BCC Minutes 01/07/2003 J (w/Naples City Council)January7,2003
TRANSCRIPT OF THE WORKSHOP OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY COMMISSION AND CITY OF NAPLES JOINT
WORKSHOP
Naples, Florida, January 7, 2003
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Commission and City
of Naples Workshop in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in WORKSHOP SESSION in
Building "F of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT:
CHAIRMAN: Commissioner Jim Coletta
Commissioner Tom Henning
Commissioner Donna Fiala
Commissioner Fred Coyle
Commissioner Frank Halas
CITY OF NAPLES:
Mayor Bonnie MacKenzie
Vice Mayor Gary Galleberg
Councilman Joe Herms
Councilman Penny Taylor
Councilman Bill Macllvaine
Councilman Clark Russell
ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager
Joe Schmitt, Adm. Comm. Dev. & Environmental Serv.
Kevin Rambosk, Naples City Manager
Stan Stenowski,
Patrick White, Assistant County Attorney
Ron Wallace, City Engineer, City of Naples
January 7, 2003
Norm Feder, Collier County Transportation Adm.
Don Scott, Collier County Transportation Planning
Ken Pineau, CC Emergency Management Dir.
Dr. John Staiger, Natural Resources Mgr. City of Naples
Ron Hovell, Coastal Projects Mgr.
Joint BCC and City of Naples Workshop
9:00 a.m., January 7, 2003
Collier County Board of County Commissioners Boardroom
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, FL 34112
1. Beach Related Issues
a. Beach parking agreement
b. Beach renourishment
2. Airport Road Flyover
a. Traffic forecasts
b. Review of City of Naples study
c. Discussion of entry into Bear's Paw
d. Agreement with the Estuary
3. CAT Program
4. FEMA
5. ASR
January 7, 2003
Meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance being recited.
Mr. Mudd addressed the audience about the speaker slips being submitted if wishing to
speak on a particular item.
Beach Related Issues
a. Beach parking Agreement
The past 15 years the County has remunerated funds to the City in exchange
for free access and utilizing the Counties Beaches with parking passes at city
locations. It covers over 1,100 parking locations. The agreement in their
packets is a continuation of the program they have now. They would like to
discuss continuing the process. He discussed the parking spaces with
compensation to the city. Some of the proposed changes relate to the TDC
funds and whether the City and the County would be willing to utilize these
funds towards the maintenance of the Beaches, being day to day maintenance
of picking up debris. Renourishment through FEMA does not qualify.
Commissioner Henning asked about the beach raking. The city of Naples
does their clean-up of which the County pays one third. Commissioner
Henning also asked if it would be cost effective and could the County enter
into an agreement for the beach raking to offset costs of unmanned meters.
Vice Chairman Galleberg stated TDC provides funding for major
renourishment of the beach, maintenance and beach raking. He felt there was
money in the TDC budget. The daily raking is not TDC funded.
Commissioner Fiala mentioned in 1997's agreement they were paying
$220.00 and now only $253.00. Costs have risen with many people using the
beaches and fortunately the City lets the County use them and feels the cost
should be offset by the County.
Mayor MacKenzie stated the County has been very generous with the TDC
funding with many of the projects. Their main concern now is the
maintenance having adequate security, vehicles, uniforms, salaries, benefits
and utility costs along with the meters themselves. The problem is the City of
Naples receives 75 cents for one hour of beach time from a visitor who feeds
the meter. They receive $1.00 for the entire year from a resident of Collier
County who visits the beach but not feeding the meter.
They have two sources of income, and need to either ask the County for a
greater contribution to offset the security and cleanliness for maintaining the
beaches or increase meter collections.
It has been a good partnership and beneficial inner local agreement but can
not afford to keep it up at the present rates. May have to have beach passes
available to only city residents and have everyone else feed the meters.
January7,2003
Another option is to have a joint effort of TDC funding between the two
entities for cleaning of the restrooms and the patrols of the beaches. They are
looking for a 5 year agreement. Not sure TDC funds are what the Coastal
Advisory Committee would suggest. The use of the beaches in the past five
years has increased significantly. The personnel have not increased thus
causing problems in keeping up at the present.
Commissioner Coletta would like to explore the TDC options. The beaches
are Tourist related.
Raking comes from the TDC funds and rest of expense is coming from the
General Fund for the County and from the taxpayers for the City.
Discussion followed on Revenues, costs, and usage of the beaches by County
residents going up with population increases.
Dr. John Staiger, Natural Resources Manager, City of Naples - there is
not a routine of beach raking this year of debris except for the issue of the
rocks. The beaches are maintained manually. The County raking machines
are used mainly on Vanderbilt, Marco Island and the city beaches when
needed.
Commissioner Halas addressed the parking problem and wondered if a
transportation system is needed. Dianne Flagg is working on that issue.
Before any decisions are made some numbers need to be looked at and studied
before any conclusions are made.
Jim Mudd stated there is a $126,000 shortfall in the Beach account for this
year. The previous agreement was over in October 2002. A resolution needs
to be agreed upon soon.
Mr. Rambosk - City Manager - feels everyone is looking for an agreement
and agrees there needs to be one. Need to research the numbers which will
give everyone an overview and lock in a 5 year agreement. The CPI will not
cover the increases. They can provide an overview in a staff report. They
want staff to put the numbers together to see how the methodology works,
how it is put together, what the numbers are and how they can do it in a period
of more than one year.
Comments were:
- The County needs to pay their fair share
- Assessment should be according to the number of Beach Permits issued
- Coastal & Tourism cut back on beach raking may give available funds
- A proposal of $5.00 per person for beach permits as a user fee may be a
solution. (not everyone agrees)
4
January 7, 2003
- Real costs rather than an Index be used
- Give both staffs direction on a workable agreement
Summarizing:
- Look at the total numbers on parking stickers issued
- County fair share on a percentage basis
- Look at cost on an annual percentage
b. Beach Renourishment
Ron Hoveil - Coastal Projects Manager Public Utilities Engineering Dept.
(Collier County) -
His presentation included graphics shown on various beaches with the
conditions of beaches before major storms. He covered the storm water
outfalls in the City of Naples and the sand search program.
Two types of dredging are used:
Cutter head dredge - can dredge in shallow water
Hooper Dredge - needs about 20 feet of water depth
Sand sizes - Hideaway Beach and Vanderbilt, Park Shore and Naples
Beaches. The sand search, finding the right source of sand and the right size
is very important.
The storm water outfall discussion will need to be brought to the various
committee's and councils. The expensive portion is the actual construction.
The timing is critical and would like to see something started by next winter.
It could be done in conjunction or in advance of the major renourishment.
He discussed the funding and affording it with the current TDC funding.
He displayed a 10 year plan on the Revenues and Expenses stating they will
have a $4.8M shortfall. They are looking at an 8-10 year renourishment cycle.
The area of beach renourishment will be discussed before a decision is made.
Councilperson Taylor asked about groins and stated they seem to work. She
hopes the Coastal Advisory Committee is focusing on groins. Mr. Hovell
mentioned the committee is looking at groins and encouraged everyone to
read "Saving Americas Beaches".
Discussion followed on the renourishment program issues and dollars spent.
Vice Mayor Galleberg stated he is personally pushing wood groins on the
Coastal Advisory Committee. He hopes the beach renourishment program is
done sooner than later, it will reduce the cost in the long run, before it
becomes a bigger problem.
Councilman Herm discussed the screening of the sand and eliminating the
rocks and the outfalls of the drain pipes. He asked Mr. Hovell if he could
provide designs of the pipes so they have a better idea of the impacts. He
doesn't want to see an inadequate system and have flooding. He wants to
make sure it works and is attractive.
January7,2003
Commissioner Halas feels the County should look into an insurance policy
with Lloyds of London to protect their investment and reassurance in case of a
large storm. Mr. Hovell stated they are one of the few counties in Florida that
doesn't use the Army Corps. of Engineers and Federal Funds to maintain the
beaches. Once they have engineered and maintained the beach they are
eligible for FEMA.
Mr. Mudd will get a quote from Lloyds of London.
Mayor MacKenzie asked Mr. Hovell if he had thought the storm water outfall
water quality improvement is one of the ways to reduce the bacteria level.
Mr. Ron Wallace - City Engineer- City of Naples commented there are
some problems with the storm water outfalls other then.just the esthetics and
erosion. When there is a storm there is a storm surge due to the elevations and
tides and they do not function well. A pump station may be needed, which is
costly. A spreader system on the beach would help with the bacteria. But
dealing with such a large volume of water would require a lot of land.
10:12 Break
10:28 Reconvened
e
Airport Road Flyover
a. Traffic Forecasts
b. Review of City of Naples Study
c. Discussion of entry into Bear's Paw
d. Agreement with the Estuary
Mr. Norm Feder - Collier County Transportation Administrator - addressed
transportation needs. The overpass at Airport and Golden Gate has been
identified as a need in the Metropolitan Planning Organization for quite
sometime. As part of the 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan update, Kimley-
Horn conducted a detailed evaluation to determine what locations could not
achieve acceptable traffic operations based on existing and future traffic
conditions with at-grade improvements. They prioritized the intersections. The
most needed location was at Airport and Golden Gate Parkway. At-grade
improvements with blowing out at grade still could not provide an acceptable
level of service. Almost 70% of the overall flow is north-south, east-west or
through movement that allows grade separation to provide relief in that area. It is
estimated that 1,700,000 hours of delay can be saved.
Still need to look at the 6 laning traffic figures for more detail for Golden Gate
Parkway and if an overpass is built, how it can fit better with the community.
The County staff has held meetings with Bears Paw, City Council and
Countywide public meetings in 2002. They entered into a contract with RWA
and Consultants for design plans which are 30% design plans at this time. More
January 7, 2003
public meetings will be held in the next couple of months to present the
information and refinement of the design itself.
In the counties five-year work program the County advanced the construction on
the sections of Goodlette-Frank between Golden Gate & Pine Ridge roads. The
County wishes to work with the City on the concepts.
They have addressed some issues with Bears Paw and an agreement with the
Estuary to utilize the signalized entrance and turn around.
They are also working with the City regarding the 36 inch raw water main that
currently lies outside the roadway lanes, but will fall under the outside when
Golden Gate Parkway is widened to six lanes.
Mr. Feder summarized the highlights according to the handout page 4.
Discussion followed on the funding and grants applications. The $7.5M can not
be applied to any other roadway in the County. Only on the roadway component
or the overpass component or Golden Gate Parkway.
Mr. Archibald - the presentation will be short, to the point and informative and
relative to providing data. He introduced M. Jack Barr from Kimley-Horn
Consultants. He has done work in the community for over 30 years.
Jack Bart - Kimley-Horn & Associates - he addressed the problems with the
Golden Gate Parkway corridor- (a system of intersections and roadway lengths).
- It is a bottleneck throughout the County
- Traffic Growth, is congested and Improvements needed
- Study is preliminary - more detailed study of the two intersections needed
o Provide Facts
Demonstration Model (best possible tool)
MPO Model for growth analysis
Then decisions needed
Mr. Dave Monteen - Kimley-Horn - everyone received a handout of his
presentation. He covered the traffic volumes. His "Exhibits" were displayed -
morning and evening peak hours. He covered the Level of Service figures. The
heaviest peak flow is North-South on Golden Gate and Airport. He showed future
estimated traffic volumes for 2005 and 2025 exhibits for Intersection Turn
Movement counts for morning and evening peak hours. He described the
different Levels of Service that are perceived by motorists according to the
National Uniform and Traffic Control Devices. Level of Service "D" is the target
in many areas.
Commissioner Henning asked what other East-West improvements in the
modeling are a part of the model. Other roadways and projects are included in the
study along with the Gordon River Bridge crossing north of the airport and the
Gordon River Bridge south of the airport, according to Kimley-Horn. The bridge
crossing north of the airport could relieve Golden Gate Parkway with about
10,000 vehicles per day. The one South will relieve about 4,000 vehicles a day on
7
January 7, 2003
the corridor. Without the two projects or either one of them the results will be
worse than what Mr. Monteen is showing on his exhibits. If they don't build the
bridge crossings, the numbers would come out higher because there would be
more traffic during the morning and evening peak hours. Mr. Monteen again
stated he used the two bridge crossings to show the situation could be worse. The
objective is to start improving different parts of the roadway system and show the
effects of two intersections "at grade" and the effect that an overpass would have
for the Level of Service for the two intersections. There are other problems such
as Goodlette Road to US 41 backing up. There will be a level of gridlock.
Mayor MacKenzie commented that grade separations were identified in the non-
funded section of the needs assessment survey. There were 3 out of the 20 that
Kimley-Horn identified at locations to be determined. Five months later one of
the locations was determined, researched and a grant submitted.
Mr. Feder responded the overpass at Golden Gate and Airport was included in the
first five year work program presented to the BCC in 2000.
Don Scott - Transportation Planning - the cost feasible plan includes the
overpass at Airport and Golden Gate, not called out specifically looking at the
costs of the improvements on Golden Gate. $43M includes the cost within it.
The three Mayor MacKenzie was talking about are unidentified. Now the 5-year
work program has been presented and there have been discussions with the
neighborhoods and the overpass has been identified.
Kimley-Hom is identifying the population from today to 2025 will be doubled.
Councilperson Taylor wants to know the percentage of growth that is being
projected per year in terms of the number of people living in Collier County. She
feels that is very important. Mr. Monteen estimates 10,000 people per year.
Commissioner Henning doesn't feel it is population that is driving the need for
the overpasses; it is land use issues in the City of Naples and Collier County. The
Commissioners need to look at opportunities to provide jobs within the urban area
or the rural fringe. There are a lot of land use issues with land in the City of
Naples not being affordable and most are coming from the urban areas. The
Commission needs to brainstorm patterns that are calling for the second and third
Gordon River Bridge and the fly-over.
The City of Naples traffic analysis that was done for a long range plan has certain
traffic analysis zones and a small increase from this time to the future. The City
itself is getting built out.
The land uses are changing intensity. The only way to redevelop is more intensity
of the uses according to Commissioner Henning.
January7,2003
Commissioner Coletta hasn't received any complaints from anyone living to the
East of 175 since this was put out on the five year plan. They are looking forward
to the project to be put in place. The situation is going to get worse as they build
out in the Estates (in which they should), and a solution is in order. It's a
necessity. He would not like to see the project delayed and talking about these
same problems years from now. They can't wait for the City and County to get
together and agree on a new bridge crossing etc.
Commissioner Coyle feels the discussion of the Gordon River Bridge takes them
off in a different direction and is unproductive. He feels what the data shows on
I75 right now - whenever the State builds the Interchange on I75, what impact it
will have on the traffic on Golden Gate Parkway and Airport Road. He would
like to see the data without any additional bridges for the needed overpass.
Whatever assumption is used or changed, will not change the bottom line results
of what the intersection needs with it being LOS "F". Without the bridge
crossings it will be worse than a LOS "F".
Councilman Macllvaine is skeptical with the input into the model as peoples
patterns will change drastically.
The information is always updated into the model and the assumptions will not
vary enough where the problem will go away in this grade separation.
Mayor MacKenzie fully supports the widening if Golden Gate Parkway east of
Airport Road to Santa Barbara. She can't understand that the overpass dead ends
and feels it is a dysfunctional intersection. There will be a thousand more cars
and they won't get through a dead end.
Mr. Monteen explained the operating system, the deficiencies, and making the
improvements. He also stated there will be gridlock at US 41 and Goodlette Frank
Road. There will be gridlock at all three intersections if nothing is done.
Mr. Feder stated more analysis can be gone into and he did not go into a lot of
data but wanted the City's Consultant to display his findings to the City and the
County. The overpass will make significant improvements but will not solve
every problem of traffic congestion in Collier County.
Mayor MacKenzie said the problem is when there is a backup at US41 the drivers
will look for alternate routes into the City and start turning off onto Goodlette and
cut through the residential neighborhoods. She is not a fan of overpasses.
Commissioner Halas questions the accuracy of the modeling principals. Mr.
Feder answered that it is the MPO's model, adopted in 2001 based on 1998 data.
It is updated constantly with the City and County staff giving them the
January 7, 2003
information. The model acts as a tool and only as good as the information and
data that are put in it.
Councilman Herms felt they need to have the true numbers the model produces
and Kimley-Hom did present these numbers. The numbers for 2005 are without
the interchange or the overpass in place. The 2025 model is with two additional
road bridges that will accept 14,000 cars per day. He asks if it is valuable to
spend $40M on an overpass to get traffic past Airport Road but a bottleneck at
Golden Gate and Goodlette Road that it backs up past the overpass. He doesn't
have enough information yet and would like the Consultant to give them all the
information needed to make this analysis.
The consultant from Kimley-Hom stated they have discussed the problems rather
than the benefits "with" having an overpass but would have to deal with worse
problems "without" an overpass. The "at grade" situation will be worse than the
situation with the overpass. Other improvements are needed at other
intersections.
Commissioner Coyle feels more uneasy about the project now due to: - the project doesn't solve the problem - it moves it
- there is no plan or proposal after the overpass is built
- need a complete plan to see how to deal w/the complete problem of all 3
intersections - (US41, Goodlette Road and Airport Road)
- sees incremental approach that may not do any good but for one
intersection
- If left unchanged, would Golden Gate become backlogged and would
people look for alternate routes through residential areas?
- Dealing with a conceptual basis
- In getting an interchange, what is the traffic impact? - Mr. Feder said
10,000 - 13,000 vehicles added to Golden Gate Parkway
- Need to understand LOS, what tums will be made, traffic flows due to
backups - need data to support the projects
Discussion followed on the traffic going through local neighborhoods, arterial
systems, and the interchanges functioning. There is 157 minute delay at
Golden Gate and Airport Road. Mr. Feder addressed issues again concerning
the bridges, the 5 year work program adopted by the County Commissioners
and stating all the problems will not be resolved. An option of not building
the overpass will not solve anything.
A lengthy discussion followed on changing land use, LOS at the different
areas, and needing an overall plan with more information.
It was noted the Consultant from Kimley-Hom was hired by the City of
Naples and Mr. Monteen, Kimley-Hom and Mr. Feder from the County are all
saying the same thing.
10
January7,2003
Commissioner Coletta said everyone is waiting for this project to happen and
the people that live to the East are not going to tolerate the complete gridlock.
He feels the Commission has an obligation to carry the projects foreword.
Many hours have been spent in Tallahassee fighting for the money and now
people want to slow it down. The people living on the other side of I75 are
paying the price. The City Consultant and Mr. Feder from the County are
saying the same thing so he wants to concentrate on the real problem to keep
everything flowing on the other end. Commissioner Henning is right - being
pro-active in controlling growth in many ways. The City is at maximum. No
other place to grow, the people have to come to Collier County into the rural
areas and Golden Gate City. Need to accommodate the people that live to the
East of Airport road and still meet the needs of the people of Naples. He
wants to keep going forward with the overpass.
Commissioner Halas feels they need to direct growth to the rural areas away
from the Naples area - build shopping centers etc. Look at the big picture and
if they do nothing it will be a bigger problem. He would like to see answers
for the all the future problems, not just the immediate one the overpass will
resolve. He would like to see more data and projections.
The Consultant said they have to take the highest priorities first which is
Airport Pulling and Golden Gate being the first step in improving the system.
He continued with his presentation. The visual showed the delays and traffic
build up for the future up to the year 2025. He is showing this for the effects;
not the solutions, the different decisions will be difficult to make.
Mr. Feder summarized:
- Will fail - if they don't change the patterns
- Subdivision in the Golden Gate Estates is growing - so need change
- Restrictions on growth are still happening
- Need to stay on the project for Goodlette Frank Rd at Golden Gate
Parkway
- Land Use issues will be primary to what the solutions are
- Overpass well thought out through different channels
- Looking and planning from a broad system because of other areas
12:20 Break
12:36 Reconvened
Commissioner Coyle wanted to put the discussion in context - mentioned
there is enough support on the MPO and the Commission to move forward
with the overpass. He feels everyone has the right to review the data that
justifies the decision and question it. He hopes the City Council and
Commissioners can work together in dealing with the issue whether building
11
January 7, 2003
an overpass or not. He would like to have the Consultants come back with the
proper information for the uncertainties that have been raised.
SPEAKERS:
Bob Stone - he feels if the overpass is authorized it will give a domino effect
throughout the county and back to the 22 original overpasses. The effect of
cost is greater than acquiring the properties. Further studies need to be
conducted regarding the overpasses. There is sufficient data available to
indicate state of the art intersection design will extend the life of the existing
intersections for many years without degradation of traffic flow. He talked
about the modeling systems, and not being with intelligent signalization. He
hopes they will have a joint decision and delay the construction until an
unbiased study is done for the City of Naples and Collier County.
Commissioner Henning asked what a State of the Art Intersection is. Mr.
Stone commented it would have an origination and destination at peak hours
and the flow of maximum traffic on right, left hand through tums.
Jeff Perry - he hopes the Commission will move forward with the project. He
stated the models used by the County are the best models available - state of
the art assimilation software is extremely expensive and the best. Intersection
improvements and the overpass movements are definitely for improvements.
The positive benefit is Airport Road and the movements that occur on Airport
Road. It doesn't generate additional traffic or move a greater amount of
traffic into the City of Naples rather improves the flow out of the City of
Naples and lets traffic arrive at Goodlette Frank Road at a different rate than it
does presently. There is no evidence presented today to suggest the
information given is any different. Maybe the information isn't complete to
the Commissioners satisfaction but it is the best information available and the
model up-to-date. The Counties land use and growth is occurring in traffic
zones outside the City of Naples.
Tina Matte- on behalf of the 75 member organizations of the Southwest
Florida Transportation Initiative - She discussed the roadway priorities that
were addressed and identified candidate projects for the Transportation at
Reach Program Dollars available through the State. The Golden Gate
corridor including the Airport flyover was the top priority with Collier
County. The organization proceeded to seek funds. They worked closely
with Transportation and Mr. Feder and the community has come together to
stress the proprieties and goals. This is not a new project. On behalf of
SWFTI they encourage the Commissioners to move forward with the project.
Jeff Provenzano -he agreed the intersection needs some major improvements
and has needed it for quite a few years. But he hasn't spoken with anyone that
likes the concept of the overpass. Some difficult decisions need to be made
12
January7,2003
and there is room for improvement for all intersections in the County. He
feels there are other alternatives and this one needs to be proven.
The Commissioners and City of Naples has seen the presentation of the
conceptual design of the overpass project, but no one has seen the 30%.
A short break was taken.
FEMA - Joe Schmitt - Administrator Community Development &
Environmental Services - He introduced several people that worked on the
aspects of the flood insurance maps and their impacts. An Executive Summary
was given the City of Naples and Commissioners in their packets. In 1996 the
maps were introduced and received in 1998. They jointly retained and entered
into a Contract with Tomasello Consulting Engineers to study the proposed maps
and provide a preliminary report and dispute the flood insurance studies sent to
Collier County. The Storm Occurrences and the wave set-ups were the major
disputes and also the elevations throughout the Golden Gate area. A company
under contract with FEMA responded and disputed the results the County
submitted to FEMA. In 2001 the County protested the study and submitted an
appeal to the Flood Insurance Restudy proposal, based on the Flood Elevation
Maps for Collier County and the City of Naples. They were told FEMA noted the
Counties methodology was not superior to the methodology that was utilized by
their contractors and would have to live with the Flood Restudy that was done
over 4 years ago.
In October, the County Manager, acting on the behalf of the Chairman of the
Board of County Commissioners, submitted a response back to FEMA. The
County disputed the maps, but FEMA wants the County to accept the maps as
proposed and continue with the re-study program.
He gave two options - do they accept the maps, accepting the financial impact
and other impacts, or do they accept the maps and jointly initiate a restudy.
Bob Devlin - stated Flood Insurance Rate Maps are established on studies using
scientific methodology. The maps are basic documents with a broad impact on
the residents of Collier County. He talked about the different zones and the
different flood elevations.
The technical data FEMA used in the models was incomplete and the
methodology was applied differently in different parts of Collier County. The
local historical data also was not included. This was all brought to their attention.
More technical data was presented on the study and noted additional
documentation requirements needed by FEMA. They will accept the numbers
done, but the mapping would be done on the specific flood zones. Different
figure examples were given for flood insurance according to the value of a home
in Golden Gate. FEMA would like Collier County to start using the maps around
the end of the year - 2003 or 2004.
13
January 7, 2003
Ken Pineau - Emergency Management Director for Collier County and
member of the Task Force - Golden Gate Estates is the primary area being
discussed. It is in a "D" zone where no flood insurance is required. There will be
considerable financial impacts. Thc Coastal area is thc other area of concern. He
discussed the various storms and/or hurricanes that have occurred in Collier
County. Since 1978 Collier County has received $5,052,000 in costs as a result of
flooding - $3M went into the storm debris removal from Hurricane George in
1998 and other beach renourishmcnt problems paid for.
Mr. Schmitt gave altematives: - Withdraw the appeal resolution process and accept the maps.
- Continue the appeal process - Federal Courts - unlikely decision would be
found favorable for Collier County.
- Accept current maps and initiate the restudy
- Withdraw from the Federal Program and seek support from the State to
develop a State Program
He is suggesting continuing with Tomasello Engineering with an estimate cost of
about $235,000 to continue the restudy process and continue to dispute the maps
and go back to FEMA with the methodology and the scientific analysis required
to dispute the maps presented to Collier County.
The Federal Government doesn't have any more money to spend on Collier
County for the restudy and reading between the lines, they are forcing the County
to pay the bill to provide them the information needed.
Patrick White - Assistant County Attorney - he states the options the County
and City has are good ones. They will use the data they have for a restudy.
Accepting the current maps is not a necessary precondition on the part of FEMA.
To summarize is the question of direction:
- 1) should they continue the appeal resolution process - the recommendation is
"yes"
- 2) should they enter into the restudy program through Tomasello and pursue
as soon as possible - the recommendation is "yes"
- 3) should they withdraw from the Federal Program - recommendation is
"yes"
Mr. Dick Tomasello - Tomasello Consultant Engineers- Jupiter, FL - the question of
FEMA accepting the methodology - after 3 months they will submit data and
FEMA will have 30 days to review it and get back to Tomasello. The study
would be done the same way FEMA would do it according to their model. The
only objection to their study is they did not take into account of the storm
parameters coming from the East - the major coastal storms. FEMA's study is
out of date now. He continued to discuss different aspects of the data and the
methodology. FEMA recognizes there are a number of flaws to their study.
14
January 7, 2003
Mr. Schmitt feels 80% chance they will accept the Counties maps. They don't
have the money to do it themselves. By May the County should know something
or a feel from where FEMA is coming from with some results.
The County could withdraw from the FEMA program on the local level and let
everyone make their own determination on getting their own insurance. In order
to receive insured mortgages, they are required to be part of an NFIP Flood
Insurance Program. This would be a risk and concern.
County Manager Jim Mudd summarized it as taking it to the appeals process, and
if it goes no where - it goes to the Circuit Court. FEMA would have to prove
their science is better than the County's. He feels the Counties are better than
theirs. Without a restudy the county doesn't have a chance.
Being the Workshop did not finish all the Agenda Items and many Councilman and
Commissioners had other appointments it was decided to hold another joint
workshop in the future.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was
adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:10 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
~ , *ht~¢~~ur='approvea by the Board on /- g ~ - ~ 3 as presented
15