Loading...
CAC Minutes 08/02/2001 RAugust 2,2001 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, August 2, 2001 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 1:30 p.m. In REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Gary Galleberg Anthony P. Pires, Jr. David Roellig John P. Strapponi Ashley D. Lupo Robert B. Stakich James L. Snediker NOT PRESENT: Robert Gray William Kroeschell ALSO PRESENT: Roy Anderson, Public Utilities Engineering Department Harry Huber, Public Utilities Engineering Department Jon C. Staiger, Ph.D., City of Naples, Natural Resources Page jul-27-01 11:34A Collier County Public Wks P.02 NOTICE OF PU BI.IC MEETING NOTICE IS IIEREBY GIVEN OF A REGULAR MEETING OF TIlE COASTAl. ADVISORY COMMITTEE AT THE BOARD OF COI.i~iER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM ON THE THIRD FI,OOR OF THE IIARMON .~I'IIRNER BUILDING, 3301 TAMIAM! TRAIL EAST. NAPI,ES, FLORIDA 341 I1 ON AUGUST 02, 2001 AT 1:30 P.M. AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Additions to Agenda 3. Presentation by Humiston & Moore Engineers llidcaway Beach T-Grt~ins, L-Year Post Construction MonitorinR Report. 4. Post-Storm Damage Assessment Report 5. Project Status Report 6. Old Business · Approval of Minutes for May 29, June 07 and June 27, 200'! · Discussion regarding telecast of meeting on Channel 54. · Di~ussion regarding Pets on the Beach. 7. New Business · Discussion rep, arding proposed field trips · Rcques! for Proposals a. RFP #01-3271, Professional Engineering Services for Coastal Zone Managemeut Projects. b. RFP 001-3272, Production of Beach Compatible Sand. 8. Audience Participation 9. Adjournment ADDITIONAI,LY, THIS NOTICE ADVISES THAT, IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAl, ANY DECISION MADE BY THE COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. WITH RESPECT TO ANY MA'I'I'ER CONSIDERED AT Tills MEETING, HE WILL NEED A RECORD OF TIlE PROCEEDINGS AND THAT FOR SUCH PURPOSE, HE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF TIlE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TF. STIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAl, IS TO BE BASED. August 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Welcome to the August 3rd (sic), 2001, meeting of the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee. I'm Gary Galleberg. I will note for the record that all members are in attendance today other than Mr. Gray and Mr. Kroeschell. Mr. Anderson, would you like to begin? MR. ANDERSON: I did get a call this morning from Mr. Gray who indicated that he was out of town and won't be able to make this meeting today, but he will certainly be here next time. The next item is Additions to the Agenda, and this is just a standard item we thought we would place here in case any board members -- any committee members, had any items to place on the agenda or something came up at the last minute. So if there are no additional items, we'll just continue. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Okay. MR. ROELLIG: I have -- CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Mr. Vice Chairman. MR. ROELLIG: Yes. It's a -- relates to the FEMA club map. I understand that the county and the city have gone down this path. They have a consultant now and so forth. I don't know if that would be an item that this committee would be involved in. It's a very -- rather complexed technical issue, and -- but it is -- does revolve around coastal matters. Would this would be something that the committee would want to get involved in, or should we wait and see what is assigned to us by the city or the county. I'm just putting this up for general consideration because what we are talking about is a significant coastal aspect of that as far as storm surge and wave heights and all that sort of thing. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Yes. That certainly is an item which affects -- has a multi-dimension effect, and I would -- if it's okay,' I would like to suggest that we take that matter under advisement, and we can check into it and report back at the next Page August 2, 2001 meeting. We'll talk to our attorneys and the various county departments that are involved with that, and we'll let you know at our next meeting. We'll get a report back at the next -- September meeting -- MR. ROELLIG: Very good. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: -- if that's acceptable. DR. STAIGER: Mr. Chairman, the city building department and the county development services administration have been working on that issue, and they have hired an outside'consultant about a year or so ago, and they have been doing a lot of work. And the FEMA coordinator for the city probably could come in and give you a briefing on just where -- where it's going. We have been back and forth a number of times with FEMA on these maps. And so there's -- there's a lot of homework that has already been done. You know, we can get him in -- Bob Devlin to come in and brief you all on what it's all about because it is a significant insurance problem with county and city residents. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I think our presentation. From Mr. Devlin from the city and, perhaps, his counterpart at the county would be helpful. It's a big issue. We have spent a fair amount of time receiving information and addressing it on the city council -- and I know the county commission has. It's something that I hope everyone in the community is aware of, but we all need to understand also that it's a federal program and other than legal action we don't really have a direct influence on the county or the city level, however a presentation next month might be very helpful. MR. PIRES: Mr. Chairman, if I may, just a suggestion on that item-- and I think following up possibly what Mr. Anderson was thinking -- I don't intend to read his mind -- possibly the staff through this committee can also advise the committee of their recommendations as to whether or not it might be an appropriate Page 4 August2,2001 issue for us to participate in because it may not be appropriate, or it may, actually, as supposed to assist may be slow down efforts. I think that can be part of the direction to the staff. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I think that can be part of the presentation. Both the city and county staffs have received direction from the elected officials to not accept the FEMA proposal, so as Mr. -- Dr. Staiger said there is a lot of work that has already been done. Did you have anything else, Mr. -- MR. ROELLIG: No. MR. ANDERSON: -- Roellig Item No. 3 is a presentation by Humiston & Moore Engineers on the Hideaway Beach T-Groins and the Three-Year Post Construction Monitoring Report. So Ken Humiston from Humiston & Moore is here to give a brief presentation on that effort as the next item. Ken, are you all set with your technology there? MR. HUMISTON: It will be just a second. MR. ANDERSON: Okay. I might add this presentation that Ken Humiston is going to give is -- is basically a report that we had submitted to you last month -- to all the members last month, so it's something that has already been made available to you. But we can certainly give you a -- another copy if you need it or whichever. I just wanted to mention that. MR. MUDD: Jim Mudd for the record. Sirs, do you have that up on your monitors up there? CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Yes, we do. MR. MUDD: Okay. MR. HUMISTON: Ken Humiston with Humiston & Moore Engineers. As Roy Anderson said I'm going to talk about the most recent monitoring report of the T-Groin Project on Marco Island. That report was handed out at the last meeting. I'm going to go over a couple of things. Page 5 August 2, 2001 The first thing that I would like to do is spend a couple of minutes talking about these erosion control structures that we are calling the T-Groins, what their function is, and how they are expected to work, and then I will talk about the results of the monitoring. The exhibit up there is just a location map to show you where the project is. As I said, just a couple of words about the function of these groins. This is a schematic drawing that illustrates in the upper right-hand comer in plain view what the T-groin looks like. There is an element that is perpendicular to the shoreline coming down from the top of the picture. Then there is a shore parallel segment in the bottom of the picture. And the lower part of this exhibit is a section view through that shore perpendicular trunk section. What this shows is that that trunk section roughly approximates a natural bench profile slope. It's done this way so that sand will be able to pass across the top of it. With conventional groins you generally have sand moving in one direction that will pile up on one side and cause erosion on the other side. The purpose of this design was to -- once the updrift side fills up with sand to allow that sand to -- cross over the low-profile structures so we get a more symmetrical shoreline response and established beach on both sides of it. This is essentially the same diagram in the upper right-hand comer, but the lower part of it shows the shore parallel T-section. I just put this up in the middle. There is a little notch in it. The purpose of that is to allow wave energy to come through. If sand accumulates behind this structure to the point where the dry beach actually connects to the structure, that beach itself could become a barrier to sand bypassing the structure. And the notch is to allow wave energy to knock that down a little bit if that tries to happen. This is an illustration of a permanent structure, permanent Page 6 August 2, 2001 T-groin structure. This is the shore parallel T-head. I would just like to mention there are only three of these installations that have been built in Florida -- or anywhere in the world, for that matter that I know of-- the one at Marco Island and the one by Gordon Pass. This illustration is from a permanent installation up on North Captiva Island that has been there for about three years now. I just wanted to use that as an example of how we anticipate these things will work because it is working very well. The contrast between this and what we have on Marco Island is that the Marco Island project is built out of temporary materials as a requirement of the permitting agencies. It's built out of sand-filled geo textile bags. The difference is that what you see on your monitor is steel sheet pile with a rock apron out in front of it. The steel sheet pile is completely impermeable. So when the sand builds up behind it, it can't go through the structure, and at the same time the sheet pile can be cut off at a very precise elevation, so it controls the elevation at which it will be overtopped by waves and so forth to keep the sand moving behind it. In contrast, this is the structure on Marco Island made out of the geo textile bags. If you look at the way these bags are piled up, they are -- they are like large pillows once they are filled with sand, but they are very hard. There are gaps between them and interstitial spaces at the seams that allows sand to pass through. Just a couple of more illustrations of the North Captiva project. This is what it looked like before the installation of the erosion- control structures. Very similar to what happened on Marco Island, very rapid erosion rates. Here the erosion rates were as high as 80 feet per year. On Marco Island we actually had one season of monitoring where we had about 70 feet per year of erosion. Just another shot of North Captiva. As I mentioned, the Page August 2, 2001 conventional groin has sand building up on one side, and you typically get down-drift erosion. This is a schematic illustrating what the project on North Captiva would have looked like with conventional groins. We opted for the T-groin approach. This is what it looked like during construction. Construction was almost complete at this time. You can see the sand already building up. I want to point out that no sand was brought in. This was all sand that was accumulated from the natural literal processes. This is what it looked like about three months after, and six months after, which is essentially what it looks like today, essentially three years later. The Marco Island project, as I mentioned that we are required to use the temporary structures that came about because we are in the process of preparing an inlet management plan for the Big Marco Capri Pass area. That plan had not been adopted by the state at the time we wanted to move forward with the erosion-control project. The state agreed to allow the county to move forward with the project with the stipulation that the structures would be temporary in nature. Conceptionally this is what the design was to look like with the first three structures put in at Royal Marco Point. And that is what it looked like (indicating). From here I can't read the date on it -- I think you can probably see that on your monitors. This is what the shoreline looked like in that area prior to putting the T-groins in (indicating). Now, what you see here is actually a -- sand had been placed in this area. And you can see the ongoing erosion was eating away at that erosion-control project, and there have been various times when the sand was not placed there where a lot of vegetation was lost from a conservation easement in that area. This is what it looks like now (indicating). At Sound Point on the west end of Hideaway Beach we put in two structures; that point of land has been eroding very rapidly. It Page 8 August 2, 2001 was undermining vegetation, as it was in the other area. This is what it looked like as of the date of that photograph (indicating), which, again, I can't see here. To get to the monitoring report, this is -- shows the scope of the monitoring. We have done surveys on each one of those lines shown on this diagram. And there are several of these that I would like to just show you some examples of the results of the surveys of. First of all, all the survey data on those lines is used to create a contour map. This is the contour map at Southpoint. I'm showing this to you because it illustrates the very deep canal where the contour lines are close together, just 100 feet or so from the shoreline. Some of the problems down here is that we have that very deep channel there; that is why in 1991 a more comprehensive beach restoration project was not done here. We put a -- about 70, 000 yards of sand along this shoreline with the intention of monitoring it and maintaining it with periodic renourishment because to build a wider beach would have involved filling in that channel. It would have taken a tremendous amount of sand to get a relatively narrow beach, so we are looking for another solution. And after maintaining that with the sand placement periodically, we realized that a better approach would be to try and stabilize those small amounts of nourishment with these structures; that's how we got to the T-groin project. This is an illustration of exactly the same area (indicating). It's a contour of change map. In this case the green areas indicate where the water got deeper. Green areas are areas of erosion. The red areas are where it got shallower. If you recall the previous illustration, the contour map where that deep channel was, the area of red and yellow there that runs along the north side of the channel is where sand had been pushed from the shoaled system into that channel, and the green area on the Page 9 August2,2001 south side is where erosion occurs. So the channel is still migrating towards Hideaway Beach, which is contributing to this erosion problem. This is the area at Royal Marco Point (indicating). Again, we have the contour change map. There is more green areas here indicating erosion which indicates that the stabilization of the structures has not been effective as it has been at Southpoint. But I would like to point out a couple of things. One is that Coconut Island, which is the island right in the middle of the inlet, has been migrating to the south very signficantly over the recent years. In fact, in 1991 when the nourishment project was done, and there was not even an erosion problem in this area. So this is a fairly recent erosion problem that cropped up while we were maintaining the 1991 beach restoration project. We replaced the three T-groins in what was the center of the most severe erosion in this area. Since that time the erosion stress is expanded to the east. One of the discussions that we've had with the regulatory agencies is over the possibility that the erosion that you see to the east of the structures could be a down-drift impact, that the sand is moving from west to east and the structures are interrupting that; then it would transfer the erosion problem to the down-drift side. To some extent that -- that probably is the case, because the structures have stabilized the area right where they are. If those structures weren't there, the sand eroded from that area would be moving to the east. But this is not the classic down-drift impact that you get with a traditional groin. Because, if you look, there actually is a little bit of erosion on the west side of these structures as well. That's an indication that sand from that area is bypassing the structures the way the structures are allowed to bypass. Yet the structures are holding enough material there that we are not losing any more of the conservation easement. Because of that significant Page August 2, 2001 erosion to the east of the structures, we had recommended and are now, even as we speak, in the process of constructing a fourth T-groin in this area to the east of the three that are there. I would also like to point out in the lower left-hand comer of this you can see there is an area of accretion, which extends beyond the limit of this exhibit. That area is -- a significant amount of accretion has occurred there because that is the shadow of Coconut Island. So part of this problem is that sand that is moving to the east toward this project is accumulating in the shadow of Coconut Island and not getting to this area (indicating) where the erosion is occurring. I have several exhibits here that show the actual monitoring data profiles. This first one is on a DNR monument. As you can see in the upper panel here (indicating), it's a profile that runs from the northwest comer of Marco Island -- actually out across the island that is known as Sand Dollar Island. If you look at the profile, you can see where Sand Dollar Island is. And you can see that there are very significant changes occurring there. The second one is a profile that is actually right in the T-groin field and runs across that channel (indicating). A couple of things that I wanted to point out here is that the area right up in the T-groin field in the very right-hand part of the picture has been very stable since the T-groins were constructed. And no sand has been placed in that area since the T-groins were constructed. The other thing this shows is the notch there near the right-hand side is that channel. You can see the changes on the north side of that channel in the shoal is encroached on the channel. On the scale of this drawing it is not as evident, but there is erosion going on in the south side of that channel as the channel migrates towards the shoreline causing the erosion problem. This is the -- I think this is the last one of these sections that I Page August 2, 2001 have here. I included this because it is in the area that's in the shadow of Coconut Island. You can see on the very right-hand side of the panel on the bottom the significant accretion of sand that's occurred there. One more section that is right in the T-groin field at Royal Marco Point. What this shows -- if you look at the very right-hand side of the lower panel, the construction profile did erode back considerably. Again, this is a pretty small scale to see it, but these profiles are in the monitoring report that was passed out at the last meeting. Once that initial readjustment occurred, that profile has been very stable, even through some periods of time that we did not place any sand in that area. This is an illustration of shoreline change in the area of the T-groins at Southpoint at the west end of Hideaway Beach. What it shows over on the left-hand side is that the period of time from the '91 nourishment project until the T-groins were put in in 1996, the erosion rates were higher on those two monuments than -- on the right-hand side of this exhibit, where you can see at M-3, I think-- again, I can't see the numbers from here -- I believe it was 2.6 feet per year. And further to the east about -- ! think that's about 700 feet to the east of the other monument -- again, we had lower erosion rates. One of the things that's a little bit tricky about analyzing this monitoring data is that on a very small scale we have been putting sand in there periodically and surveying it and trying to determine what the overall affects are. So both of these periods of times shown in this exhibit had sands placed in there. In an effort to try and see -- to try to determine what would have occurred had that sand not been placed in there, we made some adjustments to these numbers. Again, you can see that the -- at Monument M-3 there was a significant reduction in the erosion; that's the same as it was before because no sand has been placed in that area since the T-groins were Page August 2, 2001 placed. The other area further to the east, sand has been placed in there a number of times since the T-groins were put in. The erosion rate is still lower than it was prior to the T-groins, although not as significantly so. This is why we made the recommendation to construct an additional T-groin in this area, which was just completed last week. Just one final comment. One of the things that we're hoping to accomplish with these structures is, of course, stabilizing the beach, which is habitat for nesting sea turtles, and we have coordinated with Maura Kraus on some of the sea turtle data. We think it's very interesting. We have had an ongoing debate with the permitting agencies over the actual meaning of this, but if you look at this diagram, it does show that there has been an increase in the nesting density on Hideaway Beach since the T-groins were put in. We do know from the physical monitoring data that the beach has been more stable since they were put in there. There could very well be a cause-and-effect relationship. In talking to Maura -- she's here to elaborate on this, if I get anything wrong -- but there are annual variation in turtle nestings for a lot of other reasons. One thing that Maura pointed out is that the lower nesting density last year for the year 2000 -- on the right-hand side of this -- may be due to the fact that Sand Dollar Island actually extended across the entrance to Big Marco Pass that obstructed-- would have obstructed the turtles access to this beach. This year the preliminary data, I believe, there was, as of last week, about 25 nests in the Hideaway Beach area. This is something that needs to be monitored much longer to determine if there really is a cause-and-effect relationship, but it certainly does not seem there has been any harm to the turtle nesting in this area. Page August 2, 2001 And this is the final exhibit that -- I have included this in here because it does show how Sand Dollar Island is grown across the entrance to Big Marco Island Pass channel there, which is actually broken off, and that is open again this year. I will be glad to answer any questions. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Does anyone have any questions? The results from the first three T-groins being installed, I assume, were significantly worse than what was hoped for or anticipated; is that right? MR. HUMISTON: We had hoped that they would be better. We did put those in with the understanding that the T-groins were put in to help stabilize, but the management approach was to stabilize from the T-groins and do periodic nourishment as needed, and it has been necessary to do additional nourishment. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: And would the differing results be due to different erosion forces or kind of miscalculating in the beginning or-- MR. HUMISTON: We-- we believe it's largely due to the large-scale changes that have been going on in the inlet system, primary the migration of Coconut Island towards the southwest because that has opened up -- Capri Pass is much wider now than it was when the structures were originally put in. That area to the east of the structures is opened up to exposure to more wave energy directly out of the northwest, which is where some of the most severe wave energy comes from. Additionally, the tidal currents now appear to be impinging more directly on that shoreline. We believe that the erosion is a result of both the increased wave energy as well as tidal currents. Some of the things that we are looking at right now is with the very strong tidal currents in there, we may be getting some circulation or eddy formations around the ends of these structures that could be part of the problem. Page August 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: With the additional data you now have and the results from the three T-groins, is it anticipated that this fourth groin will stabilize it or-- MR. HUMISTON: Yes. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: -- or is further work to be projected? MR. HUMISTON: That is the purpose to further stabilize it. Additionally, we did complete the dredging of the entrance to Collier Bay, and all of that sand has been placed in that area where the severe erosion was. MR. SNEDIKER: Do you think another T-groin may be, in the foreseeable future, required? MR. HUMISTON: That's possible. But by the same token, these are temporary structures, and we are monitoring them for a period of time under the permit after which we will be making recommendations on what would be a more appropriate way to go. MR. SNEDIKER: How about the condition of the existing T-groins, the five that are out there now; the two and the three? There has been some rolling over the bags. Some of the bags have deteriorated. A number of the bags have broken up. Are they going to be repaired while you have got the crews out there now? MR. HUMISTON: We have no plans to repair those right now. That is another problem with these temporary structures is they are nearly as durable at the permanent ones. We have looked at -- we did some repairs last year on these structures. There are some other considerations. The wave attenuating capability of these structures is a function of both the height as well as the crest width. MR. SNEDIKER: Right. MR. HUMISTON: And when we had the bags roll off the top of it, it made them a little bit lower but a little bit wider. But at the same time we identified the loss of sand through the spaces between Page August2,2001 the bags as part of the problem. We went in last year and put some filtering material on the back side and held that in place with another row of bags. So the structures actually now are considerably wider than they were originally designed, and we feel the combination of the slightly lower elevation, but a wider crest width should make them as effective as the original design. MR. SNEDIKER: But there is a variety. In some cases they are still the original height, but they have not -- the bags have not come off, and some are wider where the bags -- in some cases the bags have just broken up and deteriorated and gone, and the sand has fell out of them. MR. HUMISTON: Yeah, that's correct. We just don't feel that it would be economically practical every time a bag is dislodged by a storm -- which is happening to us a number of times -- to go in there and mobilize the crew to remove the misplaced bags and to try and restore the structure and to try and maintain them on an annual basis at the same configuration as they were originally designed, because we don't believe functionally there is a large difference between the way they are now and the way the original design plan showed them. MR. SNEDIKER: I guess I would have thought when the crews were out there now, that might be a time to redo that -- to do the repair work. MR. HUMISTON: Well, it certainly would be, but, you know, we were focusing primarily on the additional structures to try and address the severe erosion in the areas where it was the most important. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Anything else? Thank you, Mr. Humiston. MR. HUBER: If you can just -- if you don't mind, stay there. And getting into this next item, if you could go through those slides that you have. Page 16 August 2, 2001 MR. ANDERSON: I just wanted to interject something. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to -- the next item on the agenda is a post- storm damage assessment, and what -- what we wanted to basically describe to you was the damage -- give you an update of the damage that had occurred due to the storms -- the storm of last week. And what we've got here is a -- kind of a three-part presentation. The first is a -- first of all, we passed out some photographs that we've taken that illustrates some of the storm damage. And we've also got Ken Humiston has loaded some photographs that he took, which are very similar to what we handed out, and we've asked him if he could walk through the series of photos he's done, which are set up the same way as your handout. We started in the northern part up in Vanderbilt area and then were working south. Then we also have Maura Kraus, who is going to give you an update about the turtle nesting damage, and then Harry will get into a report on the magnitude of the damage and some possible estimates. And so with your indulgence we'll begin that presentation. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Okay. Very good. MR. ANDERSON: Maybe while they are getting set up, I want to make a couple of notations, if I could. As you noticed, Harry Huber is back with us. He's back working with us on a full-time basis, and we are glad to have him back. So he's -- he'll be at the next few meetings. And we were also pleased to announce that Ron Hovell, our new project manager for the beach program, is with us, and he's helping out already. He started on the 31st of July. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Welcome back, and welcome starting. MR. ANDERSON: And the last item that I wanted to mention is that we have made up the nameplates. We have them here. However, we have got some additional logistical problems. There are only five holders, so I think what we are probably going to have Page August 2, 2001 to do is get nine freestanding holders to put up top. And we'll have those set for next month. MR. SNEDIKER: Here is a whole bunch of them right now. MR. ANDERSON: Oh, there are. Okay. Okay. Maybe we can -- if we -- set those up during the meeting and try not to be too disruptive. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Well, maybe we'll take a short break after this. MR. ANDERSON: Okay. That's fine. Ken, would you like to proceed with the photos? MR. HUMISTON: Yes, I think I'm ready now. Here are some pictures that were taken last week of the effects of the storm that we experienced. I believe it was the 21 st and 22nd of July. Starting at the north end of the county, this is Vanderbilt Beach (indicating). In the upper right-hand side of this, you can see there is an erosion escarpment there. It's not very pronounced here. It's probably in the order of a foot to a foot-and-a-half high. This is in front of the Ritz-Carlton (indicating). Again, there is a fairly mild erosion scarp. Both of these photographs are in the area that was nourished with the beach-restoration project. A little farther to the south in the Pelican Bay Strand, this is in front of one of the condominiums there (indicating). You can see there is very pronounced erosion scarp. The erosion has occurred underneath this walkover. If you look closely at the bottom step of that walkover, it's a pretty large step down to the beach. Farther to the south there is a continuous erosion scarp all the way down to Clam Pass and on down into Naples. I included this one (indicating) because it shows some of the old relic stumps that were in this area is an indication the storm uncovered some things that had not been uncovered before. One of the other problems is that the erosion ate into the dune. Page August 2, 2001 As Maura can attest, there's a number of the -- large number of the nests in Collier County were washed out by this storm. The ones that survived in areas like this was where the turtle managed to get up into the vegetative part of the dune beyond where the erosion scarp progressed to. This is the north beach facility at Pelican Bay. This picture was taken on a very low tide. Somewhere around the middle of the picture, you can see the high tide line by a little bit of the debris on the beach, which you can imagine the water up there it doesn't leave a very wide beach. I also want to add the storm is taking all of that material away from the dune in creating that erosion scarp, a lot of that material is still in the near shore area as an offshore bar. At a high tide, you would have a trough between the bar and the beach, but it would be very shallow on that offshore bar. And we would normally expect that under general wave -- gentle wave climate, a lot of that sand would move back to the beach. We expect the beach to recover somewhat in the near future. This is just south of Clam Pass and the county park (indicating). This area has the highest erosion scarp as anywhere in the county. Here, again, you can see the erosion went past one of the boardwalks coming from the beach facility out there, and the -- that boardwalk is closed. And here's a picture with a live human being in it to illustrate the scale of that scarp; that's on the order of about five feet high. This is in the Park Shore area, which was recently nourished with the material hauled in by a truck. There is no erosion scarp here. There may be a couple of reasons for that. One is that material that was hauled in was fairly coarse good beach material that you would expect to hold up better. The other is there is really no dune here on this beach. It just Page 19 August 2, 2001 goes up to the seawall. The beach berm was an elevation of about plus 5. It may very well have been overtopped by a lot of the storm action. The places in the county where we see the erosion scarp is where that was a dune that went to a higher elevation of 6 or 7 or maybe 8 feet. The storm waves ate into that higher elevation creating a scarp. This is in front of the Beach Club (indicating). There is an erosion scarp there, not as high as farther north. And then that is farther south along Naples Beach. I'm not sure exactly which street this is at (indicating). This is just north of Gordon Pass. This is a panorama view showing the T-groins at Gordon Pass. And on the very left-hand side of that picture there is a turtle nest, which you can see more clearly here. This is -- this is an area where there was no beach prior to this erosion control project, so there was no possibility of nesting in that area. I think it's significant for two reasons; one, now there is a beach there. Not only that, this nest did survive that storm provided that it wasn't overtopped to the extent that it would have been adversely affected by that. On Marco Island in the area of the T-groins projects that area held up very well. It may not have been exposed to as direct wave action as the open coast where we saw the escarpment formation, but it did hold up very well, both at -- Royal Marco Point was the previous one (indicating), and this is at Southpoint. Farther south of Marco Island this is very close to the south end of the island looking north. This is in the area of the beach restoration project in 1991. There is a small erosion scarp there. This is not really a problem. There is a very wide beach in that area. That scarp will probably be knocked down by weathering. There is still a very wide beach in that area. Page 2o August 2, 2001 This is just the final photograph (indicating) looking south toward the segment of breakwater at Caxambas Pass. MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. Thank you very much, Ken. Next we would like to ask Maura Krause if she would come up and give us an overview of the sea turtle nest damage and what-- how the prognosis looks at this point. MS. KRAUS: Hi, I'm Maura Kraus, Collier County Natural Resource Department. Before the storm we had 945 sea turtle nests. After the storm we have 414 left. We lost 56 percent. And the sea turtle hatching has been real slow because the month of May was very cool, and the turtles started nesting a little bit later. So when the storm hit we had most of the nests on the beach. We lost a total of 56 percent, which was a lot. We did lose a lot of markers but possibly not all the nests. We mark them with wooden stakes. It's a really hard job to try - to refind a lost nest. We're trying to locate two of them right now so that the area can be opened to beach cleaning. We're having a little bit of difficulty with that, but hopefully by the end of the week we will find these two areas so we can mark them off. We did have 35 nests on the new beach -- on the new beach sand at Park Shore and also in Hideaway Beach. We have 18 left. So we still have a good number that we can get a good idea with the new sand -- how those sea turtles are acting with the new sand. We have success of-- three of the nests on the new sand was over 90 percent; so it looks pretty good. We are real happy with the new sand. Does anyone have any questions? MR. PIRES: Maura, just a quick question. You mentioned about the staking or identify stakes are missing from a lot of the nests are wooden stakes. Is there thought to, perhaps, having one more permanent -- sort of like a steel rod placed where you stake it out for Page 21 August 2, 2001 identification later on? MS. KRAUS: That could be a possibility. Right now we have them GPSed, and we've never had to locate a nest that has been lost before, so we're just in a learning process now. We are trying to navigate back to the areas. We have a pretty good GPS, so we should be able to get within, you know, 5 or 10 feet of the nest. MR. ANDERSON: One of the impacts of-- of the storm is that because of the problem with the turtle nests we are precluded from going back and doing any restoration of any kind for the beach areas, so we -- we can't do anything with any mechanical equipment. We did have manual work. We arranged for some prisoners to work there this past Saturday to go along and pick up some of the rocks. But we can't do anything with any mechanical means, and we can't do any reshaping until the -- actually, until -- we got a letter from our Community Development Services indicating that the state is saying that we can't do anything until -- until November 1 st. And I understand we're supposed to be getting a formal notification from the DEP to that effect in the very near future; is that correct, Maura? Did I state that all correctly? MR. KRAUS: Yes. MR. PIRES: Maura, does that also affect any vehicle-on-the- beach permits for any other entities such as the hotels and things like that? MR. ANDERSON: I can't answer that. Do you have any clarification on that one, Maura? MS. KRAUS: Yeah. It depended on where the nests were. Like the Ritz-Carlton, for instance, they had four nests on their property at the time the storm hit, and they are all still there. So, you know, certain areas are allowed to do the beach cleaning and raking. The Ritz-Carlton is one of them. Clam Pass Beach is not. MR. PIRES: Thanks, Maura. Page 22 August 2,2001 MS. KRAUS: Thank you. MR. STRAPPONI: When we first identified the nests, I imagine that's a visual identification probably from the disruption from the sand when the nests first goes in? MS. KRAUS: Yes. We see the tracks. Then we see the - the nests. MR. STRAPPONI: Bear with me. MS. KRAUS: Sure. MR. STRAPPONI: You will have to walk me through this. At that point in time, we go ahead and we stake the nests, and we put some markers on it. And then imagine with the normal wind and rain that's probably not visually recognized because it levels out with the rest of the sand and the tracks are gone. MS. KRAUS: Yes. MR. STRAPPONI: So the only identification from that point on would be the stakes and the ribbon? MR. KRAUS: Yes -- yes, sir. MR. STRAPPONI: And if we lose that, we have marked these apparently using GPS numbers. The GPS is how accurate? MR. KRAUS: Supposed to be within a meter. MR. STRAPPONI: Within a meter. MS. KRAUS: Yeah. MR. STRAPPONI: Three feet, approximately. Then why would we be having difficulty relocating these nests after the markers have been washed away by the storm? MS. KRAUS: Because it's a learning process for us too. We haven't had to locate a nest before, and there's -- you have to take certain weigh points and-- it's kind of a complicated thing. So we are just trying to figure it out right now. MR. STRAPPONI: I'm not -- MS. KRAUS: So there's also -- we lost 531 nests. It didn't -- Page 23 August 2, 2001 MR. STRAPPONI: How many people do we have to find them? MS. KRAUS: How many people? We have one person that is responsible for each beach. MR. STRAPPONI: Okay. Four people. I'm surprised to learn the GPS has a one-meter accuracy because as a- MS. KRAUS: That's after it's corrected. So we have to do some corrections. MR. STRAPPONI: Okay. So you have to do the correction. MS. KRAUS: Yes. MR. STRAPPONI: Is there any way to -- obviously you can't use a metal detector. But do we have any kind of electronic means of possibly from noise to identify the nest? MS. KRAUS: No. MR. STRAPPONI: Strictly GPS? MS. KRAUS: Strictly GPS. You know, when we GPS we don't always know exactly where the eggs are. So we hold the GPS over the nest site. So, you know, it's hard to find the eggs. It's hard to find the eggs when you see the turtle nesting and she leaves. It's like finding a needle in a haystack. The area that opens up into the cavity of the nest is only about that big (indicating). MR. STRAPPONI: Thank you. MS. KRAUS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Okay. MR. ANDERSON: Now, we are putting Harry to work right away. So, Harry, would you like to give us your report? MR. HUBER: Okay. As Maura had mentioned and Roy had mentioned before, this situation with the sea turtle nests is significantly affecting our beach-cleaning operation. And they say we are trying to open up as many areas as we can by -- through the process of trying to relocate the lost nests and remark them because, you know, if the nests were marked and we can theoretically continue Page 24 August 2, 2001 our beach-cleaning operation in that area, since we know where the nests are and we can avoid them. But right now we have -- the most -- I guess the most serious situation is down on Marco where we have all the seaweed accumulated down there which is getting pretty rank at this point. So we do have an area down there between Residents Beach and South Seas Condo, which is an area of maybe 4, 000 feet where we have been given permission to go in there and resume our beach cleaning because all the nests are still marked in that area. There was none lost. So -- but there is also some -- an area of about 3,000 feet up in Vanderbilt, which there is -- only one nest was lost in that area. We are going to try and relocate that, so it will be, you know, a continuing, evolving process where we try to resume the beach cleaning in as many areas as possible. But my understanding that -- the stipulation that came down, you know, not only from our Community Development, but I think that came from direction from DEP, was that all beach-cleaning operations would be suspended until September 30th, you know, unless you had a specific authorizations, just like I was just referring to in certain areas where the nests have been relocated. Then I also went through to try to quantify the damage that was done as far as beach fill goes, you know, the sand that was lost because of the erosion. And here again, these are real rough figures. Here's the procedure that I used to make the determination. I took Vanderbilt Beach, and I just took the whole length of the beach that was restored back in '96. It was about 7,300 feet, and I took a beach width of 70 feet and average erosion of 2 feet in depth, which equates to about 38,000 cubic yards. I went down to Clam Pass, and I took an area of about 3,000 foot length of beach -- here again, 70 foot wide. Here I took a depth of 4 foot average, which equates to Page 25 August 2, 2001 31,000 cubic yards. Then for Naples I took the entire length of the restored beach, which is about 15,600 feet. Here, I just took an average width of about 50 feet and 2 foot deep, and it comes to 58, 000 yards. And taking all of those and adding them up, it comes 127, 000 cubic yards. So immediately-- theoretically, immediately after the storm if we were going to consider going in there and restoring the beach to where it was right before the storm, theoretically that's what the volume of beach fill that we would have to put back in there. As Ken Humiston mentioned before, there is a certain amount of recovery that happens, maybe within the next couple of weeks or month, and so that figure could be considerably reduced. But I think if we were to recommend some kind of action in this regard, first of all, we want to monitor the recovery, and then we need to -- based on that monitoring, we need to identify areas where we feel we are going to recommend we need to place some fill after November 1 st after the sea turtle season is over and during the next off sea turtle season. And that in conjunction with our incremental beach maintenance program where we have planned on an annual basis to place 50,000 cubic yards on the beach. Not only for this purpose but also for that purpose, we need within the next month or so, identify those areas where we want to put that 50, 000 cubic yards next year or more if being necessary. So we are going to be looking at next month's meeting to try and make those determinations, because we need to get started to prepare the plans and get those submitted to DEP so they can give us the authorization by November as to where we will be placing those materials. MR. PIRES: Harry, I guess one thought on-- maybe sort of follow-up on Maura was mentioning part of this -- for next year recognizing that we are in a learning curve -- the staff is learning on the nesting -- the nest marking and relocating and finding, it seems to Page 26 August 2, 2001 be a critical component of the ability to do -- engage in quite a few activities between May and November including construction activities, I guess, like, sea control line, beach raking; is there an opportunity as far as this assessment while you are doing the measurement of the damage to the beaches as far as sand loss to also look at boosting the staffing for the nesting aspect to locate the nesting to be able to engage maybe in more activities between now and November? Is that possible? Just a thought. MS. LUPO: Going back to, I guess, the beginning of your speech, you stated there is a moratorium absent special authorization until September 30th for beach cleanup because of the turtle nests? MR. HUBER: Yes, ma'am. MS. LUPO: Does that coordinate with the end of hatching season, or is that just an arbitrary date they placed on it? MR. HUBER: I think the basis of that -- and Maura can confirm -- the basis, I think -- that's the anticipated time when all the nests would probably be hatched. MS. LUPO: So if we haven't found them by September 30th, then they are deemed destroyed and you can go ahead with your beach cleanup? MR. HUBER: Well, I -- we would probably -- that would be subject to -- at least in my mind, I would want to have confirmation from DEP that that would be the situation at that point in time. MS. KRAUS: The September 30th date came from 70 days after the storm. An average nest hatches between 65 and 70 days; that's where that September 30th came from. What we could do is we could look at the nests by DNR monument and as that 70 or 80 days after that nest should have hatched, we can mark it off and keep opening up areas; so that's the only other thing we can do. The state is worried that we have nests out there that, you know, we might damage. And -- for instance, we Page 27 August2,2001 have one nest in Pelican Bay that lost most of the sand off of the top. The eggs were exposed, and a raccoon got it two days later, so we found that nest. So -- and there are areas where the nests are totally lost. MS. LUPO: Doyou have to -- I'm sorry. Do you have to locate the physical nests, or do you just have to mark it off?. So if you know the GPS is accurate within a yard, can you mark off a 2 by 2, or do you actually have to find the eggs? MS. KRAUS: No. I think we would probably mark off about a 15-foot area. MS. LUPO: Okay. Once you marked off the 15-foot area, within that stretch of beach, then you can bring the cleanup crew in at that point? MS. KRAUS: We are hoping so. MR. STRAPPONI: I would just like a clarification. When we talked about the 56 percent lost, are we talking about the nests were lost to the storm, destroyed, or we just lost the locations? MS. KRAUS: Both. MR. STRAPPONI: Both? MS. KRAUS: Yes, we have no idea. MR. STRAPPONI: So that 56 percent, a good portion of those could still be active nests? MS. KRAUS: Yes. MR. STRAPPONI: We don't know where they are? MS. KRAUS: Yes. MR. STRAPPONI: Okay. Thank you. MS. KRAUS: I do have a copy of this. MR. PIRES: Thank you, Maura. MS. LUPO: Well, this happens -- pretty much every summer when we have this rainy season. What is the average casualty? Is 56 percent normal for this time of year for a storm, or is this unusual? Page 28 August 2, 2001 MS. KRAUS: This is definitely very unusual. Usually the storms are later in the season, and the turtles have started nesting very late this year because of the water temperature. It was -- didn't hit 81 until, like, the third week, I believe, of May, and also the whole month of May was very cool. They usually hatch, you know, anywhere between 55 and 65 days. Well, we are not seeing hatching now for 70 days. So we had an incredible amount of nests that should have already been gone had we had a normal season before the storm hit. MS. LUPO: Thank you. MR. SNEDIKER: Harry, last winter we had a major problem in locating sand. As we -- those of us who were involved know about it -- and then we got into the trucking and then we got into the bonding of tile truck drivers -- the trucking companies, et cetera, et cetera. Just so we can alleviate that problem, it looks like we will be needing 100, 000 yards maybe -- somewhere in that nature of sand -- should we be taking steps now to find sand sources and meeting the specifications that we want; the S curve and all we went through before, plus, obviously, the state DEP approval for that sand? MR. HUBER: Well, as a matter of fact, if you go down on the agenda, down there under "New Business, Request For Proposals," one of those requests for proposals is for production of beach sand. And so we've already started the process to do that. MR. SNEDIKER: Very good. I will wait. I just got the agenda. I did not see that far. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Any other questions or comments? Thank you. Why don't we take a short break? Not more than 5 minutes and get the name plates up, and we will get back to business. (A short break was held.) CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Mr. Anderson, why don't we-- Page 29 August 2, 2001 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: We can resume. And the -- committee members, why don't we get started again. During the break a member of the public came to me -- and before we move on to the next item, they would like to make a comment regarding the storm damage and turtle nesting. MR. RATH: Good afternoon. My name is Carson Rath. I'm the manager of the Ritz-Carlton of Naples. The reason that I asked to share with you the storm at the Ritz-Carlton, share also the impact the storm had on the entire county, we at the Ritz-Carlton currently are in a situation like we haven't been for many years. The storm -- MR. ANDERSON: I'm having trouble hearing. MR. RATH: I'm sorry. The storm impacted us so badly that our -- our guests are actually literally checking out. From a career standpoint of view, we have lost 31 percent of our business since the storm in comparison to the last three years. So that, of course, doesn't only affect us immediately, but it also affects the county in a sense, that we use their tax. We are very concerned that there was a date out there that this -- that the beach would not be able to be cleaned up and be restored before November 1. Of, course, off season as you would appreciate, is already a very difficult time for us because, obviously, we don't have the same amount of guests coming to town as we did in season, but the ones we have, we would like to spoil at the beach. We would like them to have the access to the beach and use the beauty of-- of the Gulf. Now, 31 percent lost in business, which we can, you know, track back to not having beach access or at least very limited beach access for our guests is deteriorating. Moreover, we are also concerned about the reputation of the Ritz-Carlton of Naples and the entire county. We have guests complaining. In fact, this morning I got a letter from a guest and Page 3o August 2, 2001 telephone calls to our corporate office -- that the guests have checked out are taking it further and saying "You didn't tell us about the storm. You didn't tell us about what the beach looked like, and we came down to Naples to enjoy ourselves." The reason I got up here is to ask for your support and to ask you to put yourselves in our shoes, be concerned that November 1 is, indeed, the date that we lose business. We lose bed tax. If, indeed, the date is September 30th, which was mentioned early on, we would be, of course, very eager to ask you to help us to start right on that date with cleaning the beach where the Ritz-Carlton is located. I know my colleague has some other questions, if that would be okay too. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Sure. To what degree do we -- does the county have authority on dates? Isn't that mandated mostly from the state? MR. ANDERSON: Yes, it is, along the parameters of what Maura had indicated, the -- so we are really -- until September 30th we really can't move, with -- with the exception of there are some nests that are confirmed to either be hatched or -- you know, we get the all clear for certain specific areas. That -- with that exception. But other than that, no, we don't have any flexibility. MS. KRAUS: The Ritz-Carlton will be allowed to rake their beach, you know, after we do the morning monitoring because no nests in the Ritz-Carlton were lost or unmarked. MR. RATH: Well, first of all, we are, of course, Maura, are happy to learn that the three nests didn't get -- have any damage. Raking is very good and is important. But restoring, bringing the sand back, is what we are looking for. MS. KRAUS: The state won't let us do that, not until after sea turtle nesting season. They don't allow beach renourishment during turtle season. Page 31 August2,2001 MR. RATH: You are saying November 1 is the date that you are referring to? Maybe I misunderstood early on. I understood you to say that September 30th would be 70 days and, therefore, September 30th would be the date that we could start restoring the beach. MR. SNEDIKER: That's after beach renourishment. That was beach cleaning, I think she was referring to. Beach renourishment is a different subject entirely, that I'm sure you know. MR. RATH: So you are saying it's a DEP issue. Is that what you are saying? MR. SNEDIKER: DEP. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: DEP at the state level. MR. RATH: Yeah. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Environmental agency but at the level. MR. RATH: Right. MR. ANDERSON: As we indicated we expect a letter-- a letter state from the DEP in the next week -- week or so. We'll have the citations and the legal authority and all of that, so we would be happy to share that with you, if you give us a call. MR. RATH: That would be wonderful. Thank you very much. Okay. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Thank you. Okay. That will then conclude Item 4. Next on our agenda is Item 5, Project Status Report. MR. ANDERSON: Yes. Thank you. Harry -- I have asked Harry to put together a brief status report on our present projects in this FY '01, which is going to be coming to a close on October 1 st, and then to give a brief look ahead in terms of our projects for the next year of FY '02. Harry. MR. HUBER: Okay. What was intended here was just to bring Page 32 August 2, 2001 you up to date on projects that we have ongoing right now, actually under construction or we are doing some studies on. Collier Bay Entrance Dredging, that -- that has been completed. It was completed earlier this month. And probably just like we gave to you also on the beach fill for Park Shore and Hideaway Beach, we'll be preparing a post-construction report and get it to you as soon as that is finished. And the project that was sort of related to that, Collier Bay Entrance Dredging, the additional T-groins that Mr. Humiston referred to down at Hideaway Beach, the additional one down at Southpoint has been completed, and the one at Lower Marco Point is about 80 percent completed. We are anticipating that -- hopefully that -- that one will also be completed by probably the end of next week. There again, we will be preparing the post-construction report on that. Also Humiston & Moore is working on a feasibility report for using the offshore shoals for a source of sand for renourishing -- major renourishment of Hideaway Beach, which is the design for that is included in next year's budget. But he's currently doing the feasibility report on that; that could be completed here within a week or so. And we will be distributing that report for you for discussion at next month's meeting. And also we're sort of gearing up and preparing the design and bid documents for implementing the majority of the projects that are . budgeted for next year. And we're also conducting at this point in time a joint county-wide monitoring of the beaches in the offshore area with DEP. DEP is doing all the offshore monitoring, and we are doing the -- surveying the upland profile of the beaches, and that should be completed probably by the end of this month. And so -- we -- normally we used to -- we had an annual concert -- we would do the annual monitoring of all the beach-restoration areas, but this particular program here where DEP is cost sharing with us to perform Page 33 August 2, 2001 this monitoring this year -- that's how we are accomplishing that this year. Now, also Clam Pass dredging is -- my understanding Pelican Bay Services Division administers that project. I think they are in the process of trying to start the design and get the plans and bid documents ready for dredging as soon as possible after the sea turtle season is over. So -- I think that material dredged out at Clam Pass will then be placed on the area of Clam Pass park where we had the significant erosion here. Now, I will defer to Dr. Staiger for those projects that are currently going on in the City of Naples. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Before we go to Dr. Staiger, I have one question. Did you say, Mr. Huber, that next month we will be receiving a report from Humiston & Moore, a presentation, regarding the use of offshore sand for Hideaway Beach? MR. HUBER: Yes. We currently have a project where he's performing that feasibility study and that will be completed within about a week, and we will distribute that report and their recommendations to you for discussion at next month's meetingl CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: That would include, perhaps, steps that are being taken or safeguards that are being put in place to avoid the problems that Naples experienced in the last few years with rocks on the beach? MR. HUBER: Yeah. Well, actually, this is just determining whether it's feasible to use those particular areas for a sand source. They have already -- they have met with DEP in Tallahassee, and we have met with Rookery Bay, so after they complete this feasibility study, then there'll be a number of other steps to go out there and actually make further tests to determine whether it is, in fact, beach- compatible material. So it's a long ways to go before we would actually -- and then we would ultimately have to get a permit to use Page 34 August 2, 2001 that particular sand, so this is just the first step in a long process. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Okay. Well, we appreciate that. Then given the experience that the city and county has had in the last few years, I'm sure everybody will be interested in knowing what additional safeguards are in place this time around. MR. PIRES: Mr. Chairman, if I may, just one question to Harry, if possible? CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Sure. MR. PIRES: I think in the packet that I received was the Hideaway Beach Marco Island April 2001 incremental maintenance post-construction report. Is that a proper discussion for today under this presentation for Harry, I guess? CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: MR. ANDERSON: Yes. Sure. MR. PIRES: I guess just a question. I note in the back -- I'm not a technical guy -- I have Humiston and you-guys -- but it has examples of beach profile of the design versus the place. And I guess from the standpoint of the agencies do these reports go to the agencies and then they analyze it to ensure that the permit conditions are being complied with? And I guess the question is, it seems like the sloping is substantially different as far as the fill being placed as opposed to the design fill. And I don't know if that would have an effect on the agencies' review of future permit applications. MR. SNEDIKER: Harry, do we have an extra copy of that-- another copy? MR. HUBER: I can get you one. MR. SNEDIKER: I guess we need a few, yeah. MR. HUBER: Okay. We'll get that. MR. HUMISTON: Ken Humiston of Humiston & Moore. We do send that information to the agencies, and the profiles that are sent up there for the permit approval are to estimate the quantity. The Page 35 August2,2001 technical staff up there recognize that when you're placing material on kind of a slow process by bringing it in by trucks that the profile may not look exactly like the lines and grades of the design. We are really more interested in the quantity of the material. The permit always specifies that it's approximate anyway. So there will not be -- I don't anticipate there's going to be any regulatory problems with that. MR. PIRES: Okay. So the sloping appears to be within parameters of the agency review and the permit criteria; right? MR. HUMISTON: Right. MR. ROELLIG: I can't remember-- excuse me -- when were the surveys done for the -- there were four surveys? MR. HUMISTON: I don't remember the exact dates. I believe the surveys before were done within a week or two of when the sand was placed there. MR. ROELLIG: So those were actually design surveys -- the side profiles were the actuals of when the project started? MR. HUMISTON: Right. MR. PIRES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Any other questions or comments? Dr. Staiger. DR. STAIGER: Okay. We have a number of things underway in the City of Naples. We do have progress on some things, which is kind of pleasant. The Doctor's Pass dredging project is a tad troublesome. The contractor had engaged a local marine contractor to do the rock-removal portion of it that they had not been able to do themselves, and the -- they then ordered that local contractor to stop working. And we are going to be taking a resolution to city council. For the next meeting, which is August 15th, to declare the contractor in default. And we have already notified the performance bond company that they are probably going to have to take the Page 36 August 2, 2001 project over to get it finished. The contractor has -- the contractor that's doing the project, United Contractors and Engineers, from the Fort Lauderdale area, they are hard to get a hold of and kind of hiding out in the Bahamas. And so we don't know for sure what, if any, reconciliation there's going to be on this thing at this point. They may come back with some kind of a -- of an idea as to how to do it without losing their bond, but they may or may not. At any rate, we need to get the rock removed from the -- from the inlet, and we are going to be pressuring the bonding company to get somebody to do that. There really isn't enough money left in the project right now to -- to pay for that; that's one of the problems. They -- they racked up some rather substantial bills with local businesses that the city has been paying the bills for them rather than paying the contractor himself. So we'll see what happens with that one. MR. SNEDIKER: Jon, is this the same firm that we had problems with last winter with not showing up and the barge getting over here -- DR. STAIGER: Yes. Yes. Yes. MR. SNEDIKER: -- and the barge grounding out? It had to be repaired? DR. STAIGER: Yeah. They had 120 days to finish the project, and they started at about Day 90. So it's -- they were supposed to be done on the 8th of December of the year 2000. And so there's a rather significant amount of liquidated damages going on in there too. But, you know, we will just have to play it by ear. We paid them for the dredging they did, and they did dredge the sand out of the inlet. It's basically the rock that remains that we need to get taken out of there. We have obtained all of the necessary permits from the state and the Army Corp of Engineers to do this Parker Sandweb experiment Page 37 August2,2001 on the beach in Olde Naples starting in November, so we will see that get cranked up and see how that thing works. For those of you who don't know, it's essentially a field of groins made out of webbing-like fishnetting, but it's not fishnet; it's much more substantial. But a series of these things on about -- I think 100- foot centers for about 1,200 linear feet of beach south of the Naples Pier, and the installation will go in from the upper beach out into mean low water or lower low water in that area. So these things will be three or four hundred feet in length, and they function like a groin. They interrupt the movement of sand down the beach. And we did an experiment using that method back in the late 1980s, and it was a relatively short duration and only a500-foot stretch of beach so that it was not a particularly conclusive experiment. So we are looking at a half a mile -- or excuse me, a quarter of a mile of beach, as long as -- many months as we can. It could go in for the entire length of the nonturtle nesting season, November through April. It could -- could last that long. At any rate, we have got all the permits for that, which was quite an accomplishment. We also have the permit in hand now for sand tightening the jetty at Gordon Pass, which is a permit Humiston & Moore has obtained. And that project involves the outer length of the Gordon Pass jetty reinforcing additional rock and sheet pile and filter-fabric type of material to prevent the sand that moves north on the north end of Key Island from going through the jetty into the inlet. There's a sand transport reversal on Key Island from -- from a seven or eight hundred or a thousand feet south of the inlet down to the south, the sand moves down towards Big Marco/Capri Pass. But in the -- the quarter mile or so area that is just immediately south of the inlet there is a reversal, and the sand is pushed north, and it tends to go right through the jetty into the inlet. And the inner third or so of that jetty or maybe half of it was sand tightened some years back, Page 38 August 2, 2001 but the sand continues to go around so the jetty has a big curve in it that tends to keep the sand in that area if-- if it's not permeable. So that is a project that will be undertaken pretty soon. I think the next step is the design of the actual -- I mean, the repair has been designed, but the actual contracting I haven't talked to Ken about it. We do have the permit for that. The other two projects underway that involve tourist tax dollars are the restoration of the pavilion at Lowdermilk Park and also the repair of some City of Naples beach access ends, and the beach access -- the street-end repairs have been accomplished. The Lowdermilk Park progress has been designed. I'm in the process of filling out the permit application, but we have decided we don't want to do that project because it involves either demolishing or almost demolishing the entire pavilion at Lowdermilk; that we will probably hold off on that until next summer. We don't want to end up with the -- with the concession stand and all of that stuff out of commission the end-- the end of the season this winter, so we will probably hold off on that until the Summer of 2000 -- or 2002. But that -- that project is underway, and I believe'the previous beach committee was familiar with it. But what we are trying to do essentially there is -- is bring that thing into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The present structure, the bathrooms are noncompliant. The kitchen for the concessionaire is too small, and kitchen storage in some places is accessed through the bathroom. So there is a lot of problems with just code conformity and ADA compliance. And there should be a lot of termites; I mean, that's the impression that we have is the termites are kind of holding it together. So we need -- we need to get that whole thing rebuilt. It will be built in it footprint. We are not -- we are making it a little bigger to the north, but otherwise it's going to be a comparable structure. I can't think of anything else Page 39 August 2, 2001 that we are doing in the city, unless Harry can. MR. ANDERSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Any questions or comments? I have just one question. As of a few months ago, a similar project to the Parker Web system had been approved by the state, I think, to run the test in the Panhandle. DR. STAIGER: Yes. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Is that -- that was ahead of our project at the permitting stage. But is that going to commence on the ground -- on the shore in November, or is that up and running already? DR. STAIGER: No. It's up and running. And it has been up and running since last winter or earlier this -- it has been running for a good bit of this year, and it's still in place. The -- there are no turtle nesting concerns in that -- in that area because it's north of the range; so that it's been there. And apparently it's working. It's a different energy -- wave energy climate up there, so we -- have -- we haven't -- I haven't been keeping track of it, but the Parker people have been watching it rather closely and apparently succeeding. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Are the conditions in the system itself similar enough that we will be able to perhaps glean some knowledge from that test? DR. STAIGER: They have, I think, utilized some -- you know, they have done some learning from that one just on what -- what they need to do to make sure the thing doesn't fall apart in a storm. They had some fairly significant damage to that installation. It's -- it's on the beach in front of Eglin Air Force Base. I think it's in Destin is where that project is underway. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Thank you. Any other questions or comments. Okay. Now, we move to old business. We have three Items 6, Page 40 August 2, 2001 old business. The first is an action item. Approval of the minutes from May 29, June 7th, and June 27, 2001. And if there are any corrections, bring them up now; otherwise, we can entertain a motion -- MR. STAKICH: I make a motion they be approved. MR. STRAPPONI: I second. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: All in favor? (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: All opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Passes unanimously. Next, my understanding is that we are being televised as we speak. The next item on our agenda is discussion regarding the telecast of our meetings on Channel 54. MR. ANDERSON: Right. Yes. This was brought up at the last meeting. It would -- we discussed discussing it at the next meeting, but I guess it's -- they are here tonight -- this afternoon, so the -- it's whatever your pleasure is. If you want to have a discussion, or we want to just -- CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: We will take comments. I don't see much need for a discussion. It's the county's practice to televise public meetings -- MR. ANDERSON: Sure. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: -- and we have information, I'm sure, the public is interested in. MR. PIRES: That was going to be my only comment I found them, just living in the county, very informative all the various boards that are being televised. And my attitude and approach, I think, and the committee as a whole and the staff is, the more the public is advised and informed of various issues in the community, the better off the community as a whole is. They are in the Page August 2, 2001 community. So I applaud the fact that it's being televised. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I'm sure we all agree. Okay. Pets on the beach. MR. ANDERSON: At the last meeting, Mr. Chairman, there was a question raised as to allowing pets to go on the beach, as was indicated is being done in Lee County. There is a newspaper article presented by Jack Strapponi, committee member, to that effect, so it was agreed that we would look into the history of this and give you a report back. And this memo is -- is to that end. Basically just to paraphrase it, we looked into the issue of allowing the pets on the beaches. I communicated with Marla Ramsey, who is the Director of Parks and Recreation for the county, and she indicated that no pets have been allowed on Collier County beaches historically, although there was a dog park approved for Veterans Park. I think it was about a year -- a year or so ago. In 1997, January, there was an action on the Board of County Commissioners to turn down an ordinance to allow the dogs on beaches. So there seems to be a, you know -- historically there seems to have been kind of a -- a negative attitude towards allowing the dogs on the beach, so -- but if anyone is interested in following this up further, the contact could be directed to Ms. Ramsey at -- and I have her telephone number, 353-0404; that really is primarily a recreation-type issue, as opposed to, you know, a -- as to -- opposed to an action before the subject of-- you know, that would be taken up as a subject matter of this committee, I would suggest. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Okay. There has been substantial turnover in the membership of the County Commission since '97, but this is one of those issues that sets people off one way or the other. It's not so much a technical issue. MR. ANDERSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: It would be good to have -- if we Page 42 August 2, 2001 were to do anything at all -- or if it were even appropriate for us to do anything -- is to have some guidance whether it's in the political ends or not. MR. ROELLIG: I think my comment would be, I don't think that the dogs on the beach would have an adverse impact on the coastal processes; that we could stipulate that and be off of our agenda pretty much. It's a -- it's an area that would generally fall outside of our purview once we stipulate that it would have no impact on the coastal issues. MR. ANDERSON: I might add there is a Parks and Recreation Advisory Board similar to this Coastal Advisory Committee, and the matter could be referred to them, you know, through Ms. Ramsey; so I'm sure anyone could, you know, make an inquiry to -- request that the action be considered before that board, you know, if there is interest. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Why don't we -- if it's amenable to everyone handle it that way; that we can as individuals, perhaps, contact Marsha (sic) Ramsey or even the commissioners themselves. And if there is some element of interest, we can take a look at it. We will bring it back again. MR. ANDERSON: Good. MR. STRAPPONI: Roy, I just have one question. MR. ANDERSON: Yes.~ MR. STRAPPONI: The longstanding prohibition of pets on the beaches, I imagine, that excludes handicap and utility dogs or animals. MR. ANDERSON: Yes. I would think so, yes. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: It does -- for sure, as a matter of city policy. MR. STRAPPONI: It does? CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: In other words, if you have a Page 43 August 2, 2001 seeing-eye dog, it's allowed on the beach. If there is nothing else for the moment, at least regarding pets on the beach, we have a couple of items. Under Item 7, new business. The first is a discussion regarding proposed field trips to our various coastal regions. MR. ANDERSON: Yes. At the last meeting, we had discussed the possibility of having some field trips in the near future. And we developed a suggestion -- suggested format which -- which we -- I believe, we have sent out to everyone. And basically what we are proposing is that in the next three months -- over the next three meetings, that those meetings could be held at field locations, one area being -- the first area being down in the Marco area and the second meeting being in the Barefoot Beach/Wiggins Pass/Vanderbilt area, the northern part; the third meeting being in the Naples Park Shore area. The concept would be that we could -- we could meet and have a meeting, say, around' noontime. It could even be a lunch meeting. We could maybe have lunch, maybe 12 to 12:30 and then go into a meeting 1 to 1:30, let's say. And then starting at 1:30 -- it would be in a public location, a pavilion or some central location. And then at 1:30 to 4:30 we could go out in the field and view the beaches and the area and do that -- you know, basically that would be the format. Another option would be that we could -- we -- well, certainly there would be many options, but another possibility would be -- the one we have suggested here is actually where we will start out at nine in the morning and go until two in the morning (sic). We would actually do the fieldwork first and then have a meeting. Another option would be to start it at noontime and, you know, have the meeting and then have the field trip in the afternoon, so that would be one decision that we would want. I mean, the whole thing is really on the table. If you want to Page 44 August 2, 2001 hold this off for a few more months or -- but we thought it might be good to give -- to have these in the very -- you know, fairly not-too- distant future because, you know -- to get everyone familiar with all the various, you know, beaches in our county, so it's really before you for consideration. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Any thoughts or comments? MR. PIRES: Mr. Chairman, I like -- I think the idea is good as far as having the opportunity for the field trips. I guess my only comments would be from the standpoint of the parameters of the conduct of the activity from the Sunshine Law. ! think Mr. Anderson sort of alluded to that and referenced it to make sure we are operating well within the parameter of that whenever we engage in this activity. I'm not sure it will take this extent of time each day, five hours or not; that might be a little bit much. I would tend to favor the afternoon just from my own personal schedule from my thought standpoint. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Thank you. MR. ROELLIG: The previous committee did this, and basically I think they spent maybe a couple of hours for the field trip and then had the meeting afterwards. So -- do you recall, Harry? I don't remember. It didn't run five hours. MR. HUBER: No. We just used this as a -- MR. ROELLIG: Right. I understand that. MR. HUBER: -- as an outside parameter. Yes. Yeah. I recollect the field observation, yeah, took several -- at least a minimum of two hours, I think, and then the meeting afterwards. But, yeah, I think most of the ones that we did we -- I think started around nine o'clock in the morning, and they were usually over with by noon. MR. ROELLIG: Right. Because we generally had a short agenda, and -- as far as I l~ow, we were well within the Sunshine Page 45 August2,2001 Laws because it was advertised and the public was invited, and we had some members of the public, I don't remember, five or six or so. I think the public provided their own transportation, but the committee was, for the most part, on the city bus or something of that sort. And, you know, it seemed to work out fine. I think it's a very valuable thing to do. It's just a matter of whether we want to start right after Labor Day or what for the convenience of the board. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I think it's a good idea as well, particularly for all of us as a group to see the various locations. I think it makes it a lot easier to deal with these issues and more advantageous. On the Sunshine -- I think we're talking sort of technical compliance rather than any great danger to the public or anything, but the county commission just. Had a meeting earlier this week up in Glades County, and I know they went to great lengths to go in separate vehicles and all of that stuff. I would just say that we ought to be sure that we are complying with Sunshine when we are in the van-- if we're in the van together-- that's where the trouble logistically could be. If we are on the beach, we can have a notice of public meeting on the beach. We would just have to ask, perhaps, the county attorney's office to give us guidance. Maybe it's just simpler in the end for all of us to drive there. I mean, we are not talking great distances, and we all manage to get here. We could probably all manage to get to two or three different locations. And I think it would be good to start sooner rather than later at the next meeting. MR. PIRES: Yeah. I tend to agree with you. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Provide -- provided that we can clear the logistics -- or we can just have a consenus that we'll get -- we'll get notice of the exact location from the staff and all be responsible for getting ourselves there, which I personally think is easier than anything else. Page 46 August 2, 2001 MR. PIRES: I tend to agree. MR. ANDERSON: Is there -- seem to be -- is there a preference for mornings or afternoons? Would you prefer the afternoons over the mornings, let's say? CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I don't-- unless someone disagrees, I don't see any reason why we wouldn't just meet at 1:30 wherever the location is, just as we're doing with these meetings. MR. ANDERSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: We will just have three of them that aren't in chambers here. MR. ANDERSON: Okay. We will have a meeting, and then we will go from there. Sure. Okay. MR. STRAPPONI: Excuse me. Mr. Chairman, like yourself and Tony, I'm concerned about violations and compliance with the Sunshine Law, but I understand we are allowed to consult with staff and if the staff or the people who are going to bring us these various locations and show us these projects and process and some of the impact that the storms have done and some of the issues we are going to have to pass judgment on, I think it's something that maybe we should have counsel look at. I don't know how you can get together as a group and make it totally public. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Well, we can. They -- we can do that part, because as long as you advertise the meeting, that the meeting will be held at the Naples Pier, then it's a public meeting. Indeed, we can all run around in a van together under the Sunshine Law provided we don't talk about business. However, when you do that, then, potentially one has to deal with, "What did you talk about? "and proving a negative and all of that. For all of us -- and in my case, for sure, it's just not worth the potential grief. MR. PIRES: That's my concern. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: We can -- and I do think the Page 47 August 2, 2001 county attorney might take a few minutes and give us guidance on this. It doesn't have to be in person but just to relate through the staff, you know, how we properly notice it and all of that type of thing, and we can hold our meeting. MR. SNEDIKER: You just said we all take our own vehicles. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: As long as we drive ourselves to the location that is advertised and -- MR. SNEDIKER: We have to have a court reporter or have the minutes -- the appropriate minutes taken. MR. PIRES: As the Chairman has indicated, I think if the county attorney's office gives some guidance as to the parameters -- CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Yes. There is a way to do it. There is absolutely for sure a way to do it. We just need to make sure we are doing it correctly. MR. SNEDIKER: You do it in your own vehicles. MR. ANDERSON: I would think that everyone could come in their own vehicles. We will have the court reporter -- court recorder at the meeting, and we could -- when we go out in the field, the public could -- could come -- come along on the bus and the court reporter can be there. And it would just be a continuation of the meeting; so, yeah, that would be fine. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: We will plan, then, on the way you have it listed here September 6th, Marco Island. We will do it at 1:30; however, just as with our normal meetings -- MR. ANDERSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: -- and naturally you will have to give us all specifics of the location. MR. ANDERSON: Okay. Very good. MR. SNEDIKER: Do we establish a meeting location at this time so everyone knows or mail that out to us? CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I'd be happy to do that. If Marco Page 48 August 2, 2001 is first-- we'll do that. MR. SNEDIKER: Nancy Richie. Nancy, what is your suggestion? You're from the City of Marco Island. MS. RICHIE: Yeah-- CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: It would be better if you came to the mike, please, and stated your name. MR. SNEDIKER: Nancy is an employee of the City. MS. RICHIE: Hi. Nancy Richie, City of Marco Island. I do have a room reserved at Mackle Park for you on September 6th, in case you were going to decide today, and you can meet there at 1:30 if you want the meeting beforehand and go out to the beach or vice versa. It doesn't matter what you want to do then. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Well, let's congregate there. It's all a meeting -- MS. RICHIE: I think it would be easiest -- CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: -- under the rules. MS. RICHIE: Yeah. -- to congregate at -- Mackle Park is easily located. We can get a map to everybody. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Okay. MS. RICHIE: 1:30 Mackle Park. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Okay. Very good. Thank you. Then, of course, we will plan on Barefoot Beach in the vicinity for October and Naples and Park Shore for November. We will settle those details in the future. Okay. The second item that we have under new business, we have two different requests for proposals. MR. ANDERSON: Yes. Harry, would you like to start that? MR. HUBER: Sure. Yeah. These are two of the items that I referred to before when Mr. Snediker asked the question that in trying to prepare and gear up for the projects we have got scheduled for next year. Page 49 August 2, 2001 The first one, the Professional Engineering Services for Coastal Zone Management Projects, the intent here is to get a number of consultants onboard to give us, you know, consulting services relative to all of our projects that we have scheduled next year and beyond. And so that -- that particular one I think I mailed out with the agenda. Also, I passed out today was the top sheet -- was the appointment letter for the selection committee and the notice on there Chairman Galleberg is on that selection committee. So I believe the projected schedule for that -- you notice in the RFP that was distributed the receipt of proposals is due -- or due on August 24th, and then I've projected a contract approval by the Board of County Commissioners by October 23rd. So if there is any way that we can shorten that time span, we certainly will, but I think that's -- from a realistic standpoint, I think that is probably what we are looking at. MR. PIRES: Mr. Chairman. MR. HUBER: And what -- what will occur here, we will probably select a number of consultants, maybe three -- depends on how many submit proposals, and then we will get the board -- a board a contract of those three firms, and we will use those three firms -- like, if we have a specific project we are talking about -- and then we will get proposals from those three firms to do that work. And then we will issue -- select one of them, and issue a work order to them under the fixed-term contract. And I think in the RFP documents, I think this is for -- I think a two-year period and then we -- with the option for renewal for additional terms. Any questions on that particular one? CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Mr. Pires. MR. PIRES: If I may briefly. Harry, I noticed when Ken Humiston and Humiston & Moore did their -- again, their Hideaway Page 5o August 2, 2001 Beach, April 2001, Incremental Beach Maintenance and Construction Report, they noted as a recommendation for the future that in getting sands from upland sources in the future, it's recommended that beach fill quantities from future truck hauling from upland sources be based on the volume capacity of the truck, in lieu of volumes based on a unit weight to volume ratio. And not having had a chance to review the bid specs for the beach-compatible sand, do you know if this recommendation as to how to measure beach fill quantities -- was that incorporated into these specs? MR. HUBER: Yeah. Well, I was getting ready to go into that particular document. We were discussing the engineering surveys. MR. PIRES: I'm sorry. I thought we were on the beach- compatible sand. I'm sorry about that. MR. HUBER: Mr. Roellig. MR. ROELLIG: Yes. The question on the -- if we end up with these three firms, are these firms available to everybody in the county government then? They are not just strictly for your utilities department? MR. HUBER: No. These three firms will be strictly for coastal zone management projects; that's what this RFP is for, that we are going to make a selection of firms to provide services related to coastal zone management projects. We have a number of fixed-term engineering contracts for-- for other purposes. MR. ROELLIG: I see. But this will be for any coastal project? MR. HUBER: Yes. MR. ROELLIG: Okay. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I just have one comment, and that's sort of in the nature of a typo. On the memorandum to Mr. Olliff concerning the fixed-term professional services, it says in the second line a five-member selection committee, and then we have six people listed. Page August2,2001 MR. HUBER: The one from the purchasing department is non- voting. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Oh, non-voting. Okay. I see that now. And this is in terms of this committee this is simply an informational item; correct? Mr. Olliff will authorize this, and then ultimately the board will -- MR. HUBER: Actually, he already has. I did not have the signed copy, but-- he had to approve that before we distributed the package. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: MR. HUBER: No. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: new business. MR. HUBER: Well-- CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: conclude -- So no action is required by us? Very good. That concludes that Next on the -- oh, it doesn't MR. HUBER: We have that one more, that other RFP, which is for beach -- the protection of the beach-compatible sand. And, there again, your question, Tony, we will be going out with a separate -- this is just for the production of the sand. Okay? Then we will be going out -- and, in fact, I'm preparing those documents right now for the transport and the placement of the sand. So I think your question comes into play during that process, if I'm not mistaken. If you want to repeat that question. MR. PIRES: Yes. I guess -- I'm sorry I jumped ahead before, Harry. I apologize. In the Humiston & Moore Hideaway Beach Naples 2001 post-construction report, Incremental Beach Maintenance Report, they made a recommendation that "due to variability and moisture content of sand from upland sources, which has a significant effect on the weight to volume ratio, it's recommended beach-fill quantities from future truck hauling from Page 52 August 2, 2001 upland sources be based on the volume capacity of the truck, in lieu of volumes on a unit weight to volume ratio." I didn't know if that criteria was made part of the specifications for the beach-compatible sand. MR. HUBER: Well, there again, that will be part of the specifications for the upcoming RFP for the transport and placement of the fill. Like I said, this particular RFP that I distributed to you today is just for the production at the mine, so then we will have a separate selection for the contract that -- and transport the material that is produced-- transport it from that location to the beach and actually place it on the beach; that's what he's talking about is -- is -- rather than basing the unit cost on a weight, but base it on the volume of the truck. MR. PIRES: I guess possibly, though, maybe I misunderstand, but if we are talking about a certain capacity -- tonnage capacity, I think, is in the beach-compatible contract, RFP? MR. HUBER: Yes. MR. PIRES: It indicates, in fact, in here there is a range of, you know, cubic yard will have depending on 1.9 to 1.29 tons. I guess it would depend upon the moisture content. MR. HUBER: Yes. MR. ANDERSON: Would it be significant to be part of the beach-compatible sand production contract. MR. HUBER: Of course, the -- we've -- I think it would be from probably -- you are going to have certain variations either way you do it. I think we probably would come the closest, would be more accurate by using the weight, in my estimation. Because if you try to do by volume, it depends -- if they don't load the truck up to its full capacity, you know -- if you are going to have to measure that. Truckload every time -- you know, it's not very practical. And I think from an accuracy standpoint, I think, even though it might be a Page 53 August 2, 2001 slight variation in the moisture content and what have you, it's not going to be enough -- I think that's something that we are going to have to look at real closely when we finalize these specifications as to which way we go. But like I say, you will find basing it on the weight is going to be just as accurate as if you are going to base it on the volume of the truck. MR. PIRES: Yeah. I was sort of thinking the same thing as you. I mean, you have a truck, and is it topped off or leveled off or -- MR. HUBER: But weighing -- MR. PIRES: -- from the standpoint of the volume -- MR. HUBER: Weighing it there is no question as to how much it weighs, and then base the unit cost on per ton. And then -- I mean, all -- as far as converting it to cubic yards, as far as how many cubic yards do you have on the beach, you know, if you have -- if you are within a certain range -- I think it's going to be close enough as far as determining what volume we actually placed on the beach. In fact, we can even survey that after we place it on the beach. But I think for payment purposes I think we are much better off using a weight parameter. MR. PIRES: Easier to track. MR. HUBER: Right. MR. PIRES: Thank you. I just wanted to know the basis for the bid specs and whether or not this was incorporated. MR. ROELLIG: Well, some as much as 30 percent, would you be -- would you be testing the sand for moisture so you know how much cubic yard would weight? There has got to be -- I mean, there is a way, of course, to test it to find out what the -- what the correction factor would be, so -- MR. HUBER: Sure, we can do that. Assuming that the sand is going to be produced in advance of this trucking it to the site, and we certainly could determine the conversion factor to cubic yards per ton Page 54 August 2, 2001 prior to transporting it. MR. ROELLIG: Right. MR. HUBER: Unless, of course, you know, if you got -- let's just say when we started hauling it the sand was dry but then halfway through the -- that operation of the transporting it to the beach, you had a couple of days where it rained and everything; that is going to naturally change the moisture consent. MR. ROELLIG: But generally the moisture content is pretty easy to determine, so you could do it on a daily basis, if necessary, I would think. I'm a little uncomfortable with the 30 percent range as far as, you know, what you end up by buying it by the ton versus by the yard. I realize it can be sort of a problem, but I think, you know, the inspectors could see whether or not the trucks were carrying the proper yardage. It would just seem kind of odd you would pay for so many tons and so many yards, you know, but ... MR. HUBER: Either way we are going to -- I don't think we are going -- based on the proposals we are asking for right now, I think they are going to be consistent both ways. We will either go one way or the other -- MR. ROELLIG: Right. MR. HUBER: -- for both of them. MR. ANDERSON: One other thing I wanted to point out, Mr. Chairman, is that the -- we're -- we're adding some language in these specifications to conduct some bacterial -- bacterialogical testing because there has been an issue of water quality at the beaches. But just to -- our indication is that it's not really due to the sand -- because we have done some testing -- but we think it would be in an abundance of caution to add some testing requirements to the sand as part of the other quality criteria for the sand that is supplied at the beaches. So I just wanted to mention we will be putting that language into the specification as well. Page 55 August 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Very good. MR. STRAPPONI: Mr. Chairman. MR. SNEDIKER: Go ahead. MR. STRAPPONI: There has been a couple of articles in the newspaper recently in regards to what Roy just referred to. And the Department of Engineering supervisor, Mr. Dennis, had made some comments about the fact that the bacteria count in upland sand that was placed at two locations appeared to be higher, although he didn't strictly point his finger at that. I wonder if we would be out of line to request that Mr. Dennis address this board and give us a briefing as to what his findings have been and, you know, why he has this position. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I think -- Mr. Dennis, I'm not familiar with him. Did you say he's on the county staff?. MR. STRAPPONI: Apparently. DR. STAIGER: He's with the Collier County Public Health Unit. He's -- he's in charge of environment engineering for the health unit. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I clearly think that's within our writ, and it may be -- may be several months if we are going to be taking our field trips for the next three. I think it would be helpful to hear from him. And, indeed, with the few months for the data that, perhaps, will get more definite information from him. MR. PIRES: And possibly the timing might be appropriate because our first field trip is down at Marco. This involves Hideaway Beach, I think, so maybe if we can limit it to just a five- minute presentation down there. MR. MUDD: I can help you a little bit. Jim Mudd, for the record, Public Utilities Administrator. As soon as I saw the article, I had pollution control go in there and check both places on Park Shore and down at Barefoot where we put that sand, plus to go back to the sand pile and do tests, okay. The tests that he took, basically, didn't Page 56 August2,2001 show any elevation of bacterial count in that process. Pretty much was mundane. So I went back to make sure -- I said, you know, "It seems a little weird to me that nobody has brought that up yet," so I had our folks go do that. And part of that request -- our folks do have the capability to do those, the bacterial counts, in that process. So we are going to make sure that we head this off-- this public-relations issue off at the pass before it shows back up in the headline, because as far as we're concern and what we saw after the fact, there is no basis for it. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: So the county does ongoing testing, and in this incident that Mr. Strapponi is referring to is more -- more or less a false alarm. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The next issue I'd say in those two, to let you know, we have been kind of hostages as far as our contracts have been concerned in the past. It was alluded to earlier. First one for the indefinite delivery and indefinite quantity for the engineering firms, so we are looking for multiple firms so we are not stuck with one. The other issue that you heard Harry allude to is the fact that if we get a job we're going to go out to those three firms, even though the bid into the IDIQ, and we are going to ask them to give us an estimate, okay, so that we can get a better price. So you are not just stuck with one. "This is what you have got, and this is what you are going to pay for. And, Oh, by the way, the government estimate is exactly what you get with 10 percent -- a little added to the process." I'm not saying that happens all the time, but I have seen it quite a number of times happen in this county already. The other issues on the sand is that you are going to get multiple vendors. Okay. If you take a look at the Jhana contract that we just ran with the 41,000 cubic yards that we put on the beach, if you take a look at the transportation and the cost of producing the sand, you'll find out it breaks out one-third to produce the sand and two-thirds to Page 57 August 2, 2001 transport. One of the reasons we wanted to go to multiple vendors is because you get them at different locations. And if two -- 66 percent of your cost or thereabouts is going to be for transportation, you might pay a higher cost to produce the sand at a small quarry that is closer in but save money on the transportation cost on the end. And in the long run that particular quarry site -- even though you pay higher for the sand to be produced, it meets the requirements in the S curves that Mr. Snediker alluded to earlier. We get a better price. And then you can go to a cheaper sand production, okay, even further out. And you are going to get to certain firms can only produce so much,, and that's what we found out with the Jhana Company of the kind that we really wanted, they could only produce about a third of what we needed. But we need the whole 55 -- or excuse me, 50, 000 cubic yards, so we went to a less quality type of sand and -- and that's what we got on the beach in Park Shore and down at Barefoot. So I would say having multiple vendors gives you the opportunity to get that Grade A sand that you want. We'll be able to test it. We'll be about to get S-test to test it. Yes, it will cost a little bit different, but you've also got to put in the transportation cost into that equation to -- to roll it out so that you've got the whole deal and not just the part to what the sand cost to produce. So don't hone into the cheapest price. You've got to bring the transportation element in. And when that is done, then you can ID the vendor that you want to use first. MR. STRAPPONI: I think the concern on the transportation is that if we are paying by weight as opposed to volume, a third of-- two-thirds of the total cost would be substantial. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. We will take a look at that. Your comments are well taken -- well noticed, and we will get in that process to make sure that we don't get gypped. Page 58 August2,2001 MR. SNEDIKER: Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out one thing. As I read this, no member of this committee will have anything to do with the -- seeing the sand, feeling the sand at all that is going to be purchased. Now, last winter just got -- got into just a horrible situation in trying to determine what sand. It got out of control last year. But I'm wondering do we want to -- all of us give up that idea of seeing the sand or knowing exactly what sand is being purchased. Sand is a very, very delicate issue in this county. Do we want to pass that on to other people? CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: I think that-- MR. SNEDIKER: As I read this, we are passing it on. We will not know what the sand it. MR. STRAPPONI: I think, Jim, at a previous meeting that you may not have attended, offered to bring samples in. This committee or its predecessor has certainly gotten some bad press in the past, and that was the reason why I was particularly concerned about the bacteria content of the sand, in addition to the quality of the sand. But maybe you want to expand on that. You did offer to bring samples of that -- MR. MUDD: You are -- you are going to see the sand. You are going to touch the sand. You are going to see the stats and the test on the sand-- MR. SNEDIKER: We are? MR. MUDD: --before we award any contract. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: You are specing it out according to the specifications that were preferred last time around; correct? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. You will get to go through that whole process. MR. SNEDIKER: As I read this, we did not. MR. MUDD: We are not going down that road. We understand Page 59 August2,2001 that it's a delicate situation, okay. We are not going to put something -- there has been too many instances where stuff has hit the beach -- MR. SNEDIKER: Right. MR. MUDD: -- okay, that everyone hasn't -- you really need to have a lot of people's eyes on target to make sure it's right. MR. SNEDIKER: Thank you. MR. MUDD: You represent the people. You need to see the sand, and you will have that opportunity. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Thank you. To the bacteria, Mr. Strapponi if that, apparently, was something of a false alarm, I don't know that we should have the gentleman come in or not. How do you feel about that? MR. STRAPPONI: Should we have a press release as to what the current status of that is after looking into it? I'm concerned about the public perception. You know, the committee that preceded this one had a problem with the rocks on the beach, and now we have got a deal with that. So I think it's important that we -- the public gets both point of views in terms of the quality of the sand -- MR. PIRES: Hopefully Eric Staats, who is sitting in the back from the Naples Daily News, will give. Prominent attention to that in his news stories -- emphasis, hopefully. MR. ROELLIG: I have looked at many sources -- beach sand sources in my career, and I have never run into that problem, except one time when it turned out that taking sand out of a -- basically an abandoned pit that the septic tank was being dumped into by the haulers. I have never run into that problem in any location in the country, so it will be extraordinarily rare to run the bacteria -- (Mr. Pires exits meeting.) MR. ROELLIG: -- as long as we keep out the honey zippers, I don't think that will be a problem. MR. ANDERSON: Another option, Mr. Chairman, is that we Page 60 August2,2001 could draft, like, a press release for your signature to send into the local media, if you like. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: That we are against bacteria in the sand? No. If it turned out a false report, I'm not -- you know, there were rocks on the beach. There was something to address. If there isn't -- and we obviously hope there won't be -- and it's good that the county is taking safeguards and will be monitoring bacteria in the sand. It would seem at this point there isn't anything to address. MR. ANDERSON: Yeah, that's right. It was somewhat speculative on the part of the newspaper, and the -- there wasn't any -- it was just mentioned as speculation. And then the next day the tests turned out okay, and the beach never was closed. So, yeah, you are right; there wasn't any real event that occurred. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Thank you, then. If we are finished with the RFPs, if there is nothing else, we move on to public comment, if there is any. If anyone in the public would like to address us, now is the time. MR. STRAPPONI: Mr. Chairman, I would like to bring up some new business. If I may, I had a question. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Sure. MR. STRAPPONI: I will try and make it brief. Once again, in the newspaper there has been some articles about the potential to purchase some beachfront property. The TDC, apparently, is looking to fund this purchase. My concern is what impact that's going to have on the CAC's budget and whether or not the CAC will be kept abreast or get involved in the progress of that potential purchase. And apparently there is -- the commission is spending -- has put up the funds for an independent appraisal on the property. And I would be curious as to when that's done if we can get a copy of it. MR. MUDD: Back up, Roy. When I -- for the record, Jim Mudd again. I talked to Leo Ochs about the beachfront property and Page 61 August2,2001 that process as it came along. You have a ten-year plan with certain things broken out between parks and rec -- in Category A between parks and rec and what the CAC is going to recommend and use as that process. I looked at Leo and I said, "Okay, Leo, if you are going to do this, and I don't have an estimate yet, there are some things that you need to move on your ten-year plan to make sure that the reserves are capable." Because, if you remember, the ten-year plan around 2006, we get real tight around $450, 000 in the reserves before we get that next-year buildup, and that has everything to do with the garage -- a second garage that he estimates that could go in. I said, "If you are thinking about making that purchase, you need to adjust a little bit." So I'm keeping an eye on what that cost is and where that process is and what he's going to do with his figures. And if it impacts into this particular committee's jurisdiction or funds in that process, then outside of what is in reserve that we know about right now, then, yeah, we will bring it to your attention. We will bring the whole issue to your attention so that you know exactly the full-cost accounting of the entire process. I have asked him to be very careful and to work within his -- within his range of dollars that he has got in that ten-year plan to adjust so that he can get to it. If, for instance, there are some things that he can postpone or push off until 2008, 2009, you will notice there are great sums of money in that reserve to the tune of eight to ten million dollars that he can get to without impacting the stuff up front. So I'm -- I'm asking him to take a look at his projects, his long term, in order to move things around and orchestrate that a little bit. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: But if that were to come to pass, would it come out of the same class of TDC funds, or aren't we in our section or class or something? MR. MUDD: Sir, I wish-- it's not clean. Category A is not clean, because it does have some beach-access stuff to it, and that's Page 62 August 2, 2001 not -- I have not talked to the attorneys exactly what fund it will come out. But I know Mr. Ochs, who is the -- who's the public services administrator is the person that is working that acquisition. The only dollars that he's getting come out of Category A, which we touch. How that is all going to break down I don't know. But I'm watching it, okay, because I have the same -- I have the same cautious attitude that you do. Okay. There are certain things that need to happen to the beach as far as restoration is concerned, and how those dollars are divided we have to do it smartly. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Clearly, we would like to weigh to it. I'm sure you will bring it to us if there is an impact on the restoration funds. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Sure. What we will do -- as an update on old business, we will just give you the current status of that process as we go along. CHAIRMAN GALLEBERG: Thank you. That could be something very important. Any of the members have anything else? If not, we will next meet on September 6th, Marco Island, Special Field Trip Meeting. With that, this meeting is adjourned. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3:45 p.m. Page 63 August 2, 2001 COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE GARY GALLEBERG, CHAIRMAN TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING, INC., BY EMILY C. UNDERWOOD, RPR. Page 64