Floodplain Management Committee Minutes 03/04/2013 R Floodplain Management Planning Committee
Chairman-Jerry Kurtz Vice Chair-Craig Pajer
Kenneth Bills Phillip Brougham Joseph Gagnier Mike Sheffield
Dan Summers Clarence Tears Duke Vasey
Christa Carrera (Naples) Bob Mahar(Marco I.) Raquel Pines (Everglades City)
Meeting Minutes for 3-4-13 Regular Meeting
Start: 9:10 a.m. End: 10:43 a.m. Location: 2800 N Horseshoe Dr, Room 610
Meeting Attendance: Jerry Kurtz,Craig Pajer,Phil Brougham,Joseph Gagnier, Rick Zyvoloski (for
Dan Summers), Duke Vasey, Mike Sheffield,and Robert Wiley
Absent: Raquel Pines, Bob Mahar, Christa Carrera, Clarence Tears, Kenneth Bills
There were six (6) additional staff members in attendance and two (2) members of the public.
Meeting called to order by Jerry Kurtz,Chairman.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Approval of minutes for the 1-7-13 Regular Meeting-Jerry Kurtz asked if there were any needed
changes to the minutes. Nobody had any comments or changes. A motion was made by Joe
Gagnier to approve the minutes. It was seconded and passed unanimously.
2. Updating the Floodplain Management Plan (Robert Wiley) -Jerry Kurtz directed the committee
to skip item 2 (old business) and move on to item 1 (new business) for Nick's presentation.
Robert turned this item over to Nick.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. FMPC Work Load Discussion (Nick Casalanguida) -Nick introduced himself as the Division
Administrator. He presented a"Gantt"chart on the viewer and gave copies to members. Last
meeting there was some questions as to the priorities of the committee and priorities of the staff
and work load. He stated that he and committee member Phil Brougham and County Mgr Leo
Ochs met to discuss a work plan,such as what our priorities are and what is within our ability to
get done. He said that he had Robert and Bill worked on the Gantt chart. Nick will go through
each item on the Gantt chart.
Flood Zone map revisions:
Nick asked Robert when the next revision submittal date will be. Can we do it in stages or will
FEMA want us to submit it all at one time?
Robert-we're working to finalize the numerous corrections he had the consultant do. He is
expecting to receive GIS shape files this week(Friday)but hasn't received them yet. He will
distribute copies to City of Marco and City of Naples staff. After their review and agreement
1
with it,then we'll be ready to go in with the application. He's not sure if FEMA will say to hold
off with it until we get it all done. He doesn't think they will do that but is unknown at this
point. We'll submit it as a standard map revision but it will overwhelm the Letter of Map
Change (LOMC) office. They will forward it to FEMA's Region IV office in Atlanta. The Atlanta
office will assemble the contract and decide how to handle it. We just have to follow the steps,
and they'll let us know. Nick said he is planning a trip to Atlanta to see FEMA in the next
month or two-maybe he can discuss this with them.
Duke-questions Nick as to how the Gantt chart ties in with our action plan for 2013. Nick says
it does,it talks about resources-but it's not in the same format as 2012. Robert thought that
Duke was talking about the proposed progress report for the Floodplain Management Plan
(FMP).
Duke-that came from a larger chart that was approved before this became a fact....do Nick's
projects appear as a 2013 action? Robert says they are on there,they're in the proposed
section in the very back of that document,2012 is in the front and in the very back is the
2013.
Nick said that it ties in-that it's more of a resource evaluation for the 2013 action plan. If FEMA
is willing to accept these basins as they come forward, it would be much easier. Whenever
these changes start to hit,our phones start ringing off the hook. We have 3 or 4 staff
members that are Certified Floodplain Managers (CFM)that can assist. He questions how we
should handle the influx of calls and work load on the current staff. Should we refer them
back to the code of regulations and leave them on their own? Probably not-we want to help
our citizens navigate through this. But it's a big resource load for us. If FEMA says no and
they want to wait until all the maps get updated then obviously we're just dealing with the 2
basins that we modified. If they allow us to make these modifications and they're both in the
City of Marco and City of Naples,they may be dealing with this on their own.
Robert said that we cover the whole deal. Robert clarified that the map revisions are the
county's but LOMA's/LOMR's are each of the cities. He's unsure of the impact the calls from
the City of Naples and/or Marco have on us. We get the calls but we refer them to the city
staff for the LOMA/LOMB
Phil asked Robert when he will be submitting the plan. Robert said near end of this month or the
first part of April,which gives the cities staff time to review and agree. If it makes their
situation worse,they may not want to sign. If that's the case it can get a bit testy and we may
have to clip their boundaries.
Phil wanted to know if we could get a commitment of budgeting for staff(job bankers) as a
contingency plan. Nick said he will be budgeting for the overload of staff this year.
Phil also asked if we are taking phone calls that are for the other municipalities would they be
willing to send staff members here to assist with handling the influx of calls etc. Nick said
probably not. Robert stated that we have a great working relationship with reciprocity.
They're getting a lot of our calls too. We give info and refer callers to the appropriate
jurisdictions when the calls require more attention. Robert states extra staff will give a lot of
relief.
2
Nick-this is a cascading Gantt chart reassuring that it will take some of the pressure off but it
will happen and we have to update the basins no matter where they are. We have to submit
and that's going to happen.
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance:
Nick said that for now we have this going to the board in November and December. Nick wants
to accelerate the process by doing a parallel review with this committee and DSAC
(Development Services Advisory Committee)by providing copies of the existing ordinance
and the draft ordinance to the committee and let them make their notes and suggested
changes then submit it to the Board. That's the thing he wants to change on this chart. Once
there is a final draft it can be submitted to the BCC sometime in July or September,knowing
that the board takes a break in August.
Phil asked about the draft model ordinance that we will be using. Robert said he provided a copy
of the blank model ordinance for all members-he's already started filling in the blanks and
has given it to the County Attorney's Office (CAO) but it's really confusing. He says he'll go
over some of the issues and why it's so confusing a bit later in the meeting.
Nick is hopeful that this will accelerate this process and wants to stick with the model ordinance
and if there are any deltas between what's in there what the committee wants we'll do the
cost benefit analysis. It's his opinion that DSAC will want to stick with the base model
ordinance.
Phil wants the committee to have them side by side to review and have the committee members
agree to a deadline to get the comments in and stick to the deadline for review.Robert's going
to be the referee,then those comments can be consolidated along with DSAC comments on
the FDPO and take it to the BCC. He doesn't want to get in to a circle around thing with DSAC
that never ends. Nick agrees and said we'll bring it back for the June meeting for final review.
He also suggests doing the comments as you go doing one way back and forth emails with
Robert only(not amongst yourselves). Then we'll consolidate your comments,whatever you
give us and we'll get it into a draft package that you can review. The committee can do a final
review on it at the June meeting.
Floodplain Management Plan Update:
Nick wants to look at outsourcing this as it's a big drain on staff. This is being done by the Local
Mitigation Strategy(LMS)update as well too. He asked Rick when his update will get started.
Rick stated that the update is due 2015,but he starts working on it in 2014.
Nick wants to talk with Robert and Bill and Jerry. He wants to draft a tight scope and have some
of our consultants review it and see what it's going to cost. Our planners on staff aren't able
to jump on this thing. He thinks this will help keep us on track. When Nick asked if there
were any objections to this strategy,no one objected.
Phil questioned whether there are viable consultants out there that are familiar with floodplain
management planning activities. Nick assured Phil there are,and as long as the scope is
written so that they are going to compare the deliverables to what's required by the Code of
Federal Regulations or as part of this Mitigation Strategy we'll be fine. It also depends on cost.
3
Duke asked if the draft,one of the items we talked about today-is this what will be evaluated?
Nick said he hasn't seen what Duke is talking about. Robert said what Duke has is the state's
blank model ordinance. It's fill in the blanks with community specific language,and Robert
has sent it to the CAO. What is not addressed is any of our local criteria that we have. We
have to work with the state floodplain office to add our local criteria. He provided the
example of our current local criteria(i.e.,minimum floor elevation for a house fronting a
paved street regardless of the flood zones etc.). The language needs to meet the full
requirements of the 2010 Florida Building Code. There are so many references to the
building code,and it's very important to get it accurate.
Duke commented that Nick seemed to be saying that Rick's projects (Mitigation Strategies)will
be added into this,and this is a work plan for Floodplain Management Plan. Duke suggested
that if we approve the model ordinance,we then take all the projects we're looking at here
and fit them all inside of it. He thinks it's a work plan for Floodplain Management. This is the
first time we actually specify some significant issues,that's the amalgamation of the new
Florida Building Code.
Phil was confused and questioned Duke if he's talking about the FDPO or the Floodplain
Management Plan. Duke says we're looking at two things,but he says it's really the same. It's
the model ordinance,and the plan has to come from this ordinance. Robert said no,they are
totally separate.
Duke said he would be terribly disappointed if it were. He said that it has one economic end to it
and that's to ensure the safety of our community by not permitting structures within the
floodplain that could be damaged by storm events.
Robert explained what the two documents actually are,and that they're related,but not one and
the same. Phil explained that the Floodplain Management Plan draft document was the plan
that all Duke's comments went on.
Duke said we need to look at all of the apples and oranges we have in the current ordinance
program and make sure that we don't omit anything. He wants to make sure that everything
is evaluated for one purpose and that's the safety of the residents and protection of the
floodplain.
Nick basically says he thinks he knows where Duke is going and assures that this can be done
through the commenting process, (i.e.,look at the action plan and codify anything into the
ordinance that's the place to do it). It can be considered,but he wants the ordinance to stay as
model as it can be and cautions that anything we add could become a DSAC, Planning
Commission,and/or BCC debate as to whether it's too regulatory in a document that's really
meant to be standardized for communities,and that's a policy decision.
Phil asked Robert how many different regulations we have that are not within our Land
Development Code (LDC). Robert replied that many will be within the LDC,because it comes
from the language in the ordinances.
Phil questioned Robert about taking the approach of referencing our LDC if the majority of the
restrictions are already in the LDC so we don't have to do all this and keep the model
ordinance clean, not redundant...simplify it,keep it clean. Robert explained that it can be
done if you have an ordinance on the books which supports the contents of the LDC itself.
4
Phil proposed that we have an objective to try and do this as simply as possible. Nick stated
that he understands.
CRS Program: Preparation of a White Paper
Currently,we are rated as a Class 6 CRS community. Nick briefly discussed what it takes to
improve to a Class 5 rated community,staying as a Class 6,or dropping back to a Class 7
(there is a point bracket for each class). He plans to discuss this with Robert and Bill. He
briefly went over the brackets,the point spread vs. cost effectiveness of being a 7 on the cusp
of a 6,likewise being a 6 on the cusp of a 5 and preparing some recommendations to the
Board of County Commissioners and County Manger and fiscal impacts of maintaining that
program.
Phil said it would be a tremendous benefit to the County. Nick said by doing all this and
determining our situation,we can decide what to do (e.g.,whether to outsource,hire more job
bankers,etc.).
Phil commented that now that we're going to quarterly meetings he feels that getting the
meeting docs in advance would assist the committee in preparing for the meeting,but he also
doesn't see the point in having a meeting if there has been no progress.
Nick has two points here he wants to comment on-priority between this meeting and the next
one is to review the ordinance. He also wonders if we can get the white paper to the members
three (3) weeks in advance if that would that be enough time for them. He conferred with
Robert that this is doable.
Jerry asked if there were any more comments,or discussion?
Phil thanked the County Manager, Nick, Robert and Jerry for their responsiveness to the
committee's request from last meeting.
2. Annual Beach/Dune Report(Gary McAlpin) -Jerry skipped it intentionally and came back to it
since Gary McAplin had temporarily left the meeting.
Upon completion of Steve Preston's Best Management Practices Outreach Schedule,Jerry asked
Gary McAlpin to present the Annual Beach/Dune Report. Gary introduced himself. He started
by saying that every year we spend about$75,000 on upgrading and maintaining our dune
vegetation. He said this year we will be spending considerably more than that throughout the
beaches of Collier County. We primarily re-nourish beaches to protect the upland structures
and also for tourism reasons. This year we have several items planned.
• Project number one on Marco Island is adding sand to compensate for erosion to come up
with a six year design.
• Number two will be repairing breakwaters that need upgrading.
• Number three is re-grading beaches on the north end and will provide positive drainage
and prevent spot shoaling and bird bathes on the beaches.
The next major beach re-nourishment project for the County beaches is Vanderbilt,Park Shore
and Naples beaches adding approximately 400,000 cubic yards of material. That could
change depending on the BCC. That will provide another six year design.
5
Phil asked what the six year design is. Gary explained that it's an establishment of standards for
the beach widths from vegetation line (or a benchmark that they determine)to the mean high
water.One hundred foot width is our goal for Vanderbilt and Naples beaches-Park.Shore is
85 feet.We do advanced re-nourishment maintaining that established standard.The next
beach re-nourishment is planned for 2013/14.
Gary continued his discussion by identifying that another significant project is for Wiggins Pass
to be straightened out and we're going to rebuild Barefoot Beach to the North end. The
County also does some emergency work on all beaches.
Duke asked Gary if he'd seen any unusual erosion areas. Gary said we always have hot spot
erosions,where the area always seems to erode more frequently than we've seen in the past.
South of Doctor's Pass is one. We're addressing that and redirecting disposal from when we
dredge Doctors Pass to those hot spots. Another hot spot is jetty spurs coming off of the South
jetty at Doctor's Pass-that's planned for something in the next 3 years. The Seagate entrance
is another erosion area that is ongoing for various reasons/influences surrounding it. We've
done an extensive modeling study of the beaches and believe these are the main issues. We're
also working with the City of Naples to eliminate the drainage pipes on the beaches. This is a
long term project.
Duke stated that it looks like the normal tidal washing that took place 20 yrs ago is not
happening now-the diurnal tides are not the same or they don't have same velocity and
strength. Have any studies pointed out changes in tides? Gary responded that we still get
tidal changes,we've done studies. When looking at Clam Pass it has very good tidal flushing
coming down-one problem is Clam Pass,because of it being shoaled in. The prisms have not
changed in terms of size-that is the biggest issue we have (less of a tidal flushing). Gary
stated that he wasn't able to totally endorse Dukes comment.
Duke questions red/black and white mangrove inventory growth. Has it changed or stayed the
same? Gary mentioned a few places of growth,working with the City of Naples to change
from seawalls to rip rap in places. There's a small issue at Wiggins Pass at the north dogleg,
but that will resolve after the straightening project. Overall growth is increasing in our
mangrove forests in our estuaries as opposed to diminishing.
Duke asked about the Marco Island area. Gary replied that it's near the kayak launch site and
that's City of Marco. He was unable to comment as we're not involved in that.
Craig Pager asked about the deterioration of groins and what do you do to rehabilitate them.
Gary explained the cap rock rehab that the county does-taking off old and refurbishing with
new.
Jerry Kurtz then moved to Agenda Item 4.
3. Annual Best Management Practices Outreach Schedule (Steve Preston)
Steve Preston stated the County has a permit that is required by state and federal regulations to
operate a storm water collection and discharge system. Part of that permit requirement is to
have public education and outreach about water quality matters. The County recently
renewed our permit,and he would highlight what we are going to be doing in the next five
years.
6
Following are some of the activities we do:
• Storm water website that we keep updated with information for the public
• Community presentations-basically to HOA's or civic groups(water quality)
• We also have miscellaneous outreach events (e.g.,a water symposium on 3/28)
• The main push is Project Greenscape developed by the University of Florida and run by
Rookery Bay to train and certify landscapers in proper landscaping for preservation of
our water resources
Mike Sheffield thanked Steve for the up-to-date website maintenance.
Phil questioned Steve as to what kind of feedback he gets from the public. Steve said it comes
and goes but on the average,interest rate and participation rate and follow-thru rate has
trended up quite a bit in the last 3 years.
Phil questioned the website info for economic trade off of restricting fertilizer runoff into your
lake versus treating the algae that result. Steve said yes,we point out the practical cost
benefits and preach prevention as 90%of the cure. Phil stated that algae will get people's
attention.
Steve said we lean heavily on Project Greenscape and on training the landscapers. Landscapers
often complain about the county code getting in the way-tree location vs.storm water
systems puts litter into the storm water system,and the homeowner's aren't happy with them
(the landscapers). So this is where we're really trying to push more into the homeowner's
associations. He's found out that the HOA's presidents or management companies are
certified by the state and they have to have CEU's to keep that status. We're in the process of
getting the Project Greenscape program certified so the property managers will also come to
that class.
Jerry thanked Steve and went back to item 2.
4. Review FDPO (LOMC&PMR)Amendment draft(Jennifer White-CAO)
Robert showed a document of the ordinance to the committee. It is the document that is getting
ready to go to the BCC in a few weeks. This is an amendment to our current FDPO to add text
so that we have automatic adoption for various types of map revisions. He explained what and
why with some information from the past amendments like this. It's simply trying to get the
automatic adoption to go through on the consent agenda-this is a fairly routine thing. We
had it and the board took it completely out and required every map revision to be brought to
the board. Currently we have 20 of them; this is only the standard routines. The City of
Naples and Marco do their own. We're taking it to the next board meeting,last one in March
on the Consent Agenda.This gets their permission to advertise and if approved we go back
and amend our current ordinance,it's fairly routine.
Duke pointed out the lack of identification of acronyms FSFHA or FIS and some other minor
punctuations and things. He stated we need to be consistent.
Mike agreed with Duke that we have to look at this as if we were a member of the public.
7
Robert said OK and asked if there were any more questions on this. He wants them to be aware
of the ordinance amendment going before the board this month.
Phil stated that this is amending the current one; it's called work simplification for the board and
they have to approve it.
Duke wanted to go back a moment-he stated that in the letter to FEMA you're looking at only
two basins in the study and asked if there was any progress on the other basins you're looking
at.
Robert mentioned four more basins in addition to the main ones and talks about manually
pulling off corners of houses that don't need to be on the special flood hazard line,trying to
avoid hundreds of people having to do the LOMA process again. He stated that's what has put
us about a month behind schedule. We're trying to avoid having hundreds of people having
to go through the LOMA process again.
Duke questioned the length of validity of the Letters of Map Amendment.
Robert explained that they remain valid until a subsequent FIRM would supersede them-either
by placing the property in zone X or raising the flood elevation so it is higher than the lowest
adjacent grade. If none of that occurs,they survive.
5. Review 2012 FMP Progress Report and Action Plan for 2013 (Robert Wiley)
Robert wanted to do the progress report today so he altered the agenda to include it.
Phil asked if Robert was ready for some comments and Robert said sure. Phil pointed out some
redundant language on Page 2 between the 2nd and 4th paragraph. He thought you could
eliminate some of the verbiage in the 4th because it was already covered in the 2nd.
Robert said that there is some redundancy and that it's OK.
Phil continued with specific items not mentioned. Robert explained what and why and Phil
understood why those items are the way they are after Robert's explanation.
Phil asked if Conservation Collier is part of Facilities Management or Parks&Rec.now. For the
record Bill Lorenz said it had moved to Parks&Rec.
Robert asked if there was anything else we needed to discuss. Robert said we did our annual
library run. He commented about the odd disappearance of reference material from the
county libraries. He said the books relating to the elevation of structures in the floodplain
have all disappeared. So we have ordered new ones for replacement.
Robert, Phil and Nick continued discussing items for changes,removal, etc.
Nick stated he wanted to get this done and to the board in June.
Robert said it would be a Consent item.
Mike questioned which board meeting it would be on.
8
Robert expected the first meeting of April. He said it must be done before September because
that's the deadline to submit to ISO (Insurance Services Office). Changes will be made-Let's
move on if the committee concurs.
Jerry asked for a motion to approve the action plan. Duke made a motion and Joe seconded the
motion. It was unanimously approved as amended.
6. Review 2010 FBC Compliant"Model" FDPO document(Robert Wiley)
Robert said the Model Ordinance document talks about the concept behind it and the ISO
approval of it. The model ordinance focuses on things that are NOT already covered by the
FBC. He spoke of Florida Building Code (FBC) references in the document-the issue of local
criteria-addition of issues,stated it's the local criteria he was referring to earlier and how we
want to address that. The only place we have our local criteria (i.e. 18"above the crown of
road, 24" above in the Estates,accessory structures,etc.) are in our current FDPO. When this
new document is adopted,it will repeal and replace the old. So we need to address the issue
of whether we want to keep these local criteria and put them somewhere else or whether we
want to back off on them. He needs to work with the County Attorney on this if we want to
keep them.
Phil questioned Code Enforcements involvement in the enforcement of things in our current
FDPO that's not within the LDC.
Robert explained that they do,because it's in our code of laws and ordinances.
Nick spoke of how the Code Enforcement staff should be handling these things and the challenge
of getting these synced together. Nick and Phil discussed the way this is and what it should
be. Phil recommended cleaning this up.
Robert talked about the floodplain development permit,new terminology,and how it ties into
the model ordinance,regulation,working with the floodplain management office and letting
the committee know the steps that we will be taking to get the model ordinance submitted
and approved. He asked the committee to look over the document and start e-mailing their
comments to him as soon as possible.
Nick wants them (the state) and FEMA to look at it before it goes to the Board.
Duke said there's a great emphasis on Public Utilities and stated that they are going to need to
step up. Robert said this is because it is considered a development.
7. Develop Schedule of Public Information Meetings for FMP (Robert Wiley)
Robert said we used to hold evening public meetings;we've been slacking and need to get back
into that. We get some good input at these July meetings. This year we want to make special
efforts in Immokalee. He asked the committee if they wanted to participate in these meetings
or just have staff go to them.
Rick added that this is an opportunity to add some hurricane prep into these meetings at this
time. Robert replied that we do;we always get Rick into this.
9
Duke made a summary statement on behalf of his neighborhood He said the neighbors seem
to really like the podcasts. Duke said he feels he gets more comments from items embedded
into the websites than from people showing up at meetings. He prefers the website more
than the meetings.We're not always getting a good picture of what's happening out there.
He's concerned about the changes taking place in the county that aren't being noted that
influence the floodplain. Duke thinks that after the updates of the DFirms,the floodplain
administrator is going to have to take a look at the existing development and new
development and decide if it will exceed the 100 year floodplain-and we seemed not to have
dismissed that issue yet. He'd like to be a participant in an Emergency Services presentation;
we need to get a grip on all the changes taking place and permitting/mitigation issues.
Phil commented that he thought Duke had covered all the bases.
Robert asked Duke if he wanted to participate and likes Dukes podcast suggestions.
Duke said when Dan Summers puts on the community meeting schedule,he will be there. He
would also like Dan to create embedded videos so our residents can see exactly what these
things are. He also wants the committee involved. He makes a message to staff to figure out
how to address significant problems after re-evaluation and makes a reference to the model
and basic issue that Tomasello is discovering.
Robert was a bit lost on Dukes last comment
Robert asks Mike if we can do podcasts and Mike replied that it can be done.What we need to do
is record the meeting,then we can put it on YouTube and embed the link wherever we like.
Mike and Robert went back and forth discussing ideas of electronic communications.
Robert asked if we can do live broadcasts. Mike said the live broadcasts could only be in the BCC
Chambers but we can video and re-broadcast.
Robert questioned the ability to do webcast where there could be Q&A's. Mike replied that it's a
very complicated and difficult thing to do.
Phil feels we should fully investigate electronic communications. Robert asked Mike if we could
have more information on this subject by the June meeting and Mike agreed that he would
look into it.
Jerry moved the meeting back to Old Business,Item 2.
Updating the Floodplain Management Plan-Robert briefly went over the updating of the
Floodplain Management Plan. Nick has suggested using a consultant to help us with this.
Robert said he hasn't made any changes since we last met,but he does have the HAZUS
software loaded up on his computer now. He was going to start to get into that and start the
analyses. He will hold off until there is more information on consulting.
Phil stated that he thinks the important thing to find out by the next meeting is clarity with
respect to consultants.
10
Nick said he will get some costs of using a consultant. He and Phil discussed not having Robert do
too much until we get the figures for consults,and get an estimated cost for this. Time wise,
we have a little bit of breathing room before this is due, but we don't want it to linger.
Jerry then returned to the New Business Agenda Item 8.
8. Public Comments
Mike Ramsey, president of the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association,stepped forward and said
he felt the electronic communication is a good idea and that we should continue with the
current broadcasts. He finds the acronyms difficult to follow and thinks it would help all
around to continue the concept of rebroadcasting the meetings.
Jerry asked if there were any more public comments. There were none.
Duke motioned to adjourn the meeting and the motion passed unanimously at 10:43 a.m.
Next Regular Meeting: Monday,June 3rd, 2013 starting at 9:00 a.m. in Room 610 of the GMD-P&R
building located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104.
Jerry Kurtz,Chairman
Robert Wiley,St Coordinator
NOTE: A recording of the meeting is available for anyone desiring to hear it. Please contact Mr. Evy
Ybaceta at the Growth Management Division—Planning and Regulation building(239-252-2400)
for access to the recording.
11