1992-03-24 Reese to Drago RMA
Reese, Macon and Associates, Inc.
March 24, 1992
City of Okeechobee
55 S.E. Third Avenue
Okeechobee, FL 34974
ATTN: John J. Drago, City Administrator
RE: City/County Comp Plans
Dear Mr. Drago:
Per your request, we have reviewed the water and wastewater portions of the City and
County Comp Plans. The following comments are relevant:
City Comp Plan
Policy 1.3.2 - The noted percentages are not consistent with current DER rule
requirements (17-600.405) for wastewater. Your current permit may, or may not,
include this, but future permits will reflect the rule. Also, for wastewater, the averaging
period needs to be defined. For water, there is not DER rule but they tend to follow
the Palm Beach County rule (at 80% must go to design, at 90% must go to
construction). There should be some allowance for unusual flow circumstances for water
since this can be a one time occurrence.
County Comp Plan
Policy 1.1 - The water and sewer plans should be consistent with the City.
Policy 1.2 - This must include some reference to the City since County has no facilities.
Policy 1.3 - This must include some reference to the City.
Objective 3 - We presume this includes the City as a "provider of public supply potable
water and sanitary sewer facilities".
Policy 3.1 - This must include the City. How can the future needs of the county be
reasonably and economically assessed without benefit of knowing and working with the
only utility with an in-place infrastructure.
3003 S. Congress Avenue - Palm Springs, Florida 33461 - (407) 433-9311
PAGE 2
John J. Drago
City of Okeechobee
March 24, 1992
Policy 3.2 - This appears to say that the only way to meet the water and sewer needs of
Southern Okeechobee County is to form a utility authority which includes the County.
There are other options.
This must include language which clearly indicates the desire to move forward with the
program which is most economically feasible, not just feasible.
Will this policy force connection of existing septic tanks, but allow connection to a
central water system to be optional? On what basis can a utility authority force existing
septic tanks to be connected?
Policy 3.43 - How long will this be allowed and exactly what area does it apply to? Will
the County require connection of customers in the County to the City system wherever
the City currently has, or will supply service?
Policy 3.54 - Will this be related only to County public supplies? How will the County
treat areas where service from either the City or the County/Authority/Beach Systems is
feasible. Will the County require connection to the most feasible? Who will determine
this and on what basis?
Policy 3.65 - Will the design and construction criteria be coordinated with the existing
City criteria, so areas most feasibly served by the City will meet minimum City criteria?
Policy 3.76 - It is necessary to define "public supply facilities" for this item. Does this
mean a central system?
Is this required independent of size and location? This item could be very expensive
depending on the definitions used.
Policy 3.87 - Will the County consider continuance of the existing arrangement with the
City for water and sewer service if it is the most economically feasible? Will the County
coordinate their efforts with the City in making this determination?
Policy 4.2 - The County does not have a utility. Requirements for conservation should
be consistent with the City which should be consistent with SFWMD. Will the County
be disseminating information to the City customers in the County only, or can this
process be coordinated?
PAGE 3
John J. Drago
City of Okeechobee
March 24, 1992
We feel this document raises many questions. In general, it appears that the proposed
County plan has pre-determined that the County will be providing water and sewer
service either through a utility authority, or on its own. There may be other options, the
most obvious being the existing structure, which present a more cost effective alternative.
The comp plan should allow for use of the best economic approach, not just any feasible
approach.
If you have questions or wish to discuss this further, please call.
Very truly yours,
William D. Reese, P.E.
WDR/clm
92-109