PROJECTED SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES The Stormwater Master Plan Section 7 RECOMMENDED PROJECTS FOR STORMWATER CONTROL discusses a plan and provides a cost breakdown. This recommended cost breakdown is the basis for the projected schedule of expenditures . Let ' s get the ETM plan back on track. Everything that we presently hear about is additional costs . Where are the cost effective solutions, that are to be provided by ETM ? Where are the cost saving ideas ? No money was budgeted for stormwater work in Howell Park. Save Money! Stay out of Howell Park. MAINTAINANCE COSTS AND RESPONSIBILITY We agree that maintaining the existing system is a nightmare. We see the manpower and equipment during the storms . Much labor is expended pumping water, cleaning clogged drains, cleaning clogged piping systems .Why not develope source removal technology , that would include public awareness and participation ? A lot of money could be saved. Its recommended in the SWMP. Thank you and let ' s all get together, get this project back on course, and make this a Happy New Year for everyone. pg. 2 of 6 JANUARY 5, 1997 Joseph E. Posch 142 Magnolia Street Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 City Commission City of Atlantic Beach 800 Seminole Road Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 RE : Capitol Improvement Project City of Atlantic Beach Attn: Mayor Suzanne Shaughnessy Honorable Commissioners Beaver, Borno, Meserve, Mitchelson City Manager Jarboe City Attorney Jensen City Engineer Kosoy City Clerk King Dear Commissioners : First and foremost, I would like to thank the Commission for their patience to allow time for public discussion on this very important Capitol Improvement Project for this City. Secondly, I would ask the Commission to request the persons that are suffering the flooding damage to be just a little more patient. A lot of tax dollars are at stake, and there is a light at the end of the tunnel . Third, there are matters that need to be addressed and at this time I am addressing only the specific described matters that are relative to the Selva Lagoon and the Core City Improvement. Project. 1 . TIDES a) High tides back up into the basin ( between Wonderwood Road and A-1-A culverts) that accepts water from the Selva Lagoon. Extreme high tides back up into the Selva Lagoon. b) Extreme high tides with a north east wind, fill up the basin from Wonderwood Road back into the Selva Lagoon. Flooding all of the way back to Howell Park occurs when the City of Atlantic Beach rainwater has no where to go. c) The Selva Marina Country Club was flooded for 3 days Oct. 15, 16, 17, 1997 ) . The newly installed water level gauge at Plaza read elevation 4 . 85 . This was on Monday the 15th, and after the heavy rains had ended. d) Flooding ( caused by tides )has happened previously, it can be controlled. There are solutions . Page 3 of 6 2 . DESIGN a) . The Consulting Engineer informed us, at the commission workshop on Dec. 23, that he has designed oversized drainage pipes in the Core City to allow for the hydraulic conditions that will occur when Howell Park is flooded. He also informs us the larger pipes will move the rainwater into the already flooded park-lagoon quicker. MY RESPONSE WOULD HAVE BEEN-We have all heard the expression bigger is better " however, a consulting engineer is employed to properly design pipe for size and cost effectiveness . When Howell Park is flooded others will also be flooded. Oversized pipe would be a complete waste of taxpayer dollars . b) . The Consulting Engineer has also planned to enlarge the culvert at 11th Street. The Consultant and others have indicated that there are restrictions downstream that need to be enlarged, namely Wonderwood Road and A-1-A. MY RESPONSE IS- Larger culverts will also allow water to back into our drainage system. This must be carefully reconsidered. c) The Consulting Engineer has documented many times that his design is only for a two-year 24 hour storm with normal tides . MY RESPONSE IS- The Commissioners are not being very well served. This may well be irresponsible conduct. COMMISSIONERS ! DO YOU SEE THE RED FLAG WAVING ? Commissioners ! Please consider your friends and neighbors at Selva Marina C.C. , they were flooded December 15, 16, &17 , 1997 . The Lagoon water must be controlled to prevent flooding. The monies presently planned for the oversized pipes in the Core City could be used to design and construct a water level control structure. On one hand you have the Atlantic Ocean trying to come in. On the other hand you have the Atlantic Beach rain water trying to get out . With no designed solution, we know who is going to win. It has been documented for years . The Consultant has attempted to protect himself . He said flooding will still occur. There are solutions, however planning and funding still has to be accomplished for a control structure. Page 4 of 6 It doesn 't matter how big the drainage pipes get in the core city, they will not be capable of pushing the Atlantic Ocean out of our city. Properly sized drainage pipes would keep this project within budget and allow other necessary improvement work to be undertaken. There are solutions . We don't need to waste tax dollars . If one excavated the entire area of the City of Atlantic Beach down to the Consultant 's planned depth of minus 2 . 00 msl, the area would quickly fill with water and there would still be water in the Atlantic Ocean trying to come in. Commissioners : Please Inquire ! Please Question ! Your good name is at stake. Are you being properly served ! There are a lot of questions that need to be asked. They were not asked at the workshop on December 23, 1997 . Some questions are as follows : Q1 . Why has planned work in the Bid-Documents been eliminated Is it because the Bid is anticipated to exceed the budget Is the remainder of the Storm Water Improvement Project intended to be conducted by CHANGE ORDER ? Who is going to design and Bid the remaining work if the Consultant has completed his Contracted work as he stated on 12/23/97 ? Q2 . Preliminary Design Services are required to be performed by ETM. This includes a written report on the findings of the review including alternative evaluations and preliminary cost estimates . Has this been accomplished ? Q3 . What is the status of the coordination with the City of Jacksonville `or the reconstruction of Sherry Drive? If monies are ng from the City of Jax. for Sherry Drive, shouldn't monies be identified and be separated from the core ci )roject to accomplish other needed work ? Perhaps, the owering and regrading of Sherry Drive could be accomplished with the Improvement Project as some have suggested. The dam effect of Sherry could be eliminated. Q4 Work activities ( ponds, regrading of ditches etc. ) were not included in the SWMP for our parks . They were also specifically excluded in the ETM proposal . Why are we now discussing ponds in our parks and where is the money coming from to do this work? Q5 . The Consultant is required to take notes of all design/review meetings held with the City and regulatory agencies . Have these notes been supplied for review ? Q6 . The ETM Contract requires the impact of curbs and gutters versus swale section roadways to be analyzed in writing. Has this report been supplied for review ? Page 5 of 6 Q7 . When questioned from the floor, Former Mayor Lyman Fletcher agreed that the opponents to the ETM Plan would not have to hire their own Engineer. Former Mayor Fletcher indicated that the City would provide Engineering Services to assist in seeking alternatives to the ETM Plan. When is this going to happen ? Q8 . Has the City Engineer been requested to review the "Request for Proposals" dated December 6, 1995 with all of the relevant documents to ascertain full compliance ? Q9 . Has the City Attorney been requested to review the " Request for Proposals " dated December 6, 1995 with all of the relevant documents to ascertain full compliance ? Q10 . Where are all of the cost effective solutions that were proposed by the Consultant ? Where are the Public Relation Services that are required in the ETM Contract ? Q11 . The ETM plan requires regrading of existing drainage canals . The ETM Plan also requires expenditures for a control gate at Fleet Landing that restricts flow to a minimum low water elevation of 2 . 00 msl . Shouldn 't these expensive work items be postponed until after the outfall water level control solution is determined ? Q12 We need answers in writing from the SJWMD detailing the minimum acceptable source pollution removal requirements .We also should be aware of any additional pollution removal requirements they suggest or recommend that we try to accomplish We have already paid for source control technoligy, we haven't received it . A tour of the waterway would help to identify and understand the present conditions . It should be conducted on a rising tide to confirm the water levels between Howell Park, Plaza, Selva Marina Country Club, Fleet Landing, A-1-A culvert and Wonderwood Road culvert. This would include a close look at the restriction at Fleet Landing. It would also include a close look at the conditions at SMCC . This letter is intended as constructive and not destructive of the design. We all need to work together to get the correct focus to obtain the best project and in the most cost effective manner. In closing, I want to thank you again for the opportunity to present my views, in writing, for the record. I am confident that each of you will analyze all of the pertinent information that is available and make your best judgment for the citizens of Atlantic Beach. Respectfully Submitted Joseph E. Posch Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT C PUBLIC HEARING - JANUARY 5, 1998 ALAN W. POTTER, SR. 374 Second Street Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 January 5, 1998 City Commission City of Atlantic Beach 800 Seminole Road Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 Attn. Mrs. Suzanne Shaughnessy, Mayor Mr. Richard Beaver, Commissioner Mr. Mike Borno, Commissioner Mr. John Meserve, Commissioner Mr. Theo Mitchelson, Commissioner Re: Core City Improvement Project City of Atlantic Beach Dear Commissioners: More than three years ago, the City of Atlantic Beach embarked on a plan to eliminate the flooding problem that adversely impacted many of the citizens who reside in the "Core in December 1995, a Request For Proposals (RFP) was advertised, proposals were received, and (in March 1996) the consulting engineers were hired to design the core city improvements. On October 14, 1996, in their Project Analysis. the engineers advised the City Commission that: DESIGN STORM: 2 year 24 hour (5 inch with normal tides)" Of significance is the engineer's reference to "normal tides" rather than extreme high tides associated with strong northeaster storms. The engineers also advised that for a storm greater than two year intensity, flooding would occur. PROJECT PRESENTATION F O R STORMWATER, WATER DISTRIBUTION AND I SEWAGE COLLECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT BACKGROUND s,_. ..._,_,, RECENT STORM EVENTS — 10 YR. STORM + NORTHEASTER o - W 0- I PROJECT ANALYSIS 1 .' A) DESIGN STORM: 2yr. 24hr. (5in W/NORMAL TIDES) ilialLiiiiiip....1 `A B) OUTFALL CONSTRICTIONS PIZC1OUTLINE n x IMPROVEMENT 0 T tiyiYir-tit:A) ROADWAY SECTION & DRAINAGE SYSTEM ps 0 0 B) STORMWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES t7/5--.VA C) JOHANSON PARK IMPROVEMENTS o nn C D) HOWELL PARK IMPROVEMENTS PREPARF FUR E) DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS 4 F) SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS LYMAN FLECH R ROBER7 KOSOY.PE G) WATER IMPROVEMENTS MAYOR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/ENGINEER 9,c PREPARED BY mb iIIctJnc H) SEMINOLE ROAD DITCH EROSION MATTING f_.•N ,,,,..,:=,..,_`.. BUDGET ANALYSIS OCTOBER N.E96 England•Thims&Miller,Inc. —' City Commission City of Atlantic Beach January 5, 1998 Page 2 Noteworthy, the City of Jacksonville design criteria for SUBDIVISIONS states: For suburban, subdivision, medium density areas, the 5-year frequency storm with a minimum time of concentration of 20 minutes shall be used." and, for MAJOR OUTFALLS states: For canals, waterways, natural arainage streams and culverts of major outfalls, the 25-year frequency storm shall be used." The "engineering plans" provided to you by our consulting engineers (ETM) fail to: A Provide "high tide" protection for Atlantic Beach. B Provide positive water level control in the Selva Marina canal, in the Selva Marina lagoon, and in Howell Park. C Provide positive Mood control for the Selva Marina Country C!ub, and for many of the citizens ana their properties located within the "Core City of Atlantic Beach". D Provide an effective and cost efficient storm water collection system. In my opinion, a storm water collection system that is 200% to 300% oversized is flawed engineering and is not cost effective.) In my opinion, proper drainage system design for the City of Atlantic Beach should begin at the "POINT OF DISCHARGE" and the engineering work should proceed "up stream" to the most distant point within the drainage basin. Major items of the Atlantic Beach drainage system should include the following: 1 Drainage control structure (i.e., a dam) complete with automatic high tide backflow gates. 2 Storm water pumps, which, with automatic controls, will maintain a water level in the Selva Marina outfall canal, the Selva Marina lagoon, and, in Howell Park. City Commission City of Atlantic Beach January 5, 1998 Page 3 3 Storm water collection system along Seminole Road and Sherry Drive, and, along the several lateral streets (i.e., Ahern Street thru 12th Street plus Selva Marina Circle). 4 Reconstruction of Sherry Drive and a portion of Seminole Road in order to eliminate a flood containing dike. Flooding endangers the health and safety of numerous citizens and threatens their properties. 5 Reconstruction of the several lateral streets (identified above) to provide downhill flow from East Coast Drive to Sherry Drive and to Seminole Road. 6 Protection of the existing water distribution system and the existing sewage collection system during construction to assure continued serviceability of those utilities. Near total reconstruction of these utilities is a waste of funds and cannot be justified. In my opinion, the consulting engineers have faired to comply with the Request for Proposals, their Proposal, ar,d the Professional Services Contract with the City Accordingly, the Atlantic Beach City Commission is requested to (a) determine the funds paid to date to the engineers and (b) determine what legal remedies are available if recovery of funds paid is sought. Respectfully submitted, " ii'- ten - r Ata W.'Potter, Sr. AWP/mgh cc: Ms. Maureen King, City Clerk Attachments: ETM Project Presentation, Page 1 City of Jacksonville "Land Development Procedures Manual, Sect. 2.3, Pages 6, 7 and 8." ti easement and any restriction imposed by the agreement must also be submitted. Note: If proposed runoff is to be drained into state roads or railroad property, a letter from that agency indicating approval of such must be submitted prior to drainage approval. Sheet drainage: Sheet drainage into public right-of-way is normally not acceptable. Increased sheet drainage onto adjacent private property is not acceptable without the owners permission. 2. Upland Owner All water must be accepted from all upland owners. Such water must be accepted according to then present land conditions. When the development constructs a drainage system to accept the private off-site upstream drainage, unless accepted by the City as part of a master plan, the property owner, the Homeowners Association or other acceptable entities as approved by the City Engineer, shall maintain the system. D-1.6.1) 2.3.1I Entrances 1. All driveway entrances and exits to private property must be graded so as to prevent water entering from public streets. 2. Show all existing and proposed entrances and exits. 3. Show existing and proposed parking layouts. 2.3.13 Valley Gutters The use of valley gutters is generally unacceptable. However, they will be acceptable across cul-de-sacs of no more than 150 feet in length or as approved by the City Engineer. 2.3.2 DESIGN CRITERIA AND EQUATIONS 2.3.2A Design Methods 1. Developments with less than 10 acres of total drainage area shall use the rational method of determining runoff. 2. For developments with total drainage areas between 10 and 40 acres, the engineer may choose between the rational and SCS methods. 2.3)-6 3. Developments with total drainage areas of 40 acres and greater shall use the SCS method of determining runoff. 2.3.2B Design Storm Freauencv 1. For rivers, the 100-year frequency storm shall. be used. 2. Major outfalls. For canals, waterways, natural drainage streams and culverts of major outfalls, the 25-year frequency storm shall be used 3. Subdivisions For suburban, subdivision, or medium density areas, the 5-year frequency storm with a minimum time of concentration of 20 minutes shall be used. 4. Urban Areas When utilizing the rational method for urban areas, the 5-year frequency storm with a minimum time of concentration of 10 minutes shall be used. 2.3.2C Coefficient of Runoff Coefficient of runoff used in the design of drainage facilities shall be in accordance with sound engineering practices. The following is a list of typical rational coefficients for various types of developments: Type of Development Runoff Swamps 10% Low Hammocks 15% Natural Ground 20% Grassed Recreation Areas0% Subdivisions 40% Apartments 60 to 70: Industrial/Commercial Area 80 to 100% • 2.3.2D Rainfall Intensity The rainfall intensity -i- in inches per hour for a given time of concentration. The chart entitled, Jacksonville, Florida, Intensity, Duration and Frequency of Rainfall, U.S. Weather Bureau Gage Records, 1896-1953: 58 years, Revised 1974", shall be used to determine the factor -i-. Rainfall intensity for time of concentration less than 120 min. shall be calculated by: i =145 t+20)e 2.3)-7 Storm Frequency 1 year 1.000 2 year 0.969 5 year 0.9303.q2l , 10 year 0.900 15 year 0.884 y 3"25 year 0.863 C 'Ti •3:5 50 year 0.837 100 year 0.799 For time of concentration greater than 120 min. , FDOT intensity duration curves for Zone 1 shall be used. 2.3.3 DESIGN CRITERIA 2.3.3A General The minimum acceptable pipe velocity is 2.5 fps flowing full. If this is a physical impossibility, an absolute minimum hydraulic velocity of 2.0 feet per second for full flow should be obtained. The maximum velocity shall be kept below 15 fps. The maximum allowable velocity at the point of discharge is 6 fps unless energy dissipation is provided. If the outfall discharges into a still body of water, submergence of the outfall by at least 2/3 of the diameter may be considered as energy dissipation. 2.3.32 Pipe and Open Channels Design of pipe' and open channels shall be calculated by application of the Manning Formula and the Continuity Equation. V = 1.486 R 2/3 S 1/2 n Q = AV Where V = Velocity of flow in feet per second (fps) A = Cross-section area of flow (square foot) R = Hydraulic radius; area of flow divided by wetted perimeter in feet (a/WP) S = Slope of hydraulic grade line (feet per foot) Q = Rate of runoff in cubic feet per second cfs n = Manning's coefficient of flow The maximum allowable velocity for earth-lined ditches is 2.5 fps. 2.3.3C Manning Coefficients Type Culvert n" 15" to 30" RCP & Concrete Lined Pipe 0.013 36" to 48" RCP & Concrete Lined Pipe 0.012 54" and larger RCP (including concrete box culverts) 0.011 CMP Asphalt Coated - 15" diameter 0.013 CMP Asphalt Coated - 18" diameter 0.014 CMP Asphalt Coated - 21" diameter 0.015 CMP Asphalt Coated - 24" diameter 0.016 2.3)-8 PROJECT PRESENTA F O R STORMWA'I ER, WATER DISTRID SEWAGE COLLECTION IMPROVEN o r. . {,,,.R. , r; . ORM + NORTHEASTER go,kFr.„„ r-,-- NRlln Rea o j L.: SELVALJNKSIUI e9l l I e-' 5E aaia 5in W/NORMAL TIDESAactJrR. Ll 0E= Da DC g srLv LAKE FRIM - 1111111 L 1111rT e MRRIOR 1 1-1110WEGE SYSTEM ill LUMP" :a gy `-' V liWilli -€ n 'ERNATIVES J.tTS ii)i rpt_® Ac AUani. blvd. 1 7 PREPARED FOR LI1 YOF A NTS LYMAN FLETCHER ROBERT KO: MAYOR PUBLIC WORKS DIRE PREPARED BY ION MATTING England•Thims Miller,Inc. ro+G AND DESKa, TERS ma 3131 S.JOHNS BlU,T ROAD 50L'T11 22 11_ l.05501mut,".: 7.::,",-,X111 ' cH O.NURBER Ica?.7:'O E1E-MA5 OCTOBER 14. 1996 incl • ThimS & Miller ,Inc. EXHIBIT D PUBLIC HEARING - JANUARY 5, 1998 CINDY COREY 394 Eighth Street Atlantic Beach, Fl 32233 January 5, 1998 City Commission City of Atlantic Beach 800 Seminole Beach Road Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 Dear Mayor Shaughnessy and Commissioners Beaver, Borno, Meserve and Mitchelson, I wish to address you regarding the Howell Park Review Committee' s Final Report and Recommendations to the Commission. I have some concerns regarding the interpretation of this report and what action you may take relative to your understanding of what the report states . During the course of our work on the committee I felt the big responsibility to quickly identify an alternative approach to stormwater management that would obviate the need for stormwater retention ponds in Howell Park (and in the city or parks period) . I have been encouraged all along that this was a reasonable, obtainable goal through conversations I have had with Carla Palmer, Chief Engineer for the St . Johns Water Management District and certainly many citizens in our community who posses much more expertise and experience than I when it comes to drainage issues. I am personally thankful and moved that so many people have given up their time and resources to support a cause I have felt was important enough to stop and re- address, namely the current design of the Stormwater Improvement Project. In addition to the many conversations I have had, I have also done a fair amount of research and reading on the subject of urban stormwater management and it is clear that this issue is a pressing one all over the world. Many communities are facing the hard decisions we face to find an environmentally responsible way to manage the rainwater we have displaced by development. In our case, many things are at stake- individuals whose properties are now retaining water, the health of the receiving waters of our polluted runoff and the value of trees, wildlife and undisturbed park land. This brings me back to the Howell Park Review Committee Report. While most of the stormwater approaches in the w. report I concur with, there are however, I believe, conflicting statements and some ambiguities which have led to misinterpretations already. Due to the pressing time and the absence of our chair, Mr. Borno, during the week before our deadline we as a committee did not have the opportunity to draft the report as a team and clearly reach consensus . This left the task for Mr. Borno to shoulder himself- trying to marry the different ideas into one. I am sure that this discussion of alternatives would be better served if the commission , along with the members who have served on the Review Committee, met in a workshop session outside the commission chambers in a free exchange of ideas and questions with the outcome being a greater clarity for the alternative recommendations . In this context I believe it is now the time to receive some independent, outside mediation to assist us in reaching a consensus. I am speaking for the Friends of Howell Park, as well as many citizens, when I say that we need someone with the technical knowledge and an unbiased viewpoint to assist us in making an intelligent, responsible decision for our communities stormwater management system. In addition, I wish to make it clear that I personally 1111 as well as the Friends of Howell Park do not support any alternative design that negatively impacts the park. With other solutions available to us there is no rationale to digging out the park, placing new ditches, constructing retention ponds or any other engineered use of the park that further encroaches into an area that was to remain in a natural state for the benefit of all . There is a way to constructively, creatively use the park to capture more of its natural storage capacity for water retention and at the same time increase its recreational potential . Sincerely, Cindy Co Chair Friends of Howell 'ark EXHIBIT E PUBLIC HEARING - JANUARY 5, 1998 To whom it may concern; I would respectfully like to raise my objections to parts of the stormwater drainage plans presented to you. I believe that without addressing the reverse tidle actions and dam control of the retention area you now have from the existing dam at the north end of Selva Marina Country Club to Saltair drain system, much of the areas having a problem now, will still have problems with any hard rains. Also, I worked for the Atlantic Beach Public Works department from 1962 to 1979. During this time we opened the dam at low tides and closed it before the tide came back in. Giving us a retention pond from the dam to south of Howell Park. During these times we cleaned the storm pipes as best we could with nothing but fire trucks and mud pumps. At this time what pipe cleaning program does the Public Works have and what type of equipment do they use? To add new pipes and drains and not clean them on a regular basis, will do nothing, as they will build up with silt over time. What is really needed is a Vacuum Jet truck made for these types of jobs. I know there are no clear cut solutions, but there are a few old ones that can work very well if use correctly and often. Thank you, Richard Hilliard 338 11th Street