Loading...
Backup Documents 03/11/2011 Item #16I1611 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE March 8, 2011 1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: A. Districts: 1) Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District: Public Facilities Update Report; Bond Service letter; Letter of statement — no change in District Map or Registered Agent for FY09 -10; FY10 -11 Meeting Schedule. B. Minutes: 1) Animal Services Advisory Board: Minutes of October 19, 2010; December 7, 2010. 2) Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee: Minutes of February 2, 2010; March 3, 2010; April 7, 2010; May 19, 2010; June 2, 2010; August 4, 2010; September 8, 2010. 3) Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board: Minutes of March 2, 2010; Apri 16, 2010; May 11, 2010; June 8, 2010; October 5, 2010; November 2, 2010; December 7, 2010. 4) Collier County Citizens Corps: Minutes of September 15, 2010; October 20. 2010. 5) Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee: Minutes of October 14, 2010. 6) Collier County Code Enforcement Board: Minutes of October 28, 2010. 4- 7) Collier County Planning Commission: Minutes of November 4, 2010; December 16, 2010. 1611' 8) Contractors Licensing Board: Minutes of November 17, 2010. 9) Development Services Advisory Committee: Minutes of November 3, 2010; January 5, 2011. 10) Environmental Advisory Council: Minutes of January 5, 2011. 11) Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage Advisory Committee: Agenda of January 12, 2011. Minutes of January 12, 2011 — no quorum present. 12) Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee: Agenda of January 11, 2011. Minutes of September 14, 2010; December 14, 2010. 13) Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Committee: Agenda of October 4, 2010; January 4, 2011; February 7, 2011. Minutes of October 4, 2010; December 6, 2010; 14) Historical /Archaeological Preservation Board: Agenda of November 17, 2010. Minutes of September 15, 2010; November 17, 2010; 15) Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency: Agenda of October 20, 2010. 16) Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board: Agenda of November 18, 2010 joint with EZDA. Minutes of October 20, 2010. 17) Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Committee: Minutes of October 11, 2010; November 8, 2010. 18) Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory Committee: Agenda of October 21, 2010; November 18, 2010; January 20, 2011. Minutes of September 16, 2010; October 21, 2010; December 16, 2010. 1611 1 19) Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Committee: Minutes of September 20, 2010. 20) Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: Agenda of November 17, 2010. Minutes of November 17, 2010. 21) Pelican Bay Services Division Board: Agenda of November 3, 2010; November 16, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee; December 1. 2010; December 6, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee; January 5, 2011; January 12, 2011 Budget Committee. Minutes of October 6, 2010; November 3, 2010; November 16, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee; November 16, 2010 Strategic Planning Committee; November 17, 2010 Strategic Planning Committee; December 1, 2010; December 6, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee. 22) Radio Road Beautification Advisory Committee: Agenda of September 21, 2010; October 19, 2010; November 16, 2010; January 18, 2011. Minutes of August 17, 2010; September 21, 2010; October 19, 2010; November 16, 2010. 23) Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee: Agenda of December 2, 2010. Minutes of November 4, 2010. C. Other: 1) Collier County Code Enforcement Special Magistrate: Minutes of October 15, 2010; December 3, 2010. 2) Collier County Code Enforcement Special Magistrate — Dangerous Dog Appeal: Minutes of December 17, 2010. Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue Distrito 1, 1 I 13240 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL. 34120 CEN 239 - 455 -1204 office` 239 - 455 -6497 fax JAN 19 2011 Board of County Commissioners January 18, 2011 Collier County Board of Commissioners Collier County Government Center 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Dear Commissioners: Enclosed you will find a Public Facilities Update Report for the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District. According to Florida Statute 189.415(2) this report shall be submitted to each local government in which the Independent District is in. Should require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact Rita M. Greenberg at (239) 455 -1204. Sincerely, P"d M. P � Paul M. Plamondon, Chairperson BCIFR Board of Fire Commissioners Misc. Own: Deb: b 3 I item 1611 Al Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District 13240 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL. 34120 239 - 455 -1204 office January 19, 2011 239 - 455 -6497 fax BOND SERVICE To Whom It May Concern: The Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District incurred NO BONDS of any form for fiscal year 2009 -10 PAd M. P&...4.11 Paul M. Plamondon, Chairperson BCIFR Board of Fire Commissioners 16 l 1 Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District 13240 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL. 34120 239 - 455 -1204 office 239 - 455 -6497 fax January 18, 2011 To whom it may concern: The Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District has had no changes in its District Map or in its Registered Agent for the 2009 -2010 fiscal year. Sincerely, Rita mil. CyreW& t Rita M. Greenberg, Fire Chief 1611 Al Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District 13240 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL. 34120 239 - 455 -1204 office 239 - 455 -6497 fax Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District Board of Fire Commission Meetings 2010 -2011 6:OOpm at Administrative Offices (Oct -Jan) 5:30pm at Administrative Offices (Feb -Sept) 13250 Immokalee Road Naples, FL. 34120 239 - 455 -1204 October 12, 2010 November 9, 2010 December 14, 2010 January 11, 2011 February 8, 2011 March 8, 2011 April 12, 2011 May 10, 2011 June 14, 2011 July 12, 2011 August 9, 2011 September 13, 2011 B jV/ t 161 1 Fiala October 19, 2010 Henning VED EI Coyle le REC coletta DEC 10 2010 Board of county Commissioners MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, Octobe19, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Domestic Animal Services Advisory Committee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 6:30 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at Domestic Animal Services Resource Training Room, Davis Blvd., East Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Michele Antonia VICE CHAIRMAN: Marcia Breithaupt Dr. Ruth Eisele Sgt David Estes (excused) Tom Kepp, Jr. Dan Martin Jim Rich ALSO PRESENT: Amanda Townsend, Director of DAS Kathlene Drew, DAS Volunteer Coordinator Nan Gerhardt, DAS Shelter Manager Hailey Alonso, DAS Administrative Assistant MisdNlSww res. 2> D ibm T - 1 er 19 11� 11 October , I. Call to Order: Chairman Michele Antonia called the meeting to order at 6:32 P.M. II. Attendance: Roll call was taken and a quorum established III. Approval of Agenda: Dan Martin moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Marcia Breithaupt Carried unanimously, 6-0. IV. Approval of Minutes: September 21, 2010 Jim Rich moved to approve the minutes of September 21, 2010, as Presented. Second by Dr. Ruth Eisele. Carried unanimously, 6-0. V. Old Business A. Directors Report Amanda Townsend provided an update on: Howl -a -Day Jubilee - November 20, 2010 o A newly designed Bookmark commemorating the event was displayed. o Good response from cash sponsorships; event near paying for itself upfront o Vendor and donation fees will most likely bring in direct profit to the Donation Trust Fund. o Several in -kind goods and services donated o PGA Golfer Dennis Walters' Inspirational Show performance scheduled o Request Board Members to offer services as a Guest MC. (Michele offered) o Several staff and community members selling raffle tickets Amanda noted the huge amount of work and follow through entailed in the Event and thanked all who were helping with its success. Si U Kathy Drew offered many choices for volunteer oppo Sign--UP Sheet, available in the office for volunteering, contains a list of positions, such as guest greeters, raffle ticket sales, help in the cattery, etc. Enforcement activities - regarding disposition in horse case. The Judge's ruling against the owner, under Florida statutes, was provided. Any further interaction concerning the owner would be complaint- driven. Dan Martin questioned if legislative changes might benefit communities in future situations of the same nature; followed by a brief discussion. Report on the East Naples dog, subject of suspected abuse— Nine visits had been conducted since the complaint. The Animal Control Officer reported the owner in compliance and the dog in recovery from its skin condition. Nan Gerhardt reported: o Busy shelter activity with several cat adoptions and the reception of two horses, in addition to the older horse taken in last month. o November 1— Date for Bordetella vaccine. Stats are kept by Dr. Brown. o Implementation of vaccinations for rabies before dog and cat adoptions 2 10-1 1 October 19, 2010 and micro- chipping at time of adoption. o Changes in customer service - identifying animal with the adoptive person, micro- chipping prior to spay & neuter surgery. Along with cage card and bands, the process will help in cases of large litters. Kathy Drew announced in addition to the use of Pet Harbor on Chameleon, Pet - Finder now was linked up with E -Bay Classified to feature animals lost & found as well as to promote those available for adoptions. B. Review of Five Year Stats Amanda Townsend and the Boards Members reviewed the statistical graphs and reports for the last quarterly review period. Projection of each on the large overhead screen was provided by Hailey Alonso for the public citizens present. Positive results showed in: o Intake by population -down in 2010 (333,000- current population) o ACO productivity up (fully staffed) o Spay and Neuter — over 1,000 surgeries at DAS o Licenses sold and revenue both increased o Outreach and off -site adoptions o Volunteer numbers and hours up (over 10,000 hrs. donated) o Rescue groups and Humane Society cited for aid in adoptions Negative results showed in: o Euthanasia o Bite investigation cases o Compliance issues in some areas o Return to Owner numbers Discussion of many items followed with plans to further explore: a. Rabies statistics — to be provided by Amanda b. Licenses of cats and dogs- how many of each to be provided c. Euthanasia stats - how to turn them around d. Owner surrenders (30% ) — possible reasons e. Separate workshop on what the crux of the problem is and how to fix it. VI. New Business: A. "No Kill Nation" Conference, Ft. Lauderdale, Oct. 9th Amanda Townsend and Kathy Drew attended the conference and reported on many insights to information and processes DAS could implement in whole or in part. Highlighted were the following: o "No- Kill" was referred to as- no kill of healthy - treatable animals. o Partnership with Humane Society and Animal Servicers. o A new reporting system DAS will be looking to implement. Topic for next month's agenda. o Several new marketing ideas Four projects Amanda would like to implement: o Animal Help Desk Animal Hot - line o Intake prevention model - Community Resource Room o Participation in the upcoming Webinar by PetSmart Charities, taught by speakers from the conference, as a joint project with the Humane Society. 1611 B1 October 19, 2010 o Volunteer "Pet Detectives" to compare lost reports with shelter inventory to facilitate match ups. Re- homing was mentioned as a DAS priority to work on. Pets and owners reunited was the aim. Helping families will give DAS a good name. Not helping will do the opposite. Some "brainstorming" ideas for discussion were: o Maximize Chameleon lost & found data along with GIS zip -code data base; mail postcards regarding picked up animal to notify area residents. o Holding pets surrendered when owners can't afford impound fees, incurring more fees and less desirable adoptable pets. o Effects on families and staff when pets are surrendered for lack of funds. • Having "Help a Pet Get Home" booths at pet events — publicly donated funds — payment plans - criteria to disperse funds. • Put on agenda for further consideration. Kathy Drew expressed what she took away from the conference was the speaker's experiences with the Community that wraps itself around Animal Services issues, did what had to be done and did it right. VII. Public Comments A. Topic TBA (open discussion) The topic "Picked from the Hat" was Medical/ Lab Diagnostic Equipment for DAS Discussion, initiated by Stephen Wright, covered the following • What DAS doesn't have and what they need to facilitate processes. • Outreach to retiring veterinarians or funds to obtain equipment • Explanation of how things are done now • Medical Foster Program • Need for Blood machine —good idea; X -ray machine not necessary • Nighttime evaluations and emergencies and how handled B. Individual Comments Kelly Fox told a story of an injured dog and its care. She asked for an accounting of how and what the Trust Funds are used for; had questions on euthanasia, medical waivers and limits of the Donation Trust Fund. Her concerns were for the DAS Shelter to be a role model for other shelters. Teri Licastro asked about the number of pick ups, extending credit or the waiver of fees. She noted a second pick up results in a citation issued. If owner can't pay they leave the pet and a vicious circle begins. She also asked about getting better pictures for Pet Photos. It was suggested that some amateur photographers will take photos Kathy Drew responded better photos were already in the works. From the discussion that followed, it was requested the euthanasia issue and the Donation Trust Fund - where it goes, be put on the next Agenda. 4 161 1 B1 October 19, 2010 VIII. Advisory Board Members Comments Tom Kepp noted the stats on euthanasia were disappointing and had not changed much in spite of TNR and Spay & Neuter clinic programs being in operation for close to a year. He acknowledged the problems of space, time and money while looking toward targeting areas for enforcement and discussions on medical fostering. He made the point that DAS does not cost the taxpayers money. Irresponsible pet owners cost the taxpayers money. Marcia Breithaupt questioned feasibility of bringing TNR cats for spay and neuter at DAS to make some money. Amanda responded another Vet would be needed. DAS does not provide public services of that type and spay & neuter was not really a money making entity. Dr. Ruth Eisele stated that it was reported to her that a "real nice ACO picked up some cats." It turned out to be the newest Animal Control Officer, Larry Kenner. Dan Martin commented on the statistical graphs regarding bite cases, which seemed to be up. He asked DAS staff to explore what may be going on and report back to the Board Members. Jim Rich reported on his Pets in Condos project which he will pursue once Northerners are back in full force. Amanda responded she had a brochures from the conference on the subject and will give to Jim. The next meeting of the Domestic Animal Advisory Board is November 16, 2010. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 8:45 P.M. Collier County Domestic Animal Services ai an Michele Afitonia These minutes a�F�oved by the Board/Committee on ;171 l as presented 1/ or as amended O ji ([g jS B W Fiala Hiller JAN 1 g 2011 Henning Coyle Coletta BY:....................... MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLL: DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY Naples, Florida, December 7, 2010 1611��, December 7, 2010 i COUNTY LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Dome tic Animal Services Advisory Committee in and for the County of Colli Dr, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 6:30 PM in R HEGULAR SESSION at Domestic Animal Services Training Room, Da 's Blvd., East Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Michele Antonia VICE CHAIRMAN: Marcia Breithaupt Dr. R ith Eisele Sergeant Davi Estes (excused) Tom epp, Jr. Dan I dartin Jim gich (excused) ALSO PRESENT: Amanda Townsend, Director- DAS Nan Gerhardt, Shelter Operations Man Kathlene Drew, Volunteer Coordinator Hailey Alonso, Administrative Assistai Ekna Guavara, DAS 1 Misc. Carnes: 16I 1 B1 December 7, 2010 I. Call to Order Chairman Michele Antonia called the meting to order at 6:31 PM. H. Attendance A quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda All items on the Agenda were shown on the overhead projector. The November 16, 2010 Agenda was incorporated into the December 7, 2010 Agenda. The November le meeting was changed to December7th Dan Martin moved to approve the agenda Second by Tom Kepp. Carried unanimously, ¢0. IV. Approval of Minutes —October 19, 2010 Dan Martin moved to approve the minutes of October 19, 2010, as presented Second by Tom Kepp. Carried unanimously, ¢0. V. Old Business: A. Director's Report Amanda Townsend announced Hailey Alonso's promotion to �OperationsAnalyst in the Public Services Division, serving directly under Marla Ramsey Ekna Guavara will be assuming the Administrative Assistant duties along with her current duties. Marcia Breithaupt arrived at 6:40 pm. Amanda reported on the following shelter activities: • The swans were accepted by the city of Lakeland to be released into Lake Morton, part of Lakeland's Park Department. • The horse named Zsa Zsa will be retired to a farm Ocala. Nan Gerhardt reported DAS has inherited a sow. The shelter inventory presently includes rabbits, gerbils, ferrets and guinea pigs - all seeking new homes. Kathlene Drew reported the Howl -a -Day Jubilee was a huge success, netting $3,000 for the Donation Trust Fund. Amanda noted all the positive feedback that had been received regarding the event and she thanked all those who worked tirelessly to make it happen. It was agreed this event continually proves to be a great fundraiser for the Donation Trust Fund. 2 a. Pet Photos A slide show of shelter dogs, prepared by Amanda, b. FACA Report (handout) Amanda Townsend briefed the Board. Members on the Florida Animal Control Association (FACA) co attended on November 19 and 20. She provided cop events and speakers. She was one of the presenters opportunity to share Collier County's successful inrr program. In comparison to many other similar inma throughout the State, Collier County's inmate labor deemed the best statewide, due mainly to the collabc with the Sheriff's department's provision of an assig Facilities Management, helping with cameras and to create a safe and secure facility. Collier County DA this type of program. Utilizing the opportunity to speak with many other 1 around the state, she was able to discuss how other some of the many issues of Domestic Animal Servii topics before the FACA Board were • Various interpretations on the "spirit of the law and local laws • Dangerous Dog Law and legal challenges to it Because of Collier County's high interest in many Amanda expressed interest in serving on this Boar As a follow -up to some questions brought up at the Amanda provided the following information: c. Nighttime Emergencies Amanda Townsend stated procedures on handlin; emergencies were set out at regular safety meeting presentation on specific training in the use of non- control medication; what to look for and how to ca further determinations and diagnosis can be obtair She also announced the extensive landscape proje awaited fix to the drainage problem had been cons Management and flooding will not ever be a probl summer. 16I 1 B1 December 7, 2010 presented. Formation from rence she of the scheduled 1 had the e shelter worker programs gram was ttive relationship :d deputy and nical support to was a model for ;tors from ties approach Some major regarding state the issues, meeting, nighttime Dr. Brown did a idictive pain e for animals until d by a veterinarian. and the long tcted by Facilities in again in the B. Donation Trust Fund Usage (handout) Amanda Townsend explained the list of expenditures for the past three years on the animals, the procedures performed and the outcomes for each animal. She spoke about the restrictions in its use — for anin to keep it sustainable. The Fund contains about 40 3 care and fundraising, 50 thousand dollars. December 7, 2010 A lengthy discussion followed on possible future uses: a. Making more room so less euthanasia b. Billboards to promote spay & neuter c. Education in areas that are unwilling to participate in spay and neuter programs d. Engaging the public to spread awareness of overpopulation problems Amanda Townsend asked the Board if they would like to bring back ideas on what will work or schedule a workshop on systematically developing sustainable solutions. It would have to take into consideration the ultimate placement of the animals. One question was -Could the community absorb all the overpopulation of animals, whether they are fostered, rescued or sheltered? It was decided to start with a list of the areas of concern to utilize Fund monies; then, hold a workshop with an agenda to take up each suggestion. Amanda announced: 1. DAS would be hosting a low -cost shot clinic two Saturdays a month through Animal Health Services. This will also afford an opportunity for offering licenses and bringing those animals into the system. 2. VSA will be having a shot clinic in Immokalee in February 3. Chameleon was now interfacing with Google Earth. It will show on the computer every activity of officers, where their calls were. It will also show where in the county the majority of are coming from and will help in determining where to direct outreach efforts. Amanda will provide a demonstration at the next meeting. VI. New Business A. Ethics and Sunshine Law Video Haney Alonso provided information regarding the Sunshine Law as it pertains to Social Networking. She reminded the Board Members to make copies of all postings on sites such as Facebook and Twitter as well as a -mails that could have any connection to items discussed at DASAB meetings or that could be construed as a violation of the Sunshine Law. These hard - copies could be required at any time if they are requested by the public. B. Bite Case and Rabies Statistics (handout) The handout distributed contained graphs summarizing bite investigations (737 investigations in 2009) and rabies cases, by animal types, discovered in Florida in a 20 year time span. It also listed confirmed cases, by county, for the past 3 years. In that time Collier County had 3 cases of a rabid bat. C. Asilomar Accords/FL. Benchmarhing Consortium (handout) This document was provided to show the standardized way to accumulate shelter statistics and assists animal shelters in long range planning. Not many counties use this method yet but DAS will be working to convert DAS's system over to this method in 2012. The consortium is a group of 4 1611 B1 December 7, 2010 counties working to standardize performance measures f r animal services. It is considered the ideal reporting standard and will aid i making comparisons with other counties. D. DAS Clinic Medical Equipment (handout) Dr. Brown provided a "wish list" as requested by the Board at the last meeting. The three requested items will be included in the next budget, according to Amanda Townsend. E. Dog Beds (Dan Martin) Dan Martin spoke about the stored beds and the need to retain a supply of parts that are going to be needed so waiting for parts should not be a problem. He asked if local company could be used. He has been assembling beds for DAS. Kathlene Drew said beds are warranted for I year. The roblem was manufacturers were behind in making parts, which are on back order. The fabric is guaranteed for the life of the bed. Company is r searching a new manufacturer. VII. Public Comments A. Topic (open discussion) The topic chosen for this month's discussion was grassr is efforts and money for injured dogs. A lengthy discussion ensued on x -rays and immediate treaunent for injured dogs. Also, that monies to be used for immediate treatments be taken from the Trust Fund. The concern was the immediate treatm at of injured animals. After much discussion, it was explained that, by law, an animal is held for 120 hours to allow an owner to contact DAS. Dr. Eisele offered to view a photo disc of an injured ani rnal and give an opinion of its options. B. Individual Comments Gisela Rowley, a DAS volunteer, read a letter from a I appy family who adopted a dog from the shelter. They thanked DAS fbi their care and wrote about the dog. Gisela, who makes follow -up cal s on adopted dog families to see how well they are adapting, shared the I ositive feedback in the letter and pictures of "Cooper", happy in his new h me. Teri Licastro told of her experience with educational fforts in Immokalee which were all positive. She encouraged everyone to get together, go out and educate and make a difference in helping the people in Immokalee understand what they need to do. Bibi Barrett offered help with purchases for equipme t to stock at the shelter. She stated working together with DAS was th4 ultimate answer 1611 Bi December 7, 2010 and asked for suggestions on what she can do to help the animals. VIII. Advisory Board Member Comments Marcia Breithaupt said it would be a good idea for DAS to be represented in the Christmas parade. Dr. Ruth Eisele assured everyone her comments on the reality of cultural differences were not intended to offend anyone, being from South America herself. Dan Martin commented on getting the word out to check DAS first to obtain a pet; make people aware the clock is ticking for these pets. Tom Kepp mentioned that belonging to a specific culture was no excuse for not following the law regarding pet care; and his comments were not meant to offend anyone. Michele Antonia noted that working with other cultures to educate was the way to go. Working with grassroots efforts to promote spay and neuter. Amanda Townsend mentioned that she had been interviewed by Florida Weekly newspaper and those interested should look for the article on pet overpopulation. Neat meeting is scheduled for January 18, 2011 at 6:30 PM. There being no further business for the good of the County, meeting was adjourned, by order of the Chair at 8:45 PM. COLLIER COUNTY DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES / -- o These minutes approved by the Board/Committee on % —� d as presented , or as amended _j,,,-'. rel Fiala 1.6-) B RECEIVED � Henning ;> Coyle DEC 10 20% Coletta Hoam of county commissioners Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 2, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Mr. Gutierrez at 4:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Conrad Willkomm, Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, Carolyn Cochrane, Jerry Buck and Victor Brittain. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan and Sue Trone, Project Managers. 2. Approval of Agenda: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 7 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the January 5, 2010 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 7 -0. 4. Proiects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. Ms. Cochrane asked about treatment of White Fly on ficus trees and hedges. She asked for Mr. Gross to check for the Fly's presence on MSTU landscaped areas and she was concerned that private property owners should be made aware. Mr. Gutierrez asked how the Foxtail Palms handled the cold snap. b. South Bayshore Drive Construction Plans. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB had received South Florida Water Management District permit, forwarded and received the 60% construction comments from the Collier Transportation Division which were passed to Stormwater and Maintenance for review. She stated that the previously presented street lighting plan was conceptual only with lights placed at 75 foot intervals and were intended to be pedestrian scale lights. The schematic layout had not been engineered for proper light spacing yet. c. FPL Side Street Lighting Project. Ms. Jourdan Updated the Committee on the FPL lighting progress and that staff had ordered six shields for $1,007. Misc. Corres: February 2 2010 Minutes Dom: Item Copies to: 5. Old Business: 1611 82 a. Hiring of Dedicated (Full Time) MSTU Staff. Mr. Jackson reiterated Committee member's discussions with staff about moving forward with the selection and funding of a full -time staff member or contracting for consulting services. At the last meeting a motion to proceed with acquiring a full -time staff person was made by Ms. Nicklos and seconded by Mr. Oakley. Mr. Jackson covered the information he discovered in his discussions with Collier County HR, Budget and Management and County Manager's office. Essentially if the MSTU desires to proceed, the new staff position would have to be a CRA employee, fully funded by the MSTU through a department transfer of funds. During a round table discussion the Committee discussed the merits of a percentage time split with the CRA duties, the amount of work available within the MSTU, and whether the employee should be hired in a `permanent' status or `contract' status similar to the executive director. The Committee agreed that they desired a full -time staff of one person, under contract, stationed in the MSTU building under the management of the CRA Executive Director. Motion to process through the CRA and BCC Boards a 100% MSTU hire, 3 — 5 year CRA contract employee at the Project Manager level. Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 7 -0. 6. New Business: a. Approval of MSTU Landscapelirrigation Contract. Mr. Jackson presented the Collier Purchasing Department's Bid Tab sheet showing the respondents to the Invitation to Bid for the MSTU's annual landscape maintenance contract. The lowest bid meeting specifications was Ground Zero at $4,740 /month or $56,880 per year. Motion to recommend approval to the BCC: Mr. Willkomm, Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 7 -0. b. Request for Payment of Services. Motion to approve Ground Zero's landscape maintenance January 2010 bills: Mr. Willkomm, Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 7 -0. c. MSTU Committee Meetinq Change. Mr. Gutierrez stated that at the MSTU workshop there was an expressed desire to get more community participation at MSTU Committee meetings. Motion to have MSTU meetings on the first Wednesday of the month at 6PM: Mr. Brittain. Second Ms. Nicklos. Approved 7 -0. February 2 2010 Minutes 161 1 82 Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 d. Bayshore Drive Design Survey /Audit — Discussion. Ms Trone discussed a handout that detailed the many discussion points noted in the MSTU Workshop. In discussion, Mr. Jackson advised the Committee that before the committee commits to spending money on a corridor audit/study and obligate funds to redo a landscaped street before untouched streets are addressed may bring negative citizen comments. Mr. Oakley stated that Bayshore is different than any other streets in the area and the MSTU should seriously consider an audit and develop a 'master plan' in conjunction with the CRA. Ms. Jourdan added that the CRA already has a consultant on board to rewrite and /or update the two CRA Land Code Overlays. Mr. Oakley asked that there be more communication between the MSTU and CRA on what each organization is doing in the area. Motion to postpone the audit. Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Willkomm. Approved 7 -0. 7. Public Comments. Ms. Spink asked that the MSTU /FPL streetlight across the street from her house be removed. Ms. Jourdan stated that the Committees' process was to install all lights, evaluate them, install shields at problem locations, and evaluate. If there was still a problem, the MSTU options were to install a lower wattage bulb and /or move the light to another pole. All the above would require additional funds to pay FPL contractors. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. a. Grass replacement on Bayshore. Ms. Nicklos asked if the MSTU should replace grassed areas to reduce the cost of mowing. Ms. Cochrane stated that removing the grass will not reduce the cost. b. Kidde Park on Lunar Street Triangles. Ms. Nicklos asked if a public park equipment could be installed. Mr. Jackson stated that it is not in the MSTU charter and it would have to be managed by Park & Recreation. 9. Adiournm t: The regular meeting was adjourned at 5:38 pm. Approved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. February 2 2010 Minutes RECEIVED DEC 10 2010 Board of county COmn1"'Qner8 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 6 , �-B Fia 2 l� _ Htk Coyle, Coletta BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 3, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Mr. Gutierrez at 6:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, Carolyn Cochrane, Jerry Buck and Victor Brittain, Absent: Conrad Willkomm. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan and Sue Trone, Project Managers. 2. Approval of Agenda: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Brittain, Approved 6 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the February 2, 2010 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 6 -0. 4. Projects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. He updated the Committee about treatment of White Fly on ficus trees and hedges. Mr. Gross provided a list of suggested planting material to remove and replace along Bayshore Drive's medians. These plants were either dead or suffering from the extreme cold in January. The Committee decided to hold off on any replanting work until April to pass the cold weather period. b. South Bayshore Drive Construction Plans. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB had been responding to her requests and they are working on the Collier Transportation Division's 60% construction comments which were passed from Stormwater and Maintenance. Mr. Oakley asked for a one -on -one meeting with ABB & MSTU Staff to review his comments about the design. Ms. Jourdan stated that she would arrange a meeting and requested Mr. Oakley give her a list of dates he was available. c. FPL Side Street Lightinq Project. Ms. Jourdan Updated the Committee on the FPL lighting progress and that FPL had a work order to install �fili�cs March 2 2010 Minutes Date: Item #: Ccpies to: 1611 82 0 d. MSTU FY2011 Budget and Millage. Mr. Jackson advised the Committee that in March of each year the Committee must recommend to the BCC their next year's millage rate. Mr. Jackson presented the Committee with copies of the BCC Budget Policy for FY2011, and he explained the two options given to all MSTUs with Advisory Committees: millage neutral or tax neutral. He gave a short presentation of FY2009 and FY2010 millages, property values and millage rates. After a roundtable discussion on the impacts of setting millage neutral or tax neutral, a motion to request tax neutral for FY2011 budget was made by Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 5 -1; Ms. Nicklos dissenting. e. CRA Update. Mr. Gutierrez advised that he had nothing to report because he missed the last CRA meeting due to illness. 5. Old Business: a. Presentation: Road Conceptual Design — Thomasson & Hamilton. Mr. Jackson introduced Mr. John Ribes of JRL and Mr. Jeff Curl of PK Studios, the MSTU's selected consultants to develop conceptual streetscape designs for the two streets. Mr. Ribes provided an introduction and overview of the project. He covered some of the challenges and the reasoning behind their selection of improvement. Mr. Curl gave the detailed portion of the presentation describing the street cross sections, planting material, bio -swale systems, solar lighting and area - defining gateway features. The consultants fielded a variety of questions from the Committee. Mr. Gutierrez thanked them for their work and stated that this was exactly the kind of jump -start the MSTU needed to move forward with beautification and improvements to the area. 6. New Business: a. Request for Payment of Services. Motion to approve Ground Zero's landscape maintenance February 2010 bills, and JRLIPK Studios final payment for services rendered today: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 6 -0. b. Lunar Street Planting Proposal. Mr. Gutierrez asked if the Committee wanted to proceed with Mr. Gross' proposal to upgrade the plant material on Lunar Street. The Committee asked several questions about the type of plants, location and time to plant. Motion to have Ground Zero install the proposed plant palate but wait until late April to do it: Ms. Nicklos. Second Mr. Buck. Approved 6 -0. c. Walkable Communities Study Proposal. Mr. Jackson presented the Committee with the cover sheet and executive summary of a County Transportation March 2 2010 Minutes 1611 62 Division study performed in Naples Manor. With the Study, the County was able to acquire $750,000 in grant funds to install the improvements cited in the study. Mr. Jackson presented a Transportation quote to do the same study in the entire CRA boundary, and that the fee would be the staffs hourly rate based on their salaries of those involved. This in -house work would be between $7,000 and $10,000 — a significant savings over having a private consulting firm do the work. Mr. Jackson told the Committee that at the March 2, 2010 CRA Advisory Board meeting, the Board agreed to split the cost of the work 1 /3`d to 2/3rd' based on acreage of the Triangle and MSTU Bayshore areas. Motion to perform the Walkable Community Study in the Bayshore (MSTU) area provided the CRA agreed to pay for the remaining area within the CRA but outside of the MSTU boundary: Ms. Cochrane. Second: Mr. Buck. Approved 6 -0. 7. Public Comments. None. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. a. Mr. Jackson offered to the new and old members of the Committee that staff was willing to sit with each member and provide a comprehensive update and briefing on everything the CRA and MSTU has done and has in work. b. Mr. Jackson presented a spreadsheet showing the fiscal impact of the MSTU getting a regular bank loan to fund the streetscape improvements. The Bank loan could begin as a line of credit for streetscape design and transform into a fixed rate loan when the construction draw was made. The spreadsheet shows the principal and interest payments for $3M, $4M and $5M. 9 Adiournmeat The regular meeting was adjourned at 8:00 pm. Approved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. March 2 2010 Minutes DEC 10 2010 t3oa,rd at County ComAS!AnBCS 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 6 j ,B2 Fia l _ tkttl� Henning Coyle _ ✓ -- Coletta BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 7, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Maurice Gutierrez at 6:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, Carolyn Cochrane, Jerry Buck, Victor Brittain, and Conrad Willkomm. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan and Sue Trone, Project Managers. 2. Approval of Agenda: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Brittain, Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 6 -0 (Willkomm absent). 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the February 2, 2010 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 6 -0 (Willkomm absent). 4. Projects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. He updated the Committee about White Fly discovered on Abaco Bay Condo's on ficus hedge. Mr. Gross advised that he had completed the Lunar Street triangle area plantings. Ms. Nicklos stated that she visited the site and talked with neighbors and they were extremely pleased. b. South Bayshore Drive Construction Plans. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB had responded to Mr. Oakley's requests and there would be a staff and ABB meeting on April 15th with the Collier Transportation Division. c. FPL Side Street Lightin-i Project. Ms. Jourdan updated the Committee on the FPL lighting progress and that FPL had installed six shields and that she had a request for two more and asked for approval to order them. The Committee agreed. d. MSTU New Hire. Mr. Jackson advised that the item was going to the BCC on April 27 th and the position would have to be advertised. Misc. Corres: April 7 2010 Minutes Date: Item #: - _.:,s 0. 1611 B2 w Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 e. CRA Update. Mr. Gutierrez advised the committee on topics that the CRA was working on. 5. Old Business: None. 6, New Business: a. Request for Payment of Services. Motion to approve Ground Zero's landscape maintenance March 2010 invoice for payment for service: Ms. Cochrane. Second: Mr. Buck. Approved 6 -0. (Willkomm absent) b. MSTU Master Plan. Mr. Jackson advised that at the suggestion of the Committee, staff had drafted a scope of work for JRL Design to develop the MSTU Master Plan. JRL Design provided a quote of $75,000 plus $3000 in expenses to perform the work. After a roundtable discussion the Committee agreed to table the topic and discuss it at a Workshop in two weeks. Motion to table the item and schedule a workshop on April 21St at 5PM: Ms. Nicklos. Second Mr. Oakley. Approved 7 -0. 7. Public Comments. Bob Williams expressed his concern about the MSTU installing street lights with different wattage. Ms. Nicklos explained to Mr. Williams that in her Master Plan discussion, she did not mean for different wattage to be placed on the same street. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. Mr. Willkomm stated that his work load prevented him from attending further meetings and that it would not be fair to the Committee for him to not participate and hold a seat; therefore he tendered his resignation at that time. Motion to accept the resignation Mr. Brittain. Second Mr. Oakley Approved 7 -0. 9. Adiournme : The regular meeting was adjourned at 7:22 pm. a A roved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. April 7 2010 Minutes R F-NF-a DEC I 0 2010 """j 04 ;aun1Y commirwonem �611-162 Un"ning -r ),1 Ca !e If Coletta AA Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE MAY 19, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Maurice Gutierrez at 5,00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, Carolyn Cochrane, Jerry Buck, and Victor Brittain. MSTU Staff Present: Jean Jourdan, Sue Trone, Project Managers, and David Jackson, Executive Director (late). 2, Approval of Agenda. Mr, Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 6 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the April 7, 2010 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 6 -0. 4. Proiects Report: a. South Bayshore Drive Construction Plans, Ms. Jourdan explained that the work order for Agnoli Barber and Brundage (ABB), the consultant contracted to work on the project, had expired. Ted Tryka, the project manager from ABB was present to propose options for going forward. Mr. Tryka proposed a $0.00 change order. The slow progress in permitting has come from the South Florida Water Management District ( SFWMD) which requires that ditches maintain enough width to protect existing water flows. ABB has worked out engineering concessions that the SFWMD permit is now ready to be issued. The current hold up is with Collier County Transportation due to County protocol which defers to FDOT standards. These standards would require the sidewalk to be approximately 8' in some sections. Mr. Tryka presented the Advisory Committee with three options for the change order: Misc. Corres: 1. Engineer the pathway to vary in width between 8' and 10' as necessary; May 19, 2010 Minutes Date: Item #: G--pies to: 161 1B2 ! 2. Move the road to take up all public right -of -way in the west so that the 10' path can be made without deviations; 3. Make the path 8' Motion to make the path 8' throughout made by Ms. Nicklos. Second by Mr. Buck. Approved 6 -0. Mr. Tryka anticipated it would take 4 months to complete the project and provide plans to have for present for bid. Mr. Tryka agreed to return on July 19 to the committee with a presentation of ABB's progress and to present 100% complete plans on September 1. The work order will be extended to September 20. With regard to the landscaping to be incorporated with the South Bayshore project, Mr. Oakley recommended contacting Scott Wyndham or John Carson of the Botanical Garden. Mr. Oakley volunteered to make the necessary arrangements. 5. Old Business: None. (Break for refreshments) 6. New Business: a. MSTU Master Plan. Sue Trone introduced John Ribes of JRL Studios and Jeff Curl of JC Studios who led a kick -off discussion about the MSTU master plan. An aerial photograph with MSTU boundaries was displayed as the discussion about the master plan progressed. Mr. Curl first touched on the topic of boundary expansion: the group was asked about expanding to include Thomasson to US -41 as well as the Gateway Triangle Area. The group agreed that at this time, expansion is probably not well - advised; however, in the future, the public - right -of -way along Thomasson up to US -41 may be taken into the MSTU, if not areas along Avalon. There was no interest in incorporating the Gateway Triangle. Discussion next concerned sidestreets and the treatment of sidestreet prototypes. The first issue of concern involved implementation. Mr. Oakley despaired that, until the present, unless 50% plus one residents agree to pursue the implementation of beautification improvements, such improvements cannot be implemented. Mr. Oakley asked if there was a way around this and May 19, 2010 Minutes 1611 B2 Ale "' ri Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 Mr. Ribes offered that if the master plan were to be adopted into the Land Development Code this could be possible. Mr. Oakley was interested in this and expressed interest in cooperating with the CRA to get the MSTU master plan and the CRA overlay revisions in order to facilitate this process. He also expressed interest in the two groups (CRA and MSTU) in meeting together. Other topics discussed included: on- street parking, public artwork, public exercise stations, pedestrian walkability. 7. Public Comments: None. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications: Mr. Buck asked about banners on Bayshore Drive and why many light poles do not have banners. Mr. Buck recommended banners be installed on all lights if possible. Mr. Jackson offered to make contact with the designer at the Botanical Garden to get the project started if a quote came in at under $5,000. Motion made by Mr. Oakley. Second: Mr. Buck. Approved 6 -0. 9. New staff was introduced: David Buchheit. 10. The meetin _ djourned at 7:53. Approved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. May 19; 2010 Minutes RECOVED DEC 10 2010 o rd of i-,OU(I i comm 6sioners 611 B-2 -- Henning_�v Coyle Coletta BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 2, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Maurice Gutierrez at 6:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, Carolyn Cochrane, and Jerry Buck. Victor Brittain had an excused absence. MSTU Staff Present: Jean Jourdan, Sue Trone, David Buccheit Project Managers, and David Jackson, Executive Director. 2. Approval of Agenda: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda. Item to add, noted by staff to pay invoice to Ground Zero. Motion: Ms.Nicklos. Second: Mr.Oakley. Approved 5 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the April 7, 2010 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 6 -0. 4. Proiects Report: a. Aaron Gross from Ground Zero was present and he conveyed to the Advisory Committee that his crews have performed the usual maintenance in the area along with some repairs to equipment where needed. There was a minor infestation of army worms and Ground Zero crews sprayed to kill the pest and prevent further infestation. b. David Buccheit, new MSTU Project Manager, informed the Advisory Committee that he had contacted the designer from the Botanical Garden regarding the commission of a new design for banners on light poles. Also, he mentioned that he had investigated bringing bus stops on Bayshore Drive into ADA compliance, including getting shelters for all bus stops. At this time funding for shelters at all bus stops does not exist. c. Jean Jourdan updated the group that we are still waiting for shields for one more light on the side street lighting project. Ms. Nicklos suggested that in the next newsletter a story about the lights should be written and readers should be encouraged to call the office if they notice one of the lights needu:n ai� #enance. isc. orres: June 2, 2010 Minutes Date: Item #: Copies to: 5. Old Business: None. 6. New Business: 161 1 B2 � a. Replacement of Dead Vegetation. Aaron Gross presented a presentation for new vegetation as requested previously to replace vegetation killed off in the winter freeze as well as to "fill out" lackluster spaces in the medians and other landscaped spaces under the stewardship of the MSTU. Motion: Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved: 5 -0. b. Request to pay Ground Zero. Invoice for $4,740 for monthly maintenance. Motion: Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved: 5 -0. c. Replacement of foxtails. Ground Zero provided a proposal to replace foxtails. Recommendation raised by committee was to replace the foxtails, not to exceed $350.00. Motion: Ms. Cochrane, Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved: 5 -0. d. Streetscape Guidelines. At the last meeting, Mr. Oakley lamented the fact that a master plan that merely suggests options for streetscape guidelines will languish — attempts in the past to get the required 50% plus 1 resident on streets to support implementing beautification projects have proven unsuccessful. The LDC Overlay project being undertaken with the CRA calls for streetscape guidelines to be adopted into the LDC. Staff recommended that the Advisory Committee consider the option of having the MSTU Beautification Master Plan's streetscape guidelines be used by the overlay project and adopted into the LDC. Motion: Mr. Buck. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved: 5 -0. 7. Public Comments: Jean Jourdan relayed a public comment on behalf of an unnamed gentleman who was unable to attend. This person's concern is that the timing of the blinking of the lights at the pedestrian crosswalks is confusing. He requests the timing be changed or for the red light to be solid /unblinking. Ms. Cochrane responded that flashing lights are more attention - grabbing and David Buccheit affirmed that it is commonly held in the field of transportation planning that flashing lights are appropriate for pedestrian crossing areas. Ms. Nicklos suggested staff write about the pedestrian crosswalks in the next newsletter, explaining the law. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications: Ms. Nicklos recommended that Ground Zero wait to replace dead vegetation until the rainy season is in full swing and Mr. Gross assured the Advisory Committee he would wait until that time. There was some discussion of the plumbego plants outside Windstar —they grow too big and require frequent cutting. Alternatives were discussed. Ms. Cochrane suggested having them removed ultimately. June 2, 2010 Minutes 161 1 B2 -i The Advisory Committee agreed to meet next on August 4 at 6 PM. Motion: Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved: 5-0. 9. The meeting ady*urned at 7:27. Approved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. June 2, 2010 Minutes ,r cF -NED DEC I 0 200 ��rd of ���" Gomc�5:10q&sy Liaysnore 13eaUTITICalion rvia i u 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 4aa 1 4Atle'r Hennin, Coyle Coletta BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE August 4, 2010 MEETING .�z The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Maurice Gutierrez at 6:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, Carolyn Cochrane, and Victor Brittain. Jerry Buck had an excused absence. MSTU Staff Present: Jean Jourdan, Sue Trone, David Buccheit Project Managers, and David Jackson, Executive Director. 2. Approval of Agenda: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda. Motion: Mr. Oakley. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 5 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the June 2, 2010 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Mrs. Nicklos. Second: Mrs. Cochrane. Approved 5 -0. 4. Projects Report: a. Aaron Gross from Ground Zero was present and he conveyed to the Advisory Committee that his crews have performed the usual maintenance in the area along with some repairs to equipment where needed. There were plants replaced and light pole banners were installed. b. Mr. Gutierrez suggested that the committee get some minor project updates out of the way. At this request Jean Jourdan updated the group that we are still waiting for a shield for one more light on the side street lighting project and that it is scheduled to be installed the week of August 20. c. David Buchheit informed the Advisory Committee that the new banners were installed on many light poles, and that additional banners would be installed in a few weeks. Dwight Oakley expressed great displeasure with the design of the banners. d. David Buchheit updated the group that the paver repair work was completed. e. David Buchheit advised that the ADA compliance project to bring bus stops on Bayshore Drive into ADA compliance should be completed by the end of August. He then asked for a motion to approve the invoices for completed August 4, 2010 Minutes Date: Item #: G�pies to: 1611 B2 q banners, the paver repair work, and the work that Ground Zero has done. Motion to approve: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mrs. Nicklos Approved 5 -0 f. South Bayshore Drive Update i. Jean Jourdan asked representatives from Agnoli, Barber, & Brundage (ABB) to discuss the landscape plan for south Bayshore Drive. There was a discussion about the possibility of adding trees to the landscape plan. ABB staff explained that there is a very limited right of way and that planting trees would create a great challenge to the project. A motion was made by Mrs. Nicklos to have ABB continue on the plan and have them evaluate the possibility of adding trees. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 5 -0 ii. ABB then showed a variety of street light options. A motion was made by Mr. Oakley to refurbish the existing 10 foot poles and light fixtures, and to paint them a color to be determined in the future. Second: Mrs. Cochrane, Approved 5 -0 5. Old Business: a. Sue Trone provided an update to the JRL Master Plan. She said that more information would be provided in the next month. 6. New Business: a. Interview Candidates for the MSTU Advisory Committee. The two applicants (Sheila Dugan and Robert Messmer) gave a brief introduction to committee. They both expressed their desire to join the committee. The committee was given a ballot, and a vote was taken. Sheila Dugan won the recommendation of the committee. b. Intersection improvements at Becca Avenue and Pine Street. David Buchheit presented a plan to design a roundabout at the intersection of Becca Avenue and Pine Street. The committee expressed concerns about the plan. A motion was made by Mr. Brittain to eliminate this project. Second by Mrs. Nicklos. Motion carried: 5 -0. c. Street improvements on New Moon Court. David Buchheit presented a plan to pave a section of New Moon Court, and to add a landscaped section to the road. Motion: Mr. Oakley. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved: 5 -0. d. Crosswalk improvements. David Buchheit explained to the committee that County Transportation has agreed to allow the installation of in -road crosswalk lights. Recommendation install crosswalk lights. Motion: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mrs. Nicklos. Approved: 5 -0. August 4, 2010 Minutes 1611 gp 7. Public Comments: A member of the public suggested that the additional lights that are left from the Bayshore South project be added to the sidewalk on Republic. The committee was very receptive of that. The same person expressed concerns about possible flooding on Cottage Grove. David Jackson explained that the CRA would be looking at storm water in that area after the completion of the storm water projects in the triangle. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications: Mr. Oakley expressed displeasure that the landscape plan didn't show 3D drawings to the committee, and that trees weren't shown on the plans. Staff pointed out that Mr. Oakley had been very involved with the landscape plans for several weeks. Staff expressed surprise that he was so disapppointed by the landscape plan because he had previously been very clear that he had been very approving of the landscaping. Members of the Advisory Committee who also expressed similar disappointment as Mr. Oakley's were advised that ABB and the subconsultants could be asked to revise the plans but, as a result, the sidewalk would have to re- engineered and the permits may have to be revised, setting the project back 12 -24 months. Moreover, the vote to proceed with the plan had been taken so the vote would have to be re -taken after -the -fact. The group decided to proceed with the plan, as -is because all the work has been paid for. If the group dislikes the landscaping a new landscape plan can be contracted separately in the future. The Advisory Committee agreed to meet next on September 8 at 5 PM. The meeting-,adjourned at 8:35. ppr ved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. August 4, 2010 Minutes QEC 1 o Zoo ga;rdotGOUnt)Gom1°necs 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 16 iliall Henning Coyle Coletta BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 8, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Maurice Gutierrez at 5:00p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, Carolyn Cochrane, and Jerry Buck. MSTU Staff Present: Sue Trone, David Buchheit Project Managers, and David Jackson, Executive Director. 2. Approval of Agenda: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda. Motion: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Buck. Approved 5 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the August 4, 2010 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mrs. Cochrane. Approved 5 -0. 4. Projects Report: a. David Buchheit conveyed to the Advisory Committee that his crews have performed the usual maintenance in the area along with some repairs to equipment where needed. There were plants replaced and a philodendron was removed in the median near the entrance to Windstar in order to provide for safe sight - lines. A motion was made to approve payment of invoices in the amount of $944.00. Motion: Mr. Buck. Second: Mrs. Cochrane. Approved 5- 0. b. David Buchheit informed the committee that the ADA bus stop upgrades were completed, and requested a motion to pay for the work by Custom Brick in the amount of $2970.00. Motion to approve: Mr. Buck. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 5 -0. c. David Buchheit informed the Advisory Committee that the he was continuing to work with the County transportation staff to complete the street improvements to New Moon Court. d. David Buchheit updated the committee about the proposed crosswalk improvements at Weeks Avenue and Lakeview Drive, and requested guidance on how to proceed. The proposed work includes installing iM40dashing lights and the replacement of the existing pedestrian crossing signs with a September 8, 2010 Minutes Date: Item #: Copies to: 161 1 92 OR flashing LED pedestrian crossing sign. A motion was made to get pricing for both installing one location, and installing at both locations. Motion: Mr. Buck. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 4 -1 Mr. Oakley dissenting. e. South Bayshore Drive Update i. David Buchheit presented eleven questions that were brought to staff by Mr. Oakley that listed his concerns about the 90% plans for the Bayshore Drive improvement project. In a power point presentation format, Mr. Buchheit gave answers to all of the questions, which included responses that staff received from Collier County Transportation Division staff. Then Mr. Buchheit entertained questions regarding the responses. There was discussion regarding the driveway widths, and Agnoli Barber Brundage (ABB) staff explained the reason the driveway widths needed to be maintained (for code, previous permits and /or grandfathering). Mr. Oakley then expressed a desire to discuss the left turn lane at Bayshore and Thomasson Drives, and the road lane widths. Staff and ABB both agreed that the left turn lane could be removed. Mr. Oakley asked if he could have Brian Holley, Executive Director of the Naples Botanical Garden, speak regarding the possibility of a road expansion. Mr. Holley expressed his desire to have the road lane width expanded from the existing 10 foot to 12 foot wide lanes to accommodate the high volume of bus traffic coming to his facility. He cited FDOT regulations as the reason that he desired this. There were various discussions with MSTU advisory committee members and Mr. Halley. Advisory Committee members expressed concerns about changing the scope of the project that is now at 90% construction drawings and ready for submission to the County for review and approval. Mrs. Cochrane and Mr. Buck agreed that any new work outside the scope of this project could be accomplished as a "new project ", and perhaps installed simultaneously if the new projects were planned and permitted in a timely way. Mr. Gutierrez and Ms. Nicklos expressed concerns that stopping the project to include road lane issues that were of interest to Mr. Holley would significantly delay the completion of this project. Mr. Gutierrez advised Mr. Holley that this project began as a sidewalk (10 foot pathway — now 8 feet wide), landscape and pedestrian lighting project and that the County mandated that the four (4) foot shoulder on the west side of the road was to be removed. Mr. Buck made a motion to continue with the project as is. Seconded by Mrs. Cochrane. Mr. Oakley asked if the motion included removing the left turn lane at Thomasson Drive. And Mr. Buck and Mrs. Cochrane said that it did. Approved 5 -0. September 8. 2010 Minutes 1611 62 ' Oil Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 David Buchheit asked representatives from (ABB) and Windham Studios to discuss the landscape plan for south Bayshore Drive. There was a discussion about the landscape plan. ABB staff showed design changes to the proposed landscaping. The proposed design showed the installation of several small -scale palm trees along the west side of the pathway. These palms are slow- growing and have a shallow root ball to prevent interference with overhead power lines and underground utilities. Mr. Oakley commended them on their efforts and the committee concurred and asked that these planting plans be incorporated into the 90% plan submission to the county. Mr. Tryka, ABB, presented a set of proposed lighting plans for the Committee to review. 5. Old Business: a. David Buchheit explained that $78,125.00 of Collier County Transportation sidewalk payment in lieu funding would be transferred to the Bayshore MSTU on September 14, 2010 for use on the South Bayshore sidewalk project. 6. New Business: a. Interview Candidate for the MSTU Advisory Committee. The applicant (Robert Messmer) gave a brief introduction to committee. Mr. Oakley made a motion to recommend Robert Messmer. Second by Ms. Nicklos. Approve 5 -0. b. Elect a Vice Chair. David Buchheit explained that Conrad Willkomm was the vice chair when he resigned and asked that the Committee consider selection a new vice chair. Mr. Buck nominated Carolyn Cochrane. Second. Ms. Nicklos. Motion carried: 5 -0. c. Christmas on Bayshore. David Buchheit presented multiple options for Christmas decorations on Bayshore Drive. Mr. Buck made a motion to limit the project cost to $5,000 and for staff to investigate the amount and type of holiday material that can be purchased and to bring selections and costs back at next month's meeting. Second: Mrs. Cochrane. Approved: 5 -0. 7. Public Comments: None 8. Advisory Committee General Communications: Staff explained the September 18, 2010 meeting would require some walking around the neighborhood and briefly talked about the purpose of the meeting. Staff also handed out "Homework" in the form of the Walkable Community Study, MSTU ordinance, area map, and the past goals of the MSTU advisory committee. September 8, 2010 . Minutes 161i82 4 eT Bayshore Beautification IVISTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 The Advisory Committee agreed to meet on September 18 at 9:30 AM, and then to hold the next regular meeting on October 6, 2010 at 5:00 PM. The meeting mourned at 7:00. Approved and forwaFded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. September 8, 2010 Minutes RECEIVED 161 DEC 10 2010 THE BAY;S�Hf�ou /Gii€S�t1i�Y TRIANGLE 1 T3 r-�ennm Coyle CDlE31fta REDEVELOPMENT AGE 03ry if OMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4069 $AYSHORE DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1115 FAx 239.775.4456 BAYS HOREIGATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE MARCH 2, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Lindsey Thomas, Jill Barry, Larry Ingram, Steve Main, Peter Dvorak, Bruce Preble, Karen Beatty, and Chuck Gunther. Excused: Maurice Gutierrez. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan and Sue Trone, Project Managers. 2. Adoption of Agenda: Mr. Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Preble. Second: Mr. Dvorak. Approved 8 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes Mr. Thomas asked for any changes to the February 2, 2010 minutes. Mr. Dvorak stated that his name was left of the attendance and asked that a sentence be added to the minutes under 5b — Old Business: "Each member of the Board was asked to visit the 1991 Tamiami trail CRA owned building and return to discuss the site as a possible CRA office at a future meeting ". Motion to approve the February 2, 2010 meeting minutes as amended: Mr. Preble. Second: Ms. Barry, Approved 8 -0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Presentations: i. Linwood Avenue - Commercial Drive- Linwood Way Streetscape Concepts, Mr. Jackson introduced Ms. Gail Boorman of Boorman and Associates that was contracted to develop streetscape improvements and "conceptual" designs. Ms. Boorman presented her conceptual plans for all three streets. She addressed a few questions from the Board and audience. Mr. Thomas thanked her for her time and work. ii. Thomasson Drive- Hamilton Avenue Streetscape Concepts. Mr. Jackson introduced Mr. John Ribes of JRL Design and Mr. Jeff Curl of PJ Studios who were a joint team contracted by the Bayshore MSTU Committee to develop "conceptual" designs for these two streets. Mr. Ribes and Mr. Curl presented their conceptual design and recommended improvements, than answered questions from the Board and audience. Mr. Thomas thanked them for their time and efforts. b. Proiect Updates. Mr. Jackson advised that in the Board packages there was a projects update memo that included a HSA Scientist and Engineers report on 2068 Davis Blvd CITGO gas station the CRA has under contract for purchase. 5. Old Business: a. Request for Payment of Services. i. Mr. Jackson presented the Pizzuti Task 2 Report that included a draft rezoning application for the 17 acre site. Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to pay Pizzuti Solutions invoice in the amount of $3,500. Motion to approve Ms. Barry. Second: Ms. Beatty. Approved 8 -0. ii. Mr. Jackson presented a Q. Grady Minor invoice for Grant Writing Services in the amount of $843.75 and a quote to provide construction plan development for the Shadowlawn residential area's stormwater improvements $164,200. The construction documents are needed to bid the event &tW@jction of the improvements and needed in order to expend the $2. grant re eived March 2 2010 CRA -AB Minutes Date: Q Item 0: Copies to: 16I'3 93 from HUD DRI Grant. Motion to approve: Mr. Dvorak. Second: Mr. Gunther. Approved 8 -0. 6. New Business: a. CRA Grant Approvals: i. C -BIG 06 -2010 Davis Blvd - Commercial. Ms. Trone briefed the Board on a matching grant application: A commercial grant for to renovate the exterior and interior of the former gas station at the intersection of Davis Blvd and Airport- Pulling Road, in the amount of up to $30,000 (50% match) from the CRA for exterior work, and up to $20,000 (50% match interior — provided the full $60,000 exterior project is completed) from the CRA for interior work. Also if the exterior and interior project was completed, and additional $2,947.22 was available (no match) to cover sign /sealed architectural /engineering documents. Motion to approve Mr. Dvorak. Second. Ms. Beatty. In discussion the Board weighed the merits of the Commercial Grant process, the high risk nature of start -ups and specifically restaurants, and the impact of this business on other mom & pop businesses in the area. Approved 5 -3. Dissenting: Mr. Ingram, Mr. Preble, and Mr. Gunther. ii. SIG 04 -2010 2818 Gulfview Drive —.Residential. Ms. Trone briefed the Board on a Site Improvement Grant application: A residential grant to replace windows and doors with hurricane impact materials. The CRA provides a 33% match in the amount of not to exceed $1,094.98. Motion to approve: Mr. Gunther. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7 -1; Mr. Ingram dissenting. b. CRA Grant Fundinq FY2010 and FY2011 Grant Applications Update. Mr. Jackson informed the Advisory Board that the CRA has allocated the full $170,000 grant budget this year. He recommended that with the Board's split decisions on grant this year that staff will review, revise and /or update all CRA grants and return to the Board for review and approval. He recommend the Board pass, by motion, to not recommend any more grants this year, not increase the grant budget this year, authorize a thorough review of the grant programs to correct any administrative deviations and streamline the approval process. Motion: Mr. Gunther. Second: Ms. Beatty. Approved 7 -0; Mr. Thomas absent. c. New CRA Hire for Bayshore Beautification MSTU. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that the MSTU desired to hire a full time project manager for 3 -5 years to assist in their streetscape projects. County HR and Manager desired to have the position assigned to the CRA under the Executive Director and that the MSTU inter - government transfer funds to the CRA to fund the position. Motion to support the MSTU new hire request: Mr. Dvorak. Second: Ms. Beatty. Approved 6 -1; Mr. Ingram dissenting; Mr. Thomas absent. d. History Volunteer. Ms. Beatty advised that Ms. Bolin had volunteered to assist the CRA develop and area history for marketing, and that she had requested a Board volunteer to help her. Mr. Gunther stated that he volunteered for that work. e. Walkable Communities Survey Proposal. Mr. Jackson presented the Board with the cover sheet and executive summary of a County Transportation Division study performed in Naples Manor. With the Study, the County was able to acquire $750,000 in grant funds to install the improvements cited in the study. Mr. Jackson presented a Transportation quote to do the same study in the entire CRA boundary, and that the fee would be the staffs hourly rate based on their salaries of those involved. This in -house work would be between $7,000 and $10,000 — a significant savings over having a private consulting firm do the work. Mr. Jackson asked the Board to consider funding 1 /3`d of that that work provided the MSTU would fund 2 /3`ds of the work based on acreage of the Triangle and MSTU Bayshore areas. Motion to perform the Walkable Community Study in the Triangle area provided the Bayshore (MSTU) agreed to pay for the remaining area within the MSTU boundary: Mr. Gunther. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7 -0; Mr. Thomas absent. March 2 2010 CRA -AB Minutes 1611 83 7. Advisory Board General Communications. Ms. Beatty asked that the discussion on moving the office space to US41 be placed on the agenda. 8. Citizen Comments. Ms. Barry, Vice Chair asked if there were any comments from the audience. None. 9. Adiournment: The regular mee . g was adjourned at 7:33pm. and fqp4aKled by Lindsey Thomas, CRA -AB Chairman. March 2 2010 CRA -AB Minutes INEQ 161 1,'1B3 F, =71P. �erning y ��ayfe ^4, It3tta THE BA �y��p(�11t�,9�Ot1 +�G'AY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT t1GI :NCB COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4069 BAYSHORE DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1115 FAx 239.773.4456 BAYSHORE /GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE APRIL 6, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Lindsey Thomas, Jill Barry, Larry Ingram, Steve Main, Peter Dvorak, Maurice Gutierrez, and Karen Beatty. Excused: Bruce Preble and Chuck Gunther. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan and Sue Trone, Project Managers. 2. Adoption of Agenda: Mr. Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda; hearing none Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the agenda. Motion: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 7 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes Mr. Thomas asked for any changes to the February 2, 2010 minutes; hearing none Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the minutes. Motion: Mr. Dvorak. Second: Ms. Barry. Approved 7 -0. 4, Executive Director's Report: Project Updates. Mr. Jackson advised that in the Board packages there was a projects update memo and that the most significant information was that three Gateway Triangle streets (Calusa, Bayside and Caledonia) would get sidewalks installed in fiscal year 2013. Mr. Dvorak gave an update on the FDIC project timeline at the Bayshore Club Apartments and that Gruelle was the selected demo contractor and the project would take 6 to 8 weeks. Presentations: i. Collier Code Enforcement. Mr. Jackson introduced Ms. Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director and Ms. Patti Petrulli, Code Enforcement Supervisor. The quarterly presentation was to be given by Ms. Azure Sorrels, the CRA's new Code Enforcement Office. Ms. Sorrels presented foreclosure information in Collier County to include number of units in process, amount of money expended by banks to maintain house to Code and the status of the demolition project at Bayshore Club Apartments. In discussion the Board asked about identifying vacant houses and from the audience Mr. Dennis Zylla asked if there was a program to get banks to pay association fees. Mr. Thomas thanked the Code Enforcement staff for their faithful service to the community. ii. RWA — CRA Overlays Update. Mr. Jackson introduced Mr. Chris Scott, Mr. Patrick Vanasse and Mr. Bob Mulhere of RWA. Mr. Scott gave a synopsis of the consultants work completed to date and a timeline of the project. Mr. Ingram asked if the new overlay would take into account Burt Harris implications, to which Mr. Scott stated yes. Mr. Thomas thanked them for their time and efforts and was looking forward to the next update. Old Business: a. Request for Payment of Services. Mr. Jackson presented the Pizzuti Monthly Report for March and two invoices for $4,771.35; and two RWA invoices in the amount of $27,389.60. Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to pay Pizzuti Solutions and RWA for services rendered. Motion to approve Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 7 -0. b. 1991 Tamiami Trail East. Mr. Jackson stated that this item was discussed at the last meeting and that it was requested to be on this agenda. He added that there are two commercial businesses interested in the building and that it would M6(bCWes:the CRA April 6 2010 CRA -AB Minutes Date: Item *: Copies to: 1611 83 to lease the site instead of moving into it. He also added that the current location was the most appropriate site for the office at this time. After a round table discussion, Mr. Thomas asked Mr. Jackson to contact the bank and find out the status of this building's foreclosure and determine a cost per square foot more in line with the current market, which seems to be at $10psf. 6. New Business: a. CRA Advisory Board Applicant Interviews. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that one eligible candidate's applications were received per available seat: Ms. Beatty for Bayshore Resident; Charles Gunther for Gateway Triangle Resident. Motion by Mr. Ingram to recommend approval to the CRA Board. Second: Mr. Dvorak. Approved 7 -0. 7. Advisory Board General Communications. a. Ms. Beatty asked that the discussion on sponsoring the next CRA event include Bayshore Cultural and Performing Arts (CAPA) group. Ms. Doepke (CAPA) outlined her group's desire to sponsor and conduct an event on January 29 -30, 2011 at Sugden Regional Park. The CRA -AB was supportive and asked staff to include staff support and funding for CRA - related activities in the FY2011 budget. b. Mr. Thomas asked for the CRA -AB to consider placing signage on the 17 acres and triangle properties. Ms. Beatty asked that residential lots also be included. The Board agreed and Mr. Thomas asked staff to investigate and return with a design and a cost. 8. Citizen Comments. Ms. Karen Eldred commented on foreclosures and short sales. Adjournment: The regular was adjourned at TOOpm. Lindsey Thomas, CRA -AB Chairman. April 6 2010 CRA -AB Minutes 16 DEC 10 26ia county coy ,,, F`ic•ners THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE E13 R ���a � I.lenning-1_�� i,oyle RED EVE L0 PME14`pituPI- - ii��.�...�... COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENTAGENCY 4069 13AYSHORF DRIVE NAPLLS, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1115 FAx 239.775.4436 BAYSHOREIGATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE MAY 11, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Lindsey Thomas, Chuck Gunther, Steve Main, Peter Dvorak, Maurice Gutierrez, Bruce Preble, Larry Ingram. Excused: Jill Barry and Karen Beatty. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan Project Manager and Sue Trone Project Manager. 2. Adoption of Agenda: Chairman Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none he asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Gunther. Second: Mr. Main, Approved 7 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Chairman Thomas asked for a motion to approve the April 6, 2010 regular meeting minutes: Motion: Mr. Gunther. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 7 -0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Presentation Collier Sheriff's Office: Corporal Mike Nelson discussed the increased presence of their department in the Bayshore area. He updated the Board on their efforts to be proactive and deter crime by having additional officers on bikes and segways cruise the area and squad cars stationed at particular locations to discourage speeding. Corporal Nelson explained that the downturn in the economy and decrease in rental rates has attracted an unsavory element to the area and the Sheriff's Office will continue to be proactive and keep the area safe and crime free. i. Mr. Thomas thanked Corporal Nelson and the Sherriff's Department for the great job they are doing and the advisory board members applauded in support. 5. Proiect Updates: a. Bayshore Club Apartments: Ms. Jourdan updated the Board on the Bayshore Club Apartments Demolition and referred them to a news press release in their packets issued by the County. She further told them the Board of County Commissioners approved an agreement to proceed with demolishing the buildings with the assurance that the associated costs would be repaid by FDIC. The Board conveyed they were relieved to hear an agreement was approved to eliminate the eyesore. 6. Old Business: a. Request for Payment of Services. Ms. Jourdan presented the Pizzuti Monthly Report and two invoices in the amount $3,951.41; and two invoices from RWA in the amount of $11,026.70. Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to pay Pizzuti Solutions and RWA for services rendered. Motion to approve by Mr. Gunter. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 7 -0. b. Land Signage for CRA -owned land. Ms. Jourdan informed the Advisory Board they tasked staff to develop conceptual signage for CRA -owned land. She added staff requested quotes from three different sign companies to construct, install and permit signs on and received two responses. After a rourLdist�all��l cussion May 11, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes Date: Item t Copies to: 1611 B3 regarding the conceptual renderings in their packets, Mr. Main made a motion to approve the conceptual design and for staff to order the signs. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved: 7 -0. 7. New Business: a. Marketing Plan. Ms. Jourdan advised the Board their packets contained a conceptual Marketing Plan for the CRA area drafted by Mr. Jackson. She added that Mr. Jackson contacted a group of citizen volunteers desiring to serve as an advisory group to the CRA -AB. The group would perform community and business outreach programs and develop potential marketing functions, programs and projects to bring to the CRA -AB for approval and funding. Ms. Jourdan advised the Board there were two citizens who had volunteered to champion the project, Mr. John Hayter and Mr. Michael Sherman. Mr. Sherman was in the audience and proceeded to address the Board. i. Mr. Sherman passed out the objectives of the Marketing Team and discussed them with the Board, After some round table discussion, Mr. Thomas stated it was a good plan and Mr. Main made a motion to approve the conceptual marketing plan and tasked staff to develop a comprehensive Plan and return to the Board for approval. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved: 7 -0. b. Sweat Equity Grant. Ms. Trone presented and recommended approval of a SEG on the behalf of Mr. Luedtke in an amount of up to $1,000.00 for improvements to his driveway and mailbox. Mr. Gunther made a motion to approve. Second: Mr. Gunther. Approved: 7 -0. c. CRA Office Lease Renewal. Ms. Jourdan stated the Board directed staff renegotiate our current office space lease with Bank of Naples and Bank of Naples proposed a new rate $10.02 per square foot for a term of Twenty Four Months with an option for an additional year. Mr. Main made a motion to accept the terms of the lease and directed staff to forward the lease to the CRA Board for execution after review and approval by the CAO. Second: Mr. Dvorak. Approved 7 -0. d. Sion Permit for 1911 E. Tamiami Trail: Ms. Jourdan informed the Board that the tenant at 1911 E. Tamiami Trail requested authorization to erect a sign in accordance with applicable laws, ordinances and requirements. Mr. Gunther made a motion to approve the sign and for the Director to sign the required authorization form. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved: 7 -0. e. Proposed Lease Offer for 1991 Tamiami Trail E: Ms. Jourdan informed the Board that UGL Global Services submitted a proposal to rent a CRA owned building for $1500.00 a month. Mr. Preble made a motion to direct staff to negotiate a more favorable lease with UGL Global Services and return with new lease terms to the Board. Second: Mr. Gunther. Approved: 7 -0. f. Offer to Purchase Mobile Home Lot: Ms. Jourdan informed the Board that a mobile home located at 3069 Lunar St., was offered to the CRA for purchase in the amount of $38,900. After round table discussion, Mr. Thomas made a motion for staff to research the market and bring back more information to the next meeting. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved: 7 -0. g. County e-mail: Ms. Jourdan informed the Board there was a memo in their packet regarding their county e-mail accounts for their review. 8. Citizen Comments. Mr. Thomas asked if there were any comments from the audience and none were noted. 9. Adjournment: The regular meeting was adjourned at 6:56 pm. and fopfiarWd by Lindsey Thomas, CRA -AB Chairman. May 11, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes qFCE1VEZ) 161 DEC 10 2010 C nn�� QQmmissioners THE BA- 39- 90�f�WP' ? ATEWAY TRIANGLE � 1a'a 1 B3 rjo v lenning ,o!lle REDEVELQPMEN.i0IA AENrt / OMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4069 BANSHORE DR[VE NAPLES, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1115 FAx 239.775.4456 BAYSHORE /GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE JUNE 8, 2810 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Lindsey Thomas, Chuck Gunther, Steve Main, Peter Dvorak, Jill Barry, Karen Beatty, Maurice Gutierrez, and Larry Ingram. Excused: Bruce Preble. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan, Sue Trone and David Buchheit Project Managers and Ashley Caserta, Grants Coordinator. 2. Adoption of Agenda: Chairman Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none he asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Ms. Barry, Second: Mr. Main. Approved 8 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Chairman Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the May 11, 2010 minutes. Mr. Thomas asked that the minutes reflect that the Advisory Board had approved a summer recess schedule. Motion to approve the May 11, 2010 regular meeting minutes as amended: Motion: Mr. Gunther. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 8 -0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Project Updates: Mr. Jackson stated that all the project updates for the month were in the first Board memo and that if anyone wished more information to please ask. Mr. Jackson then introduced the two new CRA employees: Mr. David Buchheit, to serve as MSTU Project Manager; and Ms. Ashley Caserta to serve as CRA Grants Coordinator. b. MSTU Beautification Master Plan. Mr. Gutierrez gave the Board an update on the MSTU's activities which included a MSTU - funded Master Plan for the Advisory Committee. 5. Old Business: a. Request for Payment of Services. Mr. Jackson presented Pizzuti Monthly Report invoices from the CRA's contractors. Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to pay for services rendered. Motion to approve by Mr. Dvorak. Second: Ms. Beatty. Approved 8 -0. b. 2068 Davis Blvd Purchase. Ms. Jourdan informed the Advisory Board that the seller of the min - triangle site would not be able to deliver a FDEP No Further Action report on the site due to the contamination that existed on and off -site. She recommended the CRA -AB recommend to the CRA Board that they terminate the purchase agreement and repay 5/3 Bank the $1.114M held in the CRA Trust Fund for that purchase. Motion Mr. Ingram. Second: Ms. Beatty. Approved: 8 -0. 6. New Business: a. FY2011 Budget & CRA/MSTU Property Values. Mr. Jackson advised the Board of the Collier Property Appraiser's June 2010 property values for the CRA and MSTU areas. He also outlined the projected amount of TIF the CRA would receive in the next fiscal year. b. Mobile Home Lot Offers to Purchase. Mr. Jackson outlined tW shome lots that were presented to staff as potential CRA acquisition sites. a s1 a detailed in June 8, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes Date: Item: Copies to: 1611 B3 the Board's memo had been retracted by the owner. The other site was still offered in the amount of $38,900. Mr. Gunther made a motion to decline the offer. Second: Mr. Ingram. Approved: 8 -0. c. Triangle Streetscape Guidelines for CRA Overlay. Ms. Trone detailed the MSTU's Master Plan and streetscape guidelines being developed and that it made sense for the CRA to have similar guidelines for the Triangle area to go into the CRA overlays. The MSTU's contractor, JRL Design, made and initial quote of $48,600 and Staff negotiated a contractual amount of $27,400. Motion by Mr. Main to accept the terms of the scope of work. Second: Ms. Barry. Approved 8 -0. d. FY2011 TIF Grants. Ms. Trone reviewed the proposed changes to the existing CRA TIF Grant Programs that had been reviewed by the County Attorney and asked for CRA -AB approval to submit to the CRA Board. Motion to submit to the CRA Board, Ms Barry. Second: Mr. Gunther. Approved: 8 -0. e. FY2011 Artists' Incentive. Ms. Trone outlined a proposed set of artists' incentive to work hand -in -hand with the CRA's TIF Grants and conceptual Cultural District boundaries. After some discussion by the Advisory Board, motion to approve and forward to the CRA Board provided the County Attorney's review was satisfactory by Mr. Dvorak. Second: Mr. Gunther. Approved: 8 -0. 7. Citizen Comments. Mr. Thomas asked if there were any comments from the audience and none were noted. 8. Board Communications: Mr. Ingram made a motion for all future invoices for payment that all the back -up be provided to the Board for thorough review prior to approval. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. After Board discussion motion failed 3 -5 (Barry, Dvorak, Thomas, Beatty and Main against). Motion by Mr. Main to have a copy of invoice back -up material available to the Board at the meeting. Second Mr. Ingram. In discussion Mr. Main pointed out that every Board member receives an electronic and hard copy the Friday before the meeting, and if a Board member has a question they can visit the CRA's financial files ahead of time. Approved 8 -0. 9. Adjournment: The regula ee ing was adjourned at 7:30pm. by Lindsey Thomas, CRA -AB Chairman. June 8, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes w N 161 DEC 10 2�d1� +3c,ard of County Cor, ,.;s ;icners THE BAYSHORE /GATEWAY TRIANGLE j'B}B -ienning T RED EVELOPMEN�;p1F aN"i( — OMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT .AGENCY 4069 BAY51f0RE DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1113 FAx 239.775.4456 BAYSHORE /GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE OCTOBERS, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Vive Chair Ms. Barry at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Jill Barry, Chuck Gunther, Steve Main, Peter Dvorak, Bruce Preble, Karen Beatty, Maurice Gutierrez, and Larry Ingram. Excused: Lindsey Thomas. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, and Ashley Caserta, Grants Coordinator. 2. Adoption of Agenda: Vice Chair Barry asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none, she asked for a motion to approve the agenda as advertised: Motion: Mr. Main. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 8 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Vice Chair Barry asked if there were any additions or corrections to the September 7, 2010 minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 8 -0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Project Updates. Mr. Jackson stated that all the project updates for the month were in the first Board memo and that if anyone wished more information to please ask. b. Mr. Jackson asked Ms Jourdan to give an update on south Bayshore Drive Project and the CRA's Residential RFP. 5. Old Business: a. Request for Payment of Services — CRA Contracts. Mr. Jackson presented monthly invoices from CRA contractors: RWA (CRA Overlays) in the amount of $4,047; Q. Grady Minor (Triangle Tertiary Stormwater Construction Plans) in the amount of $5,460; HSA Engineers & Scientists (Bevin's Welding Shop parcel clean -up) in the amounts of $353.67 and $5,251; Pizzuti Solutions (17 Acre Mixed Use Rezone) in the amounts of $18,680, $5,250, $30,000 and $624.47; and JRL (Triangle Streetscape Design) in the amount of $4,412. Motion to pay for services rendered by Mr. Dvorak. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 8 -0. 6. New Business: CRA TIF Grant Approvals. Mr. Jackson introduced Ms. Caserta, Grants Coordinator, to present five CRA TIF Grant applications. i. C -BIG 01 -2011. 360 Restaurant at 2891 Bayview Drive in the amount of $30,000 for exterior improvements and up to $20,000 for interior improvements provided the exterior improvement cap is met. Motion to forward the CRA Board pending County Attorney approval: Mr. Dvorak. Second: Ms. Beatty. In discussion several Board members asked the applicant, Ms. Maddox, about the restaurant operations. Mr. Ingram asked what her mortgage was. Approved 8 -0. ii. C -BIG 02 -2011. Haul-It-All commercial business at 4097 Bayshore Drive in the amount of $30,000 for exterior improvements. Motion to forward the CRA Board pending County Attorney approval: Mr. Main. Second: Ms. Beatty. In discussion Mr. Ingram asked what his mortgage was. Approved 8 -0. iii. C -BIG 03 -2011. K -Star LLC commercial business at 2479 Kirkwood Avenue in the amount of $15,715 for exterior improvements. Motion to forward the CRA October 5, 2010 CRA. -AB Minutes Misc. Corres: Date: Item #: Copies to: 1611 83 Board pending County Attorney approval: Mr. Gunther. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7 -1. Mr. Ingram against. iv. C -BIG 04 -2011. Bayshore Lofts commercial business at 3570 Bayshore Drive in the amount of $1,498 for exterior improvements. Motion to forward the CRA Board pending County Attorney approval: Mr. Dvorak. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 8 -0. v. SIG 01 -2011. Richard & Michele Jarvis residential property in the amount of $8,000. Motion to forward the CRA Board pending County Attorney approval: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7 -1. Mr. Ingram against. 7. Board Communications: None 8. Citizen Comments. Ms. Barry asked if there were any comments from the audience and Mr. Cugno stated that he wanted the Board to know that the CRA staff, specifically Ms. Caserta, was extremely helpful in completing the grant applications and that she should be commended. Ms. Barry stated that she was pleased to hear that the citizens were happy with the process. 9. Adjournment: The regular eting as adjourned at 6:23pm. �d and ed by Lindsey Thomas, CRA -AB Chairman. October 5, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes r:�F--CEIVED 161 DEC 10 2010 T H E R A Vri,3�trr1n41Ci�71pity(14s T R I A N G L E 3 y Fiala (H��ee�`ntt''nQQing REDEVF_,L0PM EN"t"iiq E COleta �_ OMMUNITY EDEVELOPMENT "� GEN Y 4069 .78AY5110RE DRi%,E NAPLEs, FL 34112 P110NE 239.643.1115 FAX 239.773.4456 BAYSHORE /GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL_ ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 2, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Lindsey Thomas, Jill Barry, Chuck Gunther, Steve Main, Bruce Preble, Karen Beatty, Maurice Gutierrez, and Larry Ingram. Arrived at 6:10: Peter Dvorak. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Sue Trone, Project Manager, and Ashley Caserta, Grants Coordinator. 2. Adoption of Agenda: Chairman Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none, he asked for a motion to approve the agenda as advertised: Motion: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 8 -0; Mr. Dvorak absent. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Chairman Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the October 5, 2010 minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Preble, Second: Ms. Barry. Approved 8 -0; Mr. Dvorak absent. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Proiect Updates. Mr. Jackson stated that all the project updates for the month were in the first Board memo and that if anyone wished more information to please ask. b. Mr. Jackson pointed out several reports contained within the Project Updates memo that included an e-mail from Code Enforcement; a proposed Canal Owners' Booklet; and the FY2011 CRA Budget. 5. Old Business: a. Request for Payment of Services — CRA Contracts. Mr. Jackson presented monthly invoices from CRA contractors: Q. Grady Minor (Triangle Tertiary Stormwater Construction Plans) in the amount of $2,193.25; HSA Engineers & Scientists (Bevin's Welding Shop parcel clean -up) in the amounts of $33939.25; and JRL (Triangle Streetscape Design) in the amount of $2,506.00. Motion to pay for services rendered by Ms. Barry. Second: Ms. Beatty. Approved 8 -0; Mr. Dvorak absent. b. Marketing Team Report. Mr. Jackson gave the Board a summary of a short working committee meeting between CRA staff, Chairman Thomas and several members of the CRA's volunteer Marketing Team (Pat Utter, Mike Sherman and John Hayter). The group agreed that of the information and options provided in the Marketing Team's summer report, that there were three items that should be addressed soon. Not in order of priority was Bayshore Drive access to Sugden Regional Park, area branding, and public way - finding signage. Mr. Thomas gave specific points of interest on each of the topics and asked for Board consensus to task CRA & MSTU staff to work with the Marketing Team and return with options, recommendations and hopefully proposals. The Board agreed. 6. New Business: a. CRA TIF Grant Approvals. Mr. Jackson introduced Ms. Caserta, Grants Coordinator, to present a CRA TIF Grant application: SSG 01 -2011. Mr. and Mrs. am Marsh's rsC. illi es: November 2, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes Retie: Item t Copies to: M 1611 83 application for 2772 and 2736 Riverview Drive in the amount of $9,725.00 ($4,862.50 each parcel) for shoreline stabilization improvements. Motion to forward the CRA Board pending County Attorney approval: Ms. Beatty. Second: Ms. Barry. Approved 9 -0. b. _Quote for Vegetation Removal Services. Mr. Jackson outlined the need to maintain the vacant 17 acre parcel owned by the CRA. Staff has contracted a lot mower to keep the grass height in compliance with Codes; however the underbrush and other miscellaneous vegetation has grown up to the fence line the separates the CRA parcel from the mobile homes on Jeepers Drive. He acquired a quote for services to remove the overgrown vegetation and create a clear area to buffer the mobile homes in case of wildfire. The written quote is from Ground Zero Landscape Services in the amount of $2,300 for 2 /3rds of the fence line and an additional $200 to $599 (time and materials) to complete the work along the fence line the borders the pond. Motion to approve Mr. Dvorak. Second: Ms. Beatty. Approved 9 -0. c. Quote for Environmental Engineering Services. Mr. Jackson delivered a quote from HSA Engineers and Scientists in the amount of not to exceed $5,000 (time and materials) to review previous Phase 1 & 2 documents of work completed on the 17 acre site. The previous Phase 2 work made some recommendations that staff questioned and decided in the best interest of the CRA that they obtain a second opinion. Motion to approve HSA's quote, provided it was a not to exceed dollar amount, in the amount of $5,000: Mr. Ingram. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 9 -0. 7. Board Communications: Mr. Jackson asked the Chairman if he could add a few item for Board consideration. He handed out the CRA's 2010 Goals and asked the members to review them and at the December meeting to decide if the Board wished to conduct another Goals review or continue with those on record. Secondly he adviser that at the December meeting, the Board selects or retains Board Officers for the following calendar year, 2011. 8. Citizen Comments. Mr. John Hayter complimented the CRA -AB for their expeditious and efficient conduct of their business meeting. Mr. Chris Wrenn, Pizzuti Solutions, introduced himself and expressed his intent to keep the 17 acre site's rezoning application moving forward and that if anyone had any questions, he would gladly answer them. 9. Adioumment: The regu eting was adjourned at 6:30pm. �aa-ncVbprarded by Lindsey Thomas, CRA -AB Chairman. November 2, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes f 161 1 93 JAN 20 11 Fiala JAN Hiller ggeldof O I uml� siorl'rs Hennin THE BAYSHO J�AT EWe1Y TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT OA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGEr-f4efta 4069 BAYSHORE DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1115 FAX 239.775.4456 BAYSHORElGATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 7, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Lindsey Thomas, Jill Barry, Steve Main, Bruce Preble, Maurice Gutierrez, and Larry Ingram. Excused absence: Peter Dvorak, Karen Beatty, and Chuck Gunther. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director; Sue Trone and Jean Jourdan, Project Managers. 2. Adoption of Agenda: Chairman Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none, he asked for a motion to approve the agenda as advertised: Motion: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 6 -0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Chairman Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the November 2, 2010 minutes. Mr. Jackson pointed out that there were two corrections: First spelling of Ms Barry's name under Item 6a, and addition to the motion in Item 6c that it was made by Mr. Ingram. Motion to approve the minutes with changes: Mr. Preble. Second: Ms. Barry. Approved 8 -0; Mr. Dvorak absent. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Project Updates. Mr. Jackson stated that all the project updates for the month were in the first Board memo and that if anyone wished more information to please ask. b. Mr. Jackson pointed out several reports contained within the Project Updates memo that included a report from HSA Engineering on the status of the latest well testing on 4315 Bayshore Drive, and that there was a CRA -AB and CRA Board Workshop from 9am to 1lam on January 121h at the Government Center. c. CRA Goals for calendar year 2011 were discussed by the Board and Motion by Mr. Thomas to approve the 2010 Goals for 2011 with a change to Objective 1.2 to say work in harmony with the Naples Botanical Garden." Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 6 -0. d. Mr. Jackson stated that the CRA Redevelopment Plan (Master Plan) is now 11 years old and significant changes have occurred in the area, and that the Plan does not accurately reflect the desires and objectives of the community. As such he proposed to advertise and RFP for a consultant to assist the community update the Plan. The Board agreed for him to proceed. e. Ms. Doepke, Bayshore CAPA gave a presentation and update on the CRA -CAPA Festival. She noted that Fifth -Third Bank made a large donation to CAPA and that the CAPA Board decided to name the event the Fifth -Third Bank Bayshore Festival of the Arts. 5. Old Business: a. Request for Payment of Services — CRA Contracts. Mr. Jackson presented monthly invoices from CRA contractors: Q. Grady Minor (Triangle Tertiary Stormwater Construction Plans) in the amount of $2,193.25; HSA Engineers & Scientists (Bevin's Welding Shop parcel clean -up) in the amount of $2,887.28; RWA (CRA Overlays Update) in the amount of $6,749.00; Pizzuti Solution 17 Acre Parcel Rezone) in the amount of $26,150.00) and Ground Zero Lanh -01KA land maintenance for code compliance) in the amount of $2,800.Q0. Motion by Mr. Date: December 7, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes Item #: 1611 B3 Thomas to pay for services rendered, and authorize the CRA Director to acquire quotes to repair the fence bordering the northern boundary of the Jeepers Drives homes, not to exceed $2,000.00. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 6 -0. 6. New Business: a. CRA TIF Grant Approvals. Ms Trone, Project Manager, presented a CRA TIF Grant application: C -BIG 05 -2011: BE Home Realty, LLC application for 1712 Commercial Drive in the amount of $50,000.00 for internal and external commercial upgrades to a 10,000sf warehouse for the newly locating medical - related business. Motion to forward the CRA Board pending County Attorney approval: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Main. In discussion Mr. Thomas asked about the limited parking on site, and the applicant is going to lease a vacant parking lot across the street. Mr. Ingram asked about landscaping along Commercial Drive and the vacant parking lot fence and run -down look. The applicant stated that he is a tenant and that would be the responsibility of the lot's owner and that he would make improvements if he was able to acquire the site. Approved 5 -1. Mr. Ingram against. b. Election of CRA Advisory Board Officers for 2011. Mr. Thomas called for nominations from the floor. Ms. Barry nominated Mr. Thomas for Chairman. Mr. Main nominated Ms. Barry for Vice Chair. Mr. Thomas asked if there were any other nominations, hearing none, he closed the nominations and asked for a motion. Motion to approve nominations: Mr. Main. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 6 -0. c. CRA Executive Director Annual Performance Review. Mr. Jackson stated that in the Board memo, there was a CRA Resolution outlining the process to evaluate the CRA's executive directors. He directed the Board's attention to a letter drafted by Chairman Thomas for the Board to review and approve to forward to the CRA Board when they complete the Director's annual review. Mr. Thomas asked if there was any comment or input to the letter's content. Mr. Preble asked about the letterhead with Commissioner Halas on instead of Commissioner -elect Hiller. Mr. Jackson stated that she had not been sworn in yet. Motion to approve and forward the Chairman's letter to the CRA Board: Mr. Main. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 6 -0. Board Communications: Mr. Thomas expressed his congratulations to Mr. Gutierrez for his selection as the BCC November Advisory Committee Member for November 2010. The Board applauded his selection. Mr. Ingram expressed his desire to have a future TIG Grant requirement that the parcel will be brought up to code before any funding is authorized. Mr. Thomas asked Mr. Jackson about the staff's work on the three Marketing Team suggested action stated at last month's meeting. Mr. Jackson stated that the pathway clearing work was 80% complete, the signage work would be reviewed and completed when the Bayshore Beautification MSTU completed their Master Plan work as that was where the guidance and funding would come from, and as for "branding" the area, he had not proceeded with conducting any type of community outreach or survey to receive input. 8. Citizen Comments. Mr. John Hayter and Mr. Mike Sherman commented on marketing and branding. Mr. Hayter stated that everything falls under the branding theme. Mr. Jackson concurred; however made it clear that to re -brand an area, the general public (residents, business owners and commercial property owners) needed to be a part of that process because whenever a "few" try to change something that is part of the "many ", there is great controversy — that can be avoided. Mr. Hayter stated that he understood. 9. Adiournment: The regular niael:ingjwas adjourned at 6:49pm. Lindsey Thomas, CRA -AB Chairman. December 7, 2010 CRA -AB Minutes Collier Coun 1611 64 Government Communication & Customer Relations Department 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 September 7, 2010 I 11 Contact: 239 - 252 -8848 www.colliergov.net www.twitter.com /CollierPIO www.facebook.com /CollierGov www.youtube.com /CollierGov FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING COLLIER COUNTY CITIZEN CORPS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Citizen Corps Advisory Committee will hold a public meeting on Wednesday, September I P at 3 p.m. in the 3rd floor Policy Room at the James V. Mudd Emergency Services Center, located at 8075 Lely Cultural Parkway in Naples. In regard to the public meeting: All interested parties are invited to attend, and to register to speak and to submit their objections, if any, in writing, to the board /committee prior to the meeting if applicable. All registered public speakers will be limited to three minutes unless permission for additional time is granted by the chairman. Collier County Ordinance No. 2004 -05 requires that all lobbyists shall, before engaging in any lobbying activities (including, but not limited to, addressing the Board of County Commissioners, an advisory board or quasi - judicial board), register with the Clerk to the Board at the Board Minutes and Records Department. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. For more information, call Judy Scribner at (239) 252 -3600. -End- 161 1 B4 RECEIVED Collier County OCT 16 1010 Citizen Corp Advisory Committee Board of Courp Commissioners September 15, 2010 FIL/ a1a Voting Members Present: Russell Rainey, C.E.R.T. 1481as Heanwin9 Jerry Sanford, CC Fire Chief's Assn. Coyle �- Lt. Mike Jones, CC Sheriff's Office Dr. Joseph Neiween, Medical Reserve CorpColetta Doug Porter, Naples Civil Air Patrol Jim vonRinteln, American Red Cross Walter Jaskiewicz, Coast Guard Auxiliary Reg Buxton, Chamber of Commerce Peggy Lauzon, R.S.V.P. James Elson, CC Veterans Council Voting Members Absent: Christopher Nind, Salvation Army Expert Consultants Present: Judy Scribner, CC Emergency Mgmt Greg Speers, East Naples Fire District Meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance recited and roll call taken. Approval of Minutes Motion to accept the minutes of the August 25, 2010 meeting. Approved unanimously. Threat Update Per Lt. Jones. There are no changes to the current threat situation- Elevated (Yellow) at the National Level and all to remain vigilant. New Business Nominations for 2011. Chairman, Vice Chairman and Secretary to be submitted and voted upon in November 2010. An e -mail will be sent out to all voting members. Terms to expire on November 5, 2010 for Doug Porter, Russ Rainey and Jim Elson. They all have been informed of the reapplication process. Intro New Coordinator Mr. Josh Roberts was introduced as the new CC Emergency Management Coordinator. He welcomed the opportunity to work and help us move forward into the future. mim 118; adr CC - _. 1611 B4 Old Business Medical Alert Update Dr. Neiween reports that the Flu season so far has been quiet. This year only ONE shot is required as both the flu and virus injections have been combined. An MRC course Part 2 will be offered on Saturday, December 4th at the South Regional Library. Hurricane Update Rick advised that the current (2) category 4 Hurricanes pose no threat to us for the next ten days. There have been 11 storms so far this year. POD Training Judy is looking into when the training will be taught in 4 hours, 8 hours or 2 day segments. Other Jim Elson reported that 5 new flag poles have been placed in the recently renovated Cambier Park in the City. The annual Veterans Day remembrance ceremony will take place on Thursday, November 11th at 10:30 a.m. at Cambier Park. In addition, Jim sadly reported the death of Marine Lance Corporal L.C. Roberts the 7th war casualty from Naples. Judy passed out a CERT managers list for us to make corrections. Doug Porter reported that the Naples CAP will be offering a search and rescue class at the CAP in January 2011. Greg Speers reported that a CERT training class will be conducted on September 15th at the CAP hanger with Triage and first aid being the courses taught. Jerry Sanford reported on the planned arrival on Saturday, September 25th of 4 PINK Fire Trucks in conjunction with the Pink Heals Tour that raises money for Breast Cancer Research. Jim vonRinteln was welcomed aboard as the new American Red Cross Chairman and he expressed his thanks to again join the Citizen Corp. He announced that the Red Cross is holding a fund raiser called "Red, White & Brew" on Tuesday, November 10th at the Hilton Hotel from 5:00 pm to 7:30 p.m. with the proceeds to help the Stockings for the Troops campaign. Walt announced that the Coast Guard would be offering a search and rescue course on Sept 28th from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at 14575 Collier Blvd, Naples. The course is free. Greg Speers reports that on Saturday, October 2 °a from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. a Fire Prevention Day will take place in Fleishman's park with various fire districts participating in the event. Next Meeting/Adjourn Next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 20th at 3:00 p.m. at the EOC. Please get any agenda items to Judy Scribner before then. Meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m. Minutes submitted by Jerry Sanford for appr Approved by Acting Chair: e Russell Raine at medics reservE corps The Public Depends On You Get Trained with the Florida Bureau of Radiation Control 1611 94 ' Course: Radiation Response Volunteer Corps (RRVC) Training Date: Saturday, December 4, 2010 Time: 8:30 - 4:30 (Lunch on your own) Location: South Regional Library 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway Naples, FL 34113 Register now at www.myfloridaeh.com /radiation And click on "RRVC" course registration page • This training is for those volunteers who are willing to assist with population monitoring following a large scale radiological event, such as a detonation of a "dirty" bomb or other radiological dispersal device. • Learn about radiation, radiation protection, detection, contamination and removal • Continuing Education Credit available Target Audience: Medical Reserve Corps (MRC), Red Cross, CERT and other interested Volunteers sponsored by the Collier County Medical Reserve Corps Please call Kathleen Marr @ the Collier County Health Department for questions Phone # 252 -6874 1611, ' B4 Citizen Corps Advisory Committee Agenda September 15, 2010 3:00 Pledge of Allegiance Chairman - Opening Remarks - Roll Call Sheriff s Office Medical Reserve Fire Chiefs CERT USCGA Red Cross Veterans Council RSVP Salvation Army Chamber of Commerce CAP EMS EM Health Dept Medical Examiner City of Naples Everglades City Neighborhood Watch PRMC NCH City of Marco Island 3:05 Approval of Minutes Chairman 3:10 Threat Update CCSO 3:15 3:30 New Business Chairman Nominations for 2011 Chairman (look ahead) Intro of new Coordinator EM 3:35 Old Business Chairman Flu/Dengue Fever Update DOH Hurricane /Weather Update EM Coordinator Search EM POD training 4:00 Next Meeting/Adjourn Chairman Wed. Oct 20, 2010 16 11 r, Collier County Government Communication & Customer Relations Department 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 October 13, 2010 Contact: 239 - 252 -8848 www.colliergov.net www.twitter.com /CollierPIO www.facebook.com /CollierGov www.youtube.com /CollierGov FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING COLLIER COUNTY CITIZEN CORPS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2010 Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Citizen Corps Advisory Committee will hold a public meeting on Wednesday, October 2e at 3 p.m. in the 3rd floor Policy Room at the James V. Mudd Emergency Services Center, located at 8075 Lely Cultural Parkway in Naples. In regard to the public meeting: All interested parties are invited to attend, and to register to speak and to submit their objections, if any, in writing, to the board /committee prior to the meeting if applicable. All registered public speakers will be limited to three minutes unless permission for additional time is granted by the chairman. Collier County Ordinance No. 2004 -05 requires that all lobbyists shall, before engaging in any lobbying activities (including, but not limited to, addressing the Board of County Commissioners, an advisory board or quasi - judicial board), register with the Clerk to the Board at the Board Minutes and Records Department. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. For more information, call Judy Scribner at (239) 252 -3600. -End- B 4 ""21' 16 1 V Hiller Henning , Coyle �' Colette 3 2011 Collier County :gr�?missionCitizen Corp Advisory Committee October 20, 2010 Voting Members Present: Voting Members Absent: Expert Consultants Present: Russell Rainey, C.E.R.T. Reg Buxton, Chamber of Commerce Jerry Sanford, CC Fire Chief's Assn. Christopher Nind, Salvation Army Jim vonRinteln, American Red Cross Doug Porter, Naples Civil Air Patrol Lt. Mike Jones, CC Sheriff's Office Dr. Joseph Neiween, MRC Peggy Lauzon, R.S.V.P. Barbara Jaskiewicz, Coast Guard Aux. (for Walter Jaskiewicz) Andrea Kulon, CC Veterans Council (for Jim Elson) Walt Jaskiewicz (Excused) Jim Elson (Excused) Judy Scribner, CCEM Greg Speer, East Naples Fire District Meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance recited and roll call taken. Approval of Minutes Motion to accept the minutes of the September 15, 2010 meeting. Approved unanimously. Threat Update Per Lt. Jones, there are no changes to the current threat level in the US. Yellow, elevated. However, the threat level on flights in France and Germany is Orange or High. Weather update Rick Zyvoloski reports that a weather system is a current threat to Central America and is not a threat to us. The disturbance is headed to the Pacific. All other areas in the Caribbean are quiet. New Business Nominations for 2011. Chairman, Russ Rainey, Vice Chairman, Reg Buxton, and Secretary Jerry Sanford. Are there any additional names to these seats. There were none. The ins were closed and will be voted upon at the next meeting on November 17, 2010. Date: Item t Copies to: 1611'B4 Pod training. Judy Scribner reports that the State of Florida is offering an 8 -hour, 12 -hour or 2- day course on Pod management and training. This is an excellent training tool for our CERT teams to help after an event if they are not going to be used in their areas. She will further discuss the Pod training at the CERT managers meeting on October 28, 2010. We will need to decide which hourly course to apply for, plus a date, time and location. The course is FREE. Most likely, January 2011 with a minimum of 35 and a maximum of 65 people. A Traffic Control Class will be given on Saturday, November 13, 2010 at Golden Gate Fire Station 71 from 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon and given by Golden Gate Fire Battalion Chief Bill Moyer. Our CERT members are invited to attend the course. A CERT Managers meeting hosted by Judy Scribner will be held on Thursday, October 28th at 11:00 a.m. at the EOC. New training ideas for CERT will be discussed. Signatures. The Manager of the BCC Ian Mitchell has e- mailed Judy regarding the attendance requirement at our Citizen Corp meetings. No more than 2 unexcused absences in a row are allowed and some people are not showing up for 4 to 5 months in a row. An excused absence is a call to Judy. Other advisory boards meet quarterly. If Judy is not notified it is an UNEXCUSED absence. Kindly e -mail her if you cannot attend. Do we need to meet every month. Jerry Sanford made a motion to not meet this December. Motion approved. We will discuss this item at our January meeting as to how often we will meet in 2011. Judy passed out an affidavit regarding a Sunshine Law & Ethics workshop on October 14th that was shown on cable Channel 97 or viewed it on a DVD. All attending members signed. Judy announced that a Coordinator position is still open, and a female candidate has been considered but has not been hired. The Reference Resource Guide has been worked on for over a year and is a bigger job than we thought. Judy will be meeting with a person from Avow Hospice to gain information from her that will assist us in preparing the guide. GOING AROUND THE ROOM Andrea Kulon reports that The Collier County Veterans Assn will hold the annual Veteran's Day Ceremony on Thursday, November 11'h at 10:00 a.m. at Cambier Park in the City of Naples. All are invited to attend. Jim vonRinteln from the Red Cross announced that the Red Cross is hosting a "Red White & Brew" fund raising event on Wednesday, November 10th starting at 5:00 p.m. at the Hilton Naples Hotel that will benefit our troops overseas and the Red Cross. Tickets are $50.00 each and can be obtained from Jim. Another event for the Red Cross is a fund raiser at Stan's in Goodland on Sunday November 14th. All are welcome. Chris Nind from the Salvation Army announced that their fund raising Red Kettle campaign begins on Nov�'mber 19th and runs through December 24th. Last season was the most successful year they ever had in Collier County. Over 2,000 people per month ask for help. ■ Jerry Sanford gave an update on the Freedom Memorial progress and happily announced that purchased bricks have been placed in the walkway that surrounds the memorial flag and a small sample of Granite placed on the flag. In addition, he spoke about the Susan G Komen 3 day (60) miles walk (20 miles per day) for breast cancer he recently completed with his two daughters in Philadelphia. Over 2,200 walkers raised over $5.7 million dollars that weekend. Medical Reserve Corp. Dr. Neiween reported a few cases of West Nile virus have been reported in Collier County, with one death from the disease. He distributed fliers concerning seasonal influenza and pneumonia and vaccination for prevention. Everyone should be vaccinated against the flu, especially the very young and elderly. People over 65, immune compromised individuals under 65, and people under 65 with chronic diseases should be vaccinated against pneumonia. Peggy Lauzon (RSVP) announced that the director of RSVP, Mr. Brian Kelly is retiring. No replacement has been named. Greg Speers, East Naples Fire reports that his CERT class to the Civil Air Patrol folks (23) have completed the training in September and graduated. Russ Rainey reported that the Marco Island CERT team has trained 25 City of Naples employees in the CERT program. Rick Zyvoloski reports that the Local Mitigation Committee met recently, had elections at the meeting electing Victor Hill as Chairman and Reg Buxton as Vice Chairman. Reg Buxton announced that there will be a salute to retiring Collier County Commissioner Frank Halas on November 12, 2010 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Collier County Museum. Next Meeting/ Adjourn Next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, November 17, 2010 at 3:00 p.m. at the EOC. Please get any agenda items to Judy Scribner before then. Meeting was adjourned at 3:55 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by Jerry Sanford for approval. Approved by Russell Rainey, Chairman 6ate 1611 B4 Citizen Corps Advisory Committee Agenda October 20, 2010 3:00 Pledge of Allegiance Chairman - Opening Remarks - Roll Call Sheriff's Office MRC Fire Chiefs CERT USCGA Red Cross Veterans Council RSVP Salvation Army Chamber of Commerce CAP EMS EM Health Dept Medical Examiner City of Naples Everglades City Neighborhood Watch PRMC NCH City of Marco Island 3:05 Approval of Minutes Chairman 3:10 Threat Update CCSO 3:15 Weather update EM 3:30 New Business Chairman Nominations for offices(election in Nov) POD Training EM Attendance CERT meeting EM Signature confirming DVD receipt EM 3:35 Old Business Chairman Coordinator position update EM Meeting dates Chairman 4:00 Next Meeting/Adjourn Chairman 1611 84 " FLU Vaccine ... $25 PNEUMONIA Vaccine... $40.00 The Seasonal Flu vaccine is prepared for the viruses expected to be present for the 2010 / 2011 Flu season. This includes the H1N1 virus. Only one dose is required for adults each year. The Pneumonia vaccination is one dose given at age 65 or older. A booster may be advisable for certain high -risk individuals after five years. Check with your physician! No prescription is necessary if you are age 65 +, and this is your first Pneumonia vaccination. Pneumonia vaccinations may also be given to those with respiratory or other health issues. Please check our website for more information. Medicare Part B and Medicare Advantage Plans are accepted. Please bring your card with you. Sorry, no billing to Medicare HMO's. If you have private insurance, please bring your insurance card and photo Id. We may be able to bill your health insurance for services. NEED MORE INFORMATION? Call the Flu Hotline: 239 - 252 -8212 or check the website at WWW.Collierhealthdept.org CADocuments and Settings \EvensRJ \Desktop \Paula \Flu 10 11 vaccination Community Sites 2010 2011- English 2.000 1611 84 FOR PERSONS INTERESTED IN A FIRST TIME PNEUMONIA SHOT FIRST TIME PNEUMONIA SHOT: The Collier County Health Department (CCHD) has expanded the opportunity to receive a first time pneumonia vaccination. This expansion is based on the 2009 recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). It is recommended that for both persons 65 years or older with no or unknown prior receipt of pneumonia vaccine AND, now, those 2 years to 64 years who have the following health related issues and no or unknown prior pneumonia shot, receive a pneumonia vaccination: cigarette smoker chronic cardiovascular disease (e.g., congestive heart failure, cardiomyopathies). chronic pulmonary disease (e.g., chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, asthma) diabetes, alcoholism, chronic liver disease (cirrosis), or cerebrospinal fluid leaks functional or anatomic asplenia (e.g., sickle cell disease, splenectomy) immunocompromising condition (e.g., HIV, congenital immunodeficiency, hematologic and solid tumors) immunosuppressive therapy (e.g., alkylating agents, antimetabolites, long term systemic corticosteroids, radiation therapy) organ or bone marrow transplantation chronic renal failure or nephritic syndrome candidate for or recipient of cochlear implant (Persons 2 -18yrs are served at the CCHD main clinic through the Vaccine for Children program) PHYSICIAN PRESCRIPTION REQUIREMENT: A physician prescription is needed for receipt of a pneumonia shot for persons less than age 65, without a health issue listed above, or for a re- vaccination with in five years from the first shot. REPEAT PNEUMONIA SHOT: A one time re- vaccination can be given to a person age 65 +, whose prior shot was given at less than age 65 and 5 or more years ago. r-4 C> ev T 0 ry LO u.. ra N N C::. 00 0 O 0 c-JN04 N \1 4Y Z LLI - _ N N N T°� N n M EL M D z 114 N � ODCp TT L,4C14LN C, M 0 < -:rl •qc m m m O �0 T vy T i+ 0 0 M- z ry L }� V x r z 1611 B4 • r • • a • O IR _. V V) 04 {q D [b Q in N- R; 0 co Ln co O Cb Li m L L EL L ¢ �- CIL fD CL Q} L � ¢ w [1i w °' 4 C E F�ua °} vc, a try T E E ccy 0 , E,Q'� 9D - E C 0 Q _P c E wE¢�, 0 o Q 13- uo L ,E2 W � C il5 O a.C•- �> '- < ¢7 C z L.L- T CnV � CV f 1 V V) 04 {q D [b Q in N- R; 0 co Ln co O Cb Li m L L EL L ¢ �- CIL fD CL Q} L � ¢ w [1i w °' 4 C E F�ua °} vc, a try T E E ccy 0 , E,Q'� 9D - E C 0 Q _P c E wE¢�, 0 o Q 13- uo L ,E2 W � C il5 O a.C•- �> '- < ¢7 C z L.L- T CnV � CV USCGAd asunar StAtes-i This; fi —2411,duf 0 Al I e, he 'Dis silvere( board C Wen ,.,of,h'1sj placed grands 0 v � Chas bee V1 1.5tt c ar so t 4 r i ru staff f and Ara than '5 District k" Thel i.- eenco p S tk out Geprgla to rt, IT4 r -11 t situation T, sontin z,e of geogr I , Y. I, is; shoes blefing �k 0; p sona thishigl 1-1e, say 7 fl',Octo66� rl&�12010:.' A -4 tote theylarg d-Auxilt star Walter Jaskiewicz was elected to ir•Diqtr1M'7 j,;Oregon w )re JasiiewIcz wi .,an 1880s lapi�to. every ItInto a,t I overcome the i "and casir fde-dgf en is the next day term city'; council clorejasldewicz's_i In, 1996.; they finaily se life' experiences on Marco Island Where m a natural, for are, both verYactive7 L profile , ' poSition •','C6mmun,ty. h .t aU',,he. did pe ON -1 staff reco, presi ldpwici's' tuteWe',,,aIi6 - ,vided 6,0dG,',4oursjq.," I1 B4 ■ ■ a �� R! Al- ry A ° #t; ky 'a - C6' ..m e of -177Ri +�� °r; lro�aa"Fo���fsF�n'�biaT %p3 s01"';' o(K�r6at ®s5as rinFta�o�eT f' -JI!b 24 P. a,jn€ ��yYe�.'�e(`' �✓: "ntbR�n' 4ot;'a�; '�` eAs�56n� ai3ae 7q�? i i�ay���,,•f -' e o 'i9ejh l of �Y iA a AiP441 i, a yx 2 ®e RECEIVED DEC 0 9 2010 Board of County Commissioners Fiala _J Henning Coyle Coletta CA De m,e V I6JI- pp val J inutes 1 01 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, October 14, 2010 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 1:00 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at Administrative Building "F," 3rd Floor, Collier County Government Complex Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: John Sorey, III VICE CHAIRMAN: Anthony Pires John Arceri (Excused) Jim Burke Murray Hendel (Excused) Robert Raymond (Excused) Joseph A. Moreland Victor Rios Wayne Waldack ALSO PRESENT: Gary McAlpin, Director, Coastal Zone Management Colleen Greene, Assistant County Attorney Gail Hambright, Accountant Misc. Cornea: Date: �J Item #: V Copies to: 16 �AC cem 0 inutes 1,i prova 2 of 111��J J I. Call to Order Chairman Sorey called the meeting to order at 1:00 PM. II. Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. III. Roll Call Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. IV. Changes and Approval of Agenda Mr. Burke moved to approve the Agenda subject to the following changes: • Hearing items VIII.4 — 8 followed by Items VIII.1 — 3 after item VI.1 Second by Mr. Moreland. Carried unanimously 6 -0. V. Public Comments None VI. Approval of CAC Minutes 1. September 9, 2010 Mr. Pires moved to approve the minutes of the September 9, 2010 Meeting. Second by Mr. Rios. Carried unanimously 6 -0. VIII. New Business 4. RFP Wiggin's Pass Navigation Improvements Completion Gary McAlpin provided the document "Scope of Work for Preparation of Inlet Management Plan, County Environmental Impact Statement, Additional Modeling and Geotechnical Investigation for Design and Permitting of Wiggins Pass Improvements" dated October 14, 2010 for consideration. He noted: • Staff was required to obtain a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Scope of Work due to recent changes in the (Competitive Consultants Negotiation Act) policy. • The Selection Committee unanimously determined the Scope of Work should be awarded to Coastal Planning and Engineering as they were the most qualified and had developed the project plans. • The RAI (Request for Additional Information) from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has been placed on hold until a consultant is chosen. • The FDEP has now determined that in addition to the original RAI comments; additional vibracores will be required as they believe an unidentified rock ledge exists in the area which may hamper the proposed re- alignment of the channel. • The Scope of Work is to be completed at a cost not to exceed $177,489 and he requested committee approval. Mr. Pires requested clarification if staff has taken the proper procedure in seeking approval for the Scope of Work (has the BCC ratified the selection of Coastal Planning and Engineering). CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 3of11 161 1 95 Gary McAlpin stated he was unsure if the selection of the consultant requires ratification by the BCC. Staff will ensure the required County policies for purchasing are followed before authorizing the work. Mr. Pires noted he is under the impression BCC approval is required. Mr. Moreland moved to approve the issuance of a Work Order for the proposed work in an amount not to exceed $177,489, including time and materials. Second by Mr. Waldack. Motion carried S "yes" —1 "no." Mr. Pires voted "no." Gary McAlpin noted he will notify committee members by email if there are any changes to the approval procedure for authorizing the Scope of Work. 5. Work Order Emergency Dredging/Maintenance Dredge Wiggins Gary McAlpin provided the copy of a letter from Stephen Keehn, P.E., Senior Coastal Engineer of Coastal Planning and Engineering — "Subject: Beach Berm Restoration and Wiggin 's Pass Dredging, Coastal Design Scope of Work under Contract No. 09 -5262" and related Scope of Work dated September 29, 2010. The proposal is to combine the proposed Scope of Works to save on costs. The total Scope of Work is to be completed at a cost not to exceed $10,000 and he requested committee approval. Mr. Pires requested clarification if the proposed Scope of Work falls under the time frame when the County received an opinion from the Attorney General regarding the County's compliance with the CCNA procedure (where expenses incurred for work performed in good faith prior to a certain date would be honored by the County). Gary McAlpin stated he believes this is the case. He will verify proper CCNA procedures have been followed in proposing the work. Mr. Moreland moved to approve the proposed Scope of Work (at a cost not to exceed $10,000). Second by Mr. Rios. Carried unanimously 6 -0. Mr. Pires noted his vote in favor of the motion is predicated with the understanding that proper purchasing procedures (including the BCC ratification process) have been followed in proposing the Scope of Work. 6. Work Order Doctor's Pass Jetty Gary McAlpin provided the copy of a letter from Stephen Keehn, P.E., Senior Coastal Engineer of Coastal Planning and Engineering — Subject: "Doctor's Pass North Jetty Repairs, Coastal Design Services, Collier County, Florida, Scope of Work under Contract No. 09- 5262" dated September 30, 2010. The total Scope of Work is to be completed at a cost not to exceed $24,794 and he requested committee approval. Mr. Rios moved to approve the proposed Scope of Work (at a cost not to exceed $24,794 including time and materials). Second by Mr. Burke. Carried unanimously 6 -0. CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 4of161il B5 Mr. Pires noted his vote in favor of the motion is predicated with the understanding that proper purchasing procedures (including the BCC ratification process) have been followed in proposing the Scope of Work. 7. Work Order FY 2012/13 Renourishment Studies Gary McAlpin provided the copy of a letter from Stephen Keehn, P.E., Senior Coastal Engineer of Coastal Planning and Engineering — Subject: Evaluate Conceptual Design and Modeling of Alternatives Collier County Beach Nourishment Project Scope of Work under Contract No. 09- 5262 " dated October 8, 2010. He noted: • The Scope of Work is for a "study" and "conceptual design" of the proposed beach renourishment. • The proposal does not include the preparation of engineered documents or bid packages. • The work should be initiated now, if not the County will lose FEMA funds provided in conjunction with damages caused by Tropical Storm Fay. • Estimated time frame for receiving the necessary permits is 1 -2 years. • Staff is in the process of preparing a draft access easement document for private beach lands proposed for renourishment. • The draft easement will be provided to the CAC at the next meeting, or by email for comment. • The area of study includes Vanderbilt Beach, Park Shore Beach and Naples Beach. • It is anticipated the study will be completed within 5 — 6 months. • The Scope of Work is to be completed at a cost not to exceed $147,602. Mr. Rios moved to approve the proposed Scope of Work (at a cost not to exceed $147,602 including time and materials). Second by Mr. Moreland. Carried unanimously 6 -0. Mr. Pires noted his vote in favor of the motion is predicated with the understanding that proper purchasing procedures (including the BCC ratification process) have been followed in proposing the Scope of Work. 8. Cancellation of Clam Bay Subcommittee Gary McAlpin noted Staff is recommending, and the Subcommittee agrees, it has reached a point where it will be more beneficial for the main committee to address the issues associated with the Clam Bay System. Mr. Moreland moved to disband the Clam Bay Subcommittee. Second by Mr. Waldack. Carried unanimously 6 -0. 1. Presentation by Jack Wert: TDC Funding Options for Year Round Advertising Jack Wert, Tourism Director presented a slideshow "Tourism Promotion Discussion" providing comments and analysis including: • The BCC approved the re- direction of $1M Beach Facilities Funds to advertising and promotion for FY 2011. CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 5of11 16! 1 B5 • The BCC requested Mr. Wert address stakeholders to assist in determining a long term solution (beginning in FY 2012) for increasing funding for tourism promotion and advertising to enable year round promotion. • Prior to FY 2010, advertising was primarily dedicated to "off season" times. • Given current economic times and the increased competition from competitive markets it is becoming necessary to promote the region on a year round basis. • The increased funds may be expended in markets not currently pursued (Boston, Cleveland, etc.). • A comparison of Collier County vs. a competitive market's utilization of funds for advertising and beach facilities /renourishment was outlined. • Many of the other destinations have Tourist Tax Rates of 5 — 6 %. Mr. Moreland questioned how the increase /decreases in tourism may be measured in responses to advertising. Mr. Wert noted the responses are measured by face to face interviews, comparisons with visitation statistics in other markets that haven't increased advertising budgets, tracking website visitation by market, etc. Mr. Pires noted he had to leave the meeting and is not in favor of increasing funding for advertising. In addition, with regard to item VII.5, he is not in favor of requesting a variance for turbidity levels and supports the Conservancy of Southwest Florida's position on the issue. Mr. Pires left the meeting at 2: 07pm Mr. Rios expressed concern on the validity of the statistical comparisons of Collier County with the other competitive markets as the characteristics of the markets are different. Also, the research provided by companies is paid for by Collier County and the companies may have a vested interest in providing positive statistical results. Chairman Sorey noted the Tourist Development Council (which he is a member) has asked the same questions however, the statistics on "Marketing Budget per Lodging Unit" are valid and should be used for market comparison. Mr. Moreland expressed concern on reducing /reallocating funds in Beach Park Facilities and Beach Renourishment due to the areas economic dependence on the resources. Mr. Wert agreed the "Beach" is the product necessary to promote the area and supports maintaining the facilities at a high standard. The County needs to maintain its voice in the market and find a balance in the expenditures and priorities. In conclusion, the item is up for discussion and is seeking agreement from the stakeholders that: • Naples, Marco Island, Everglades needs to promote visitors year round. • The area needs more marketing funding to compete in the tourism marketplace. • They need to evaluate all current TDT use and consider re- allocations for more marketing and promotion funding. CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 6of16 1 1 B5 Mr. Waldack supports year round advertising but expressed concern on re- directing funds from beach funding. Mr. Moreland supports year round advertising but does not see it as an urgent matter based on the County's current financial situation. Mr. Burke supports year round advertising and requested clarification on why the percentages of funds expended in beach operations varies drastically from market to market. Chairman Sorey noted the other markets utilize additional or alternative funding sources for beach operations (General Fund, User Fees, etc.). Mr. Rios stated the presentation and statistics has not convinced him to increase funding in advertising. Chairman Sorey supports year round marketing. The challenge facing the County is how to fund it. He favors finding additional funding sources, not re- directing existing sources. He recommends consideration is given to increasing the Tourist Tax Rate from 4 cents to 5 cents. There are statistics available on the favorable results of advertising and he urged committee members to review the statistics on the Philadelphia market, since it was a consensus of the committee to support year around advertising. Speaker Steve McIntyre, Collier County Lodging and Tourism Assoc. noted it is the hotels and motels that generate the Tourist Tax Revenue and do not support an increase in the Tourist Tax Rate to 5 %. They support the year round marketing proposal and there is currently enough revenue to provide an advertising budget of $4 -5M. Studies indicate tourists do not travel to the region for the museum facilities and recommended this expenditure of Tourist Development Tax Revenue be examined. He encouraged the committee (Coastal Zone Management) examine their own expenditures to determine if they can "do more with less." The Association is developing a recommendation for staff on how the Tourist Development Tax Revenue be allocated. Hotels that rely on group sales business would be negatively affected by raising the Tourist Tax I%. 2. Summary of Renourishment Program and Costs. Gary McAlpin provided the document "Collier County Fund 195 Beaches /Inlets Revenue Vs. Expense Analysis Key Comments — 1011212010 " dated and attached proposed Resolution "A Resolution of the Coastal Advisory Committee of Collier County, Florida Providing its Support for Year Round Destination Advertising, Support for a Fifth Percent of Tourist Development Taxes for this Purpose, and Opposition to the Reallocation of the Current Four Percent of the Tourist Development Tax " dated October 14, 2010 for consideration. The Committee requested Staff review the wording and revise as necessary to make it clear they support adding 1 % to the current 4% rate making it 5 % total. Mr. Moreland moved to approve the Resolution. Second by Mr. Burke. Motion carried 4 "yes" — I "no. " Mr. Rios voted "no. " CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 7of11 161 B5 Chairman Sorey recommended any members with questions on the advertising budget or visitor data contact Mr. Wert. Break: 2: 52pm Reconvened: 3: 01 pm 3. Sediment Study Clam Bay Gary McAlpin provided the document "Summary of Preliminary Findings on Sediment Studies" for review. He noted the report indicates ambient locations sampled throughout the Clam Bay System are not compromised by pollutants. The tests conducted for the analysis could not identify the age of the sediment due to its lack of organics. The canals in Seagate have silted a depth of 5 feet the last 50 years. The reason is unknown and under investigation. S eaker Kathy Worley, Conservancy of Southwest Florida noted fine sediments naturally occur in Mangrove Systems so it is understandable why PBS &J found them present in the Clam Bay System. She stated canals, such as the ones present in the Seagate community, tend to accumulate fine sediments by the nature of their composition which explains their presence. VII. Staff Reports The Committee determined to hear item VII 5 followed by 1/II4 5. Wiggins Pass Activities Gary McAlpin presented the document "Staff Reports Item 5.2 " dated October 14, 2010 for informational purposes - Contract RFP for Completion of Channel Straightening Permit Activities The item was discussed under VIII.4 - Maintenance Dredging Permit Gary McAlpin provided the document a copy of a Memorandum from Jeff Raley of the Bureau of Natural and Coastal Resources (FDEP) to Dr. Merrie Beth Neely, Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems (FDEP) — Subject "JCP File No. 0142538 -009 — JCP — Wiggin's Pass Interim Dredging Permit Application " dated August 25, 2010. He noted: • FDEP has notified staff the permit application is complete. • The US Fish and Wildlife Service will not require a new biological opinion. • Staff is requesting a variance for turbidity levels (of the required Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU's)) created during the dredging. • Adherence to required NTU standards is necessary as the proposed dredging will impact areas located within the designation of "Outstanding Florida Waters" (OFW). • Previous dredges were not subject to NTU standards as the dredging activity did not involve areas identified as "OFW." CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 8 of 11 161 1 B5 • The purpose of the variance is to allow the dredging to be completed in a shorter time frame (possibly). • Staff has no cost savings estimate at this time. Sneaker Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida noted the Conservancy is opposed to the variance request and submitted a letter from the Conservancy to Gary McAlpin "Re: Permit No.: JCP 142538 -009, Applicant: Collier County, Project: Wiggin's Pass Maintenance Dredging" dated October 7, 2010 which outlines the reasons for the Conservancy's opposition. She expressed concern the request may delay permit issuance prolonging the dredging activity required to improve navigation of the Pass. The Conservancy is working with the County on the issue, but other entities or organizations may appeal the decision if the variance is issued. Kathy Worley, Conservancy of Southwest Florida addressed the Committee expressing concern over the issue of a variance as it may lead to environmental damage to the benthic community present in the area. The benthic community is the foundation of the system and damaging it may cause detrimental conditions within the system. Gary McAlpin noted the County does not want to environmentally degrade the area, but wants FDEP to review the environmental data to determine if a variance is allowable given the existing environmental conditions found within the area under consideration. Staff intends to work with the Conservancy and FDEP to resolve the issue. Chairman Sorey polled the committee on their position of the variance request. Mr. Moreland is in favor of pursuing the request, however if it is denied or appealed, the County proceed without pursuing it further. Mr. Waldack is not in favor of pursuing the request due to environmental considerations. Mr. Burke agreed with Mr. Moreland's position. Mr. Rios agreed with Mr. Moreland's position. Chairman Sorey is not in favor of pursuing the variance request. The committee decided to proceed with the request for the variance, since the majority of the committee polled agreed. - Navigation Improvement /State Park Comments Copy provided by staff as noted above 4. Clam Bay Activities - Work Team with Foundation — Agenda/Foundation Executive Summary Gary McAlpin provided "An Update on Clam Bay," prepared by Steve Feldhaus, dated October 2, 2010" for informational purposes. Development of a Work Plan/Master Plan CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 9of111 6 11 B5 Gary McAlpin presented the document "Staff Reports Item 4.2 " dated October 14, 2010 for informational purposes. The document contained an email string and agenda for a proposed Clam Bay Work Group Meeting to be held in October. He provided a brief update on the following issues: • Water Sampling • Sediment Analysis • Modeling * Dredging Permit for Tidal Flushing - Channel Marker Gary McAlpin submitted a "Corrected Letter ", from Ryan Snyder of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) dated October 8, 2010 revising the previous "Request for Additional Information." The revision requests the County address additional items outlined by FDEP. S esker Kathy Worley, Conservancy of Southwest Florida requested clarification on a statement in Mr. Feldhaus's letter (on page 3) where seagrass was not identified outside of "Upper Clam Bay" and questions whether this should read "Lower Clam Bay." Gary McAlpin noted the comment will be brought to Mr. Feldhaus's attention. The City of Naples is now representing the interests of the Seagate Community in the "Clam Bay Work Group." 1. Expanded Revenue Report — Gary McAlpin The committee reviewed the "Tourist Tax Revenue Report — FY 2009 — 2010 " updated through September, 2010. He identified a minor shortfall ($183, 369) for FY09 /10 collections. The shortfall should not negatively affect the Coastal Zone Management Budget. 2. Project Cost Report — Gary McAlpin The committee reviewed the "FY 2009/2010 TDC Category A: Beach Maintenance Projects" updated through October 6, 2010. 3. FEMA Reimbursement — Update Gary McAlpin provided the press release "Collier County receives nearly $10 million in FEMA Reimbursement for Storm Damage" dated Oct. 6, 2010 for informational purposes. The storm damage occurred during Hurricanes Wilma and Katrina. 6. Upcoming Project Timing Gary McAlpin noted staff hopes to have the packages for review within 30 days. • Emergency Renourishment • Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredge • Doctors Pass Jetty CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 10 of 11 16! 1 B5 7. Collier County Dune Restoration Sea Oat Monitoring Gary McAlpin provided a copy of a letter from Charles L. Kocur, Jr., President of Earth Balance to Pamela Keyes of Coastal Zone Management — Re: "Collier County Dune Restoration Sea Oat Monitoring" dated October 1, 2010. The report outlines results of the planting program completed in April of 2010. For the City of Marco Island, panic grasses are under consideration for future plantings. IX. Old Business 1. Peer Review Discussion/Direction Gary McAlpin provided a copy of a letter to Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Pelican Bay Services Division from Leo Ochs, County Manager — "Re: September 9, 2010 letter referencing Peer Review of the Clam Bay System Data Collection Analysis Report by PBS &J" dated September 9, 2010 for informational purposes. X. Announcements None XI. Committee Member Discussion Mr. Waldack requested staff to address the following concerns on Marco Island Beaches raised to him by Nancy Ritchie: • The possibility of utilizing different /additional equipment for moving larger amounts of sand during the grading process. • Status on the breakwaters at South Beach. • Possibly re- nourishing South Beach in 2011 — 2012 (as opposed to 2013- 2014). • Can sand be placed on eroded areas of Tigertail Beach? • Hideaway Beach update. Gary McAlpin noted: • The equipment required to move the larger amounts of sand may be an option to the County, however moving a large volume of sand will require permits. Staff will review the issue. • The breakwaters are under review in the current study authorized for the Marco Island Beaches. • The concept is to re- nourish all County beaches at once to save on mobilization costs. Staff is open to further discussion with Marco Island representatives on the issue. • Staff intends to develop a program to address Tigertail Beach. • Hideaway Beach improvements are underway and a more specific update will be provided at a later date. XII. Next Meeting Date/Location November 10, 2010 — Government Center, Administration Bldg. F, 3rd Floor CAC December 9, 2010 VI -1 Approval of CAC Minutes 11 of 11 1611 B5 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the chair at 4:07 P.M. Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee ohn Sorey, III, Ch man These minutes approve by the Board /Committee on as presented or as amended 16 I koctab285 Zoio RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD L DEC 0 2 2010 Naples, Florida Fiala morCounty Comumssraners October 28, 2010 Henning Coyle Colette LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: ALSO PRESENT: Kenneth Kelly Larry Dean Ron Doino, Alternate Robert Kaufman James Lavinski Gerald Lefebvre Lionel L'Esperance Tony Marino (Absent) Herminio Ortega Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jen Waldron, Code Enforcement Specialist Page 1 Misc. Corres: I Date: ©� 1 Item #: Copies to: 161,1 8(6ber%, 2010 CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right, good morning. I'd like to call to order the Code Enforcement Board, Collier County, this October meeting. Notice: The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation, unless additional time is granted by the Board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes, unless the time is adjusted by the Chair. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. May I have roll call, please. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Ken Kelly? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Robert Kaufman? MR. KAUFMAN: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Larry Dean? Mr. Larry Dean? MR. DEAN: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. Larry, here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? MR. UESPERANCE: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Herminio Ortega? Page 2 16111 �CtAer 28, 2010 MR.ORTEGA: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Ron Doino? MR. DOINO: Here. MS. WALDRON: And Mr. Tony Marino is absent. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Moving on to the agenda, do we have any changes? MS. WALDRON: We do. Under number four, public hearings, motions, letter -- I'm sorry, under C, hearings, number four, case CESD20090017892, JESSREAL Estate LLC, LIS Holdings, LLC has been withdrawn. And number seven, Case No. CESD20090014178, Big Cypress Ventures, Inc, has been withdrawn. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, with that, do I hear an approval for the agenda? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to approve. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. VESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Now on to the approval of the minutes from the September 23rd hearing. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to approve. Page 3 1611 R6bert, 2010 MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? MR. DEAN: One abstain. CHAIRMAN KELLY: One abstention, Mr. Dean. Now moving on to public hearings, A, motions, number one, Charles D. Brown. We have a request for an extension of time. (Speaker duly sworn.) MR. SNOW: Good morning. Mr. Brown was supposed to be here this morning. I don't have any excuse why he's not here. He's asking for an extension of time. He does have one permit that the Board required him to get, but he also has another permit. The extenuating circumstances involved in this is that he hired a contractor that was not allowed to work in Collier County, he wasn't certified to work in Collier County. He paid for the gentleman up front for the work. And unfortunately, I guess, the gentleman invested his money that was paid to him in something else. And so he's in the process of getting his money back so he can hire another contractor. The contractor that he had for the first permit was not qualified to do the roof, that's why he had to get the second contractor. The county would not object to an extension of time. I talked with the investigator this morning. He requested that if you grant an extension of time, that would be no more than six months. No more Page 4 16 I 1 B6 ctol is, Zoio than six months. MR. KAUFMAN: Question. Was the $81.15 paid? MR. SCOTT: I don't believe so. MR. KAUFMAN: Can you hear me now? The Verizon commercial. He was given 120 days originally, February 5th. MR. SNOW: Yes, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: Then he was given another 120 days. What has been done and when was it done? MR. SNOW: Well, he does have a permit that's had one inspection. The one permit was pulled on 6/l/20 10. He does have an inspection for that. That has to do with the fascia and the toilet on the interior. He did pay the other contractor in good faith to get the roof permit. But again, the roof contractor was not certified to work in Collier County, that's why that part wasn't done. The investigator feels that he has been somewhat diligent in doing what he's supposed to do. MR. DEAN: Well, his letter also states that he's waiting to get his money back from the person he gave it to, which probably will never happen. So six months from now we're going to be in the same position. If he's waiting for money from someone he gave it to, they're not coming back. MR. SNOW: Well, I understand he's supposed to get it back this month, or back in November. That's what he says. It's up for the Board to decide is the veracity of his statements. MR. LEFEBVRE: How much work needs to be done on the roof? MR. SNOW: He replaced a couple of panels. It's a tin roof and he replaced some holes in that. Talking to the investigator this morning, this is a triplex and there are people living in it. I asked him the question did he feel it was a Page 5 1611 ' B6doll 28, Zoo health and safety issue, and he said no. Again, that's up to the Board's discretion. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we extend it for 60 more days from today's hearing. MR. KAUFMAN: I second that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seeing none, all in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Grant it for 60 days. MR. SNOW: Thank the Board. MR. KAUFMAN: One quick item on this one. The 81.15 which was supposed to be paid 30 days after February 4th, I would expect that that would be paid within the 60 days also. MR. SNOW: We'll request that, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: You want me to amend my motion? CHAIRMAN KELLY: It was just a request. If you wanted to go through a full blown, we could. However, it is part of the original charging documents. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, we'll leave it at that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next case would be Mr. 99 Cents, Inc. Again, this is a request for extension. Morning. Are you the attorney representing? If we could, let's go ahead and swear the other two parties in. Page 6 10 l'1 966berI8, 2010 (Speakers duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. MR. KRAUS: Michael Kraus (phonetic) on behalf of respondent Mr. 99 Cents. We're here today to request an extension of six months to comply with the board's decision on removal of the non - compliant structure. The extenuating circumstances requiring this request include that Mr. Hassam, the manager and officer of the corporation, was diagnosed with non - Hodgkin's Lymphoma last year and has been unable to work at the store. In addition, as with many businesses, the business has suffered a severe reduction in revenue during the past 12 months in excess of almost 40 percent. So financially there's a hardship as well. We have just last month obtained a third estimate, which is the lowest estimate thus far, that we feel is an appropriate amount that we can move forward with and are therefore prepared within the next six -month period to complete the removal of the structure. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the Board? MR. KAUFMAN: I have two. Was the $86.71 paid within 30 days of the last hearing? CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's paid. MR. KAUFMAN: It is paid? MR. SNOW: I don't know the answer to that question. MS. WALDRON: (Nods head affirmatively.) MR. KRAUS: I do believe so, but I do not have an answer to that question. MR. KAUFMAN: And my next question is on number five, which is actually number six, it says respondent shall provide monthly updates in written form to code enforcement for the next year. Have any of those updates been presented? MR. SNOW: Every month, sir. And if I may add, part of the provisions of what this Board Page 7 16 I 1 Puker218,2010 required, that the electric be turned off and there was no use associated with that particular structure on the property. They have done that well. So we do receive monthly updates. And they have vacated that part of -- that structure is not being utilized at all and the electricity is off on that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Again, what was the time frame you said? MR. KRAUS: Six months, please. MR. KAUFMAN: I make a motion that we extend it for six months, as requested by the respondent's attorney. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded by Mr. Dean. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Granted a six -month extension. MR. SNOW: Thank the Board. MR. KRAUS : Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That concludes the motions -- or letter A, motions. There's no stipulations, so we now move on to hearings. Case number one, Alvus Perkin. 0=_ i 16 I �1 ° B6 October 28, 2010 I saw Investigator Paul a second ago. He might be in the hall. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chair, I believe we have two stipulations that are coming in as well from Investigator Mucha. CHAIRMAN KELLY: If you have them now, we might be able to just quickly amend the agenda and get them in. MS. WALDRON: The first one is number five under hearings, Case CELU20100008361, Katherine Smith. And the second one is number six on the agenda, Case CELU20100009076, Katherine Smith. MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion that we amend the agenda. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, we'll hear the first case for Smith, and that will end in 8361. (Speakers duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Cherie', you do have the respondents behind you. (Speakers duly sworn.) MR. MUCHA: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. Page 9 16 t 106 Octdber 28, 2010 I met with the property owner Katherine Smith on both of these cases -- can I do them both at the same time or do one at a time or -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: We're going to vote on them separately, but if they're related, sure. MR. MUCHA: I'll start with CELU20100008361. I met with Respondent Katherine Smith this morning. She agreed that she was in violation. She also agrees to pay operational costs in the amount of $79.72 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; to abate all violations by: must obtain and affix current valid license plate to each vehicle /trailer not stored within the confines of a completely enclosed structure, and must repair defects so each vehicle is immediately operable or store said vehicles within a completely enclosed structure and /or remove offending vehicles /trailers from agriculturally zoned property within 14 days of this hearing or a fine of $50 a day until violation is abated. Respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator to perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Do you understand and agree to everything that the investigator just read and that you signed earlier? MS. SMITH: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: The question the Board is going to have is 14 days long for you to get the license plates necessary and to get the vehicles in operable -- MR. SMITH: Well, all I have left is one vehicle, a semi truck. And my uncle is coming down at the first of the month, and I was going to cut it up and scrap it. I hate to do it because I've got a lot of Page 10 16 I� 1 B ober 28, 2010 money invested in the truck. But he told me to hold off if I could until he got here. I think he had a buyer for it. If not, I'm just going to have to have them tow it to the scrapyard and get it out of there. And as far as the building goes, all it is is a matter of me just -- I have to pull the drywall back down. So -- MS. SMITH: That's on the -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: We'll take the vehicles first just so we can keep the conversation separate. Because we're going to vote on them separately. MR. SMITH: Well, everything else other than the semi is tagged. I have one in the back that I've already got three - quarters of the way cut up. And that shouldn't be no problem, you know, 14 days I should have that done. And like I say, the other truck, if he don't have a buyer for it where I can get it out there, I would just tow it to a scrapyard. I don't have no other choice. MR. KAUFMAN: Would you feel more comfortable if it was a month, 30 days rather than -- MR. SMITH: Yes, sir, I would, I would really appreciate that, because I'm not in very good health. It would help me a lot. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is there any other discussion? MR. KAUFMAN: I make a motion that we amend the stipulation that's written, extend the date to the 30 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: I second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and a second. All in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. Page 11 16 I 1 ctbber 28', 2010 MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: They're going to change the original copy, and they'll have you initial right where the changes were made. It's now 30 days. MR. SMITH: Thank you very much. MS. SMITH: Thank you, guys. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We'll go ahead and move just quickly to the second case. And Investigator, if you want to read it in. MR. MUCHA: Yes. For the record, Joe Mucha, Investigator, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is Case No. CELU20100009076. Met with respondent Katherine Smith this morning. She agrees that she is in violation. And she has agreed to pay operational costs in the amount of $80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; abate all violations by: must cease all use of the storage building for living purposes immediately and obtain all applicable permits, inspections and certificates of completion/occupancy, remove unpermitted alterations to storage building and return storage building to a permitted state within 14 days of this hearing or a fine of $100 per day until violation is abated. Must cease all use of recreational vehicles for living purposes located on the property within 14 days of this hearing or a fine of $100 per day until violation is abated. Respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County Page 12 16 kl B6 w October 28, 2010 may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. I have to ask you again, do you agree with everything that the investigator just read? MS. SMITH: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And I'll open it up to the Board for any questions. MR. KAUFMAN: Is anybody living there right now? MR. SMITH: I was living there, sir. I've redone the house. She's got custody of two of her grandchildren -- MS. SMITH: Three of them. MR. SMITH: Three of her grand -- grand -- great -grand kids. And I just -- I had no place in the house where I could stay -- I just now got on my disability. I got no way of -- I can't afford no place else to live. CHAIRMAN KELLY: If I can, Investigator, it says here also permits necessary. Is this a demo situation or -- MR. MUCHA: He needs to remove some drywall and electrical stuff. So I believe it could be a demo situation. You know, that's why I'd recommend for them to go down to the Building Department and explain what they need to do and if they need to pull a permit to remove those items, yes. MS. SMITH: I went down and she wouldn't even talk to me about a permit because the garage was not joined to the house. MR. MUCHA: I think when you were trying to see if you could permit it to turn it into living space, correct? MS. SMITH: Yes, so he could sleep out there at night. I was going to make just a bedroom out of it. MR. LEFEBVRE: There would be impact fees and so forth that would have to be paid also, correct? MR. MUCHA: Correct. Page 13 16 6 i ��B b �! October 28, 2010 CHAIRMAN KELLY: If we could just clarify your intentions, are they to remove the drywall and the electric and turn it back into a storage room, or do you plan on trying to live in it? MR. SMITH: Well, if they're not going to give me a permit, there's no way I can live in it. I would just have to remove the drywall and electric and store everything in it. I don't even have room in the house. I mean, you know, I have to store my clothes and stuff out there. I don't have no space whatsoever in the house. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sure, I appreciate that. But you understand that we're concerned about your safety as well, and if you're living in a structure that hasn't been permitted and properly inspected -- MR. SMITH: No, I was going to stay in the house. I'm just going to have to store my stuff out there in one of the rooms. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, the next question would be, again, would 14 days give you enough time to remove the drywall, the electric, and to -- MR. SMITH: That's what I would like to ask whether you can make that 30 days also so I could work on them both together. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any response from the Board? MR. KAUFMAN: No objection. MR. DOINO: I have a question. When you walk in -- have you been inside the structure? MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. MR. DOINO: When you walk in there, what do you see? Rooms? MR. MUCHA: I have pictures, if you -- MR. DOINO: Can we -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: I'd rather not hear the case. If we show the pictures, we usually have to open it up to a full case, and then that becomes part of -- Page 14 161166 October 28, 2010 MR. DOINO: Okay. The reason for my question was that I don't think 14 days is going to be enough. MR. MUCHA: I agree with the 30 days. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I think the Board's in consensus with the extended time. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me just -- maybe this will simplify it. How many square feet are we talking about? MR. MUCHA: It's not very big -- MR. LEFEBVRE: A one -car garage, two -car garage? MR. MUCHA: Well, it's not the whole garage. Only a section of the garage has been closed off, like, kind of like -- just basically a bedroom. MR. LEFEBVRE: Like a 12 by 12 room? MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: I think extending the time is certainly the right thing to do. Thirty days you think would be sufficient time? MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: And if you can't get it done in 30 days, if you could notify Code Enforcement and then we can take a bite out of that apple when it comes about. MR. SMITH: Okay, I appreciate that, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: In the meantime, I would like to make a motion that we agree to the stipulation with the -- a modification of the date to 30 days. MR. UESPERANCE: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, the only thing I have, is typically when we have these situations we ask that the place be vacated. I'm wondering if that would be appropriate in this particular case within a shorter period of time. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I believe the respondent agreed to moving out of that and back into the house -- Page 15 16 I R` B6 October 28, 2010 MR. SMITH: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: -- and I think the request of the Board is that you would do that immediately because of the health and safety issue that it creates. MR. SMITH: I'm just going to use the garage like I said just to store my clothes in right now and to work out of. I've got to be there to try to work on it out there. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great, thank you. Will that suffice that we've put it on the record? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? MS. RAWSON: Can I ask a question? Are you leaving the second part, the 14 days to remove the recreational vehicles? MR. KAUFMAN: That was modified to 30 days. MS. RAWSON: I thought that was the first part. MR. KAUFMAN: That was the first case. MR. LEFEBVRE: Recreational vehicles are on this case also. MR. KAUFMAN: Oh, yes, same thing, 30 days. MS. RAWSON: Thirty days for both. MR. KAUFMAN: Right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And Gerald, do you agree with that? MR. LEFEBVRE: I didn't second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Oh, I'm sorry. Lionel? MR. UESPERANCE: Yes, I agree. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, sir? MR. SMITH: Yes, sir, the only recreational vehicle that is left out there -- I mean, like I say, I have one of them that's three - quarters of the way turned down. It's almost down to nothing but the frame. I've been scrapping on that every day. And the only other recreational vehicle out there is licensed and plated. And nobody is living in there. My uncle just left it. He lives Page 16 1611 B6 October 28, 2010 in Kentucky and he's got property down there. And when he was down there he bought a tractor and stuff and he left his trailer so he could haul his tractor back. But nobody's living in it and it is tagged. It's just tagged in Kentucky. But that's where it's titled at. CHAIRMAN KELLY: The investigator says that's acceptable. Very good. Okay, all in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. It's been 30 days on all of those. I appreciate your help. MS. SMITH: Thank you, guys. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You're welcome. Good luck. That's the end of our stipulations. Now moving on to hearings, part C, number one -- MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chair, we do have one more stipulation. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Oh, you do. MS. WALDRON: It is number two on the agenda, Case CESD20100009316, Malcolm Gianella. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We technically need to amend the agenda. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to amend the agenda. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? Page 17 161 196 October 28, 2010 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Amended. (Speakers duly sworn.) MR. PAUL: Good morning. For the record, Renald Paul, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20100009316, dealing with violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), garage was converted to storage space with no permits. Mr. Gianelli (sic) has agreed to the stipulation. He has agreed to pay the operational costs in the amount of $81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days. Respondent is required to obtain any and all permits as required by Collier County for any and all improvements and alterations to the residence, or obtain permits for removal of all unpermitted improvements to this property and obtain all required inspections and certificate of completion within 120 days of this hearing or be fined $200 a day for each day the violation remains unabated. Respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may Page 18 161 1 gc§ober'28, 2010 abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. And he has signed the stipulation agreed to this. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. So you understand the stipulated agreement and agree to it? MR. GIANELLA: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Are there any questions from the Board? MR. KAUFMAN: I have one question that probably is more of a generic question. What's the difference between a garage and a storage area? Is that the door that -- MR. PAUL: Well, what's happened is whoever owned the property before him has put up walls, and you can't even fit a vehicle into this garage anymore. All it can be used is for storage now. There isn't very much room to even really walk into it now. A conversion -- well, some people when they do conversions, they make it into like a room you can actually live in. You can't live in this room. That's the only thing you can use it for is storage. MR. LEFEBVRE: And you bought this property through foreclosure; is that correct? MR. GIANELLA: Correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is there electric and what -not added? MR. PAUL: I didn't see any electric that was added, but I was only there for a brief moment. I don't believe there's any electric that has been added, but Mr. Gianelli (sic) could confirm that for you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That's okay. Just curious as to whether or not a violation exists if it's just a storage room. You're not -- MR. PAUL: Well, they still have to get a permit to permit it has a storage. But Mr. Gianelli (sic) as of right now, he has a permit that's in apply status to change the room to something different. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. Page 19 1611 6 '­1 October 28, 2010 MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Thanks very much. MR. GIANELLA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any further stips? MS. WALDRON: (Shakes head negatively.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sure? MR. DEAN: Going once. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Now moving on to hearings. Number one is Alvus Perkin. Renald, I was just trying to catch you before you took off for the hall. (Speaker duly sworn.) MR. PAUL: For the record, Renald Paul, Code Enforcement -- MS. WALDRON: I have to go first. This is in reference to violation of Ordinance Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: Unpermitted animal enclosure /shelter. Location/address where violation exists: 6311 Copper Leaf Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio #38160480008. Page 20 16 I'll B 6 F-1 October 28, 2010 Name and address of owner /person in charge of violation location: Alvus M. Perkins, 6311 Copper Leaf Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116. Date violation first observed: July 19th, 2010. Date owner /person in charge given Notice of Violation: August 25th, 2010. Day on/by which violation to be corrected: September 25th, 2010. Date of reinspection: September 30th, 2010. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. PAUL: For the record, Renald Paul, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20100009388, dealing with violations of Collier County Land Development Code, 04 -41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), unpermitted animal enclosure /shelter, location at 6311 Copper Leaf Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116. Service was given on August 25th, 2010. I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? Page 21 161f1 B6 October 28, 2010 (No response.) MR. PAUL: It will be Exhibits B -1 through 3 and C -1 and C -2. And as you'll see through the first three pictures, these are just pictures of animal enclosures. I'm assuming that's where the horses were going. And C -1 is the original building permit application from '77. This is quite old. I don't see anything on there that says animal enclosures as such. MR. UESPERANCE: Were permits required back in 1977 for these type of improvements? MR. PAUL: I would believe so. MR. UESPERANCE: Do we need to confirm that, or is that a fair assumption? MR. DOINO: That is a fair assumption. MR. PAUL: It's a fair assumption, I believe. And the next picture is a picture of the '77 survey. As you can see, none of these structures are on this survey. The only thing that's on there is the house and the driveway. MR. KAUFMAN: Could you go back to the previous page? So the application that we have in front of us now is for a building permit. Is that for the whole structure or is that for the animal structures? MR. PAUL: It's for the animal structures. MR. KAUFMAN: For almost $49,000 in 1977. It must have been quite a structure. MR. DOINO: This was the house permit, I believe. MR. PAUL: That's the house permit. I'm just showing that there's not showing any, like extra things on there that show any kind of animal structure or anything. I would assume it would have probably been under other or something like that. MR. KAUFMAN: And the zoning in that area does permit horses? Page 22 16 irl 'B6 October 28, 2010 MR. PAUL: Yes. MR. DOINO: It would have been a separate permit anyway, it wouldn't have been a -- MR. PAUL: Correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Cherie', could you swear him in. (Speaker duly sworn.) MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Supervisor Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. rrequest to submit one more piece of evidence. Could we call this C -3. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. VESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) MR. LETOURNEAU: This is the property card from the Property Appraiser's. As you can see, they've recorded every permit that's ever been issued for this particular piece of property. The original house permit is on that property card. There has been no other permits recorded for this piece of property. And I believe you can see there was an improvement -- I've got to look at it again here. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I was going to say, added in 1980. MR. LETOURNEAU: Correct. That was -- I believe that was Page 23 1611 B §ctober 28, 2010 probably the improvements after the original house was built. And as you can see, there was no permit applied for or obtained for that improvement. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I think the question by Lionel was whether or not a permit was necessary for that type of structure in 1979 when it was built. MR. LETOURNEAU: I would -- to be honest with you, I believe it was, but I'm not the expert on -- I'm not the expert on that. I think it was, though. CHAIRMAN KELLY: In our packet, the charging packet, you're listing 04 -41 referencing the building code and the ordinance to adhere to the code. But if this was built back then, I think we need to go to that code, and at that time did it require permits? MR. LEFEBVRE: Maybe one thing is, one way of determining when this was put on this property was look at aerials from -- a snapshot of aerials. If that's -- there's a way to do that. And first of all, I don't think that we should review this case. I think it maybe should be continued until we find out if in fact we can -- (Speaker duly sworn.) MR. SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. We've had to do extensive research in Immokalee to go back, because Immokalee is such an old community. We've gone back all the way to -- the first available one is 1969, and permits were required for structures from 1969 on. That's the earliest one we've got. So the obvious truth is that permits were required for this structure, definitively. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I think the question is not necessarily a structure, but this particular type of structure, an ag. structure that's not really -- it's kind of one of those in between, it's not necessarily even a shed or a storage room. MR. SNOW: A structure on ag. property would not require a Page 24 161 Q gb October 28, 2010 permit if it was in conjunction with a bona fide ag. use. And I don't believe there's any bona fide ag. use associated with this property. It has to be associated with that particular use on the property. For instance, if it was a cattle rancher and he wanted to place a pole barn out there, then that's associated with the use on that property. There was no use attached to this property, so therefore there can't be any ag. exemption. And that's what you're speaking of, an ag. exemption, correct? CHAIRMAN KELLY: I believe so. MR. KAUFMAN: Have you had any conversation with the respondent? MR. LETOURNEAU: I believe the respondent was pretty hostile to the investigator. We would agree with Mr. Lefebvre's request, though, to continue this at a future date and research it a little bit more as far as whether or not this permit was required at that time. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think if you determine when -- if you can determine through aerials when it was actually put on the property, then you can look at the LDC and make sure that in fact it was -- it needed a permit. And then I think that would make your case a lot stronger, just in my -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, I believe according to the property card, the appraiser went out there in 1980 and did observe the structure going up there. But I'll get a definitive answer on whether or not they needed a permit for this particular structure or not, if we can continue it at a later date. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Actually, just thinking out loud, I'm kind of opposed to that. I think we've been presented with a case. I don't think the documentation supports it. And I know that Supervisor Snow's knowledge is credible, but that's not necessarily definitive documentation. And I just think the county failed to prove this one, and I think it Page 25 1611 B 6 '7 October 28, 2010 should be ruled that no violation exists. I don't think it should be tabled so the government gets the opportunity to find more ammunition to prove their case at a later date, especially if the respondent's not here. MR. UESPERANCE: Is that a motion? CHAIRMAN KELLY: No, I can't make -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, this -- if it's continued, then it will give an opportunity for the respondent to be here. And I think that would be the way to go. I guess at this point should I make a motion? CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's up to you. All I was merely stating was, you know, we're not here to do the business of the county, we're really here as kind of a community advisory board to look at both sides. And we try to be as fair and as balanced as possible. That's not a Fox commercial, you know, I was just throwing that out. Whichever way the Board wants to go. I just figured I'd put that out there. MR. KAUFMAN: Can I ask some more questions on the discussion that you had with the respondent? Is there any particular reason why the respondent's not here today, or did the respondent say that I didn't need a -- how did the conversation go? MR. PAUL: Originally when I was at the residence, I was actually there for a different violation. He just made some threats he was going to shoot me and so on. So I left the property. That's pretty MR. KAUFMAN: Is that a code violation? MR. PAUL: But that's pretty much where the conversation ended. He just threatened me and then he told me to get off his property. And I've never had another conversation with him. MR. DEAN: Can I ask a question? How long has this Mr. Perkin lived at the residence? Any idea? Is he -- for his permit to be 19-- Page 26 161 q 86 'v October 28, 2010 MR. PAUL: It's been quite a while. I don't know offhand -- MR. LEFEBVRE: January, 1987 is when the deed -- MR. DEAN: Is that what it said when he occupied? MR. LEFEBVRE: That's when there was a deed in the back of our package, the last page of our packet. CHAIRMAN KELLY: If it's the county's position to withdraw it, you have the right to. It's up to you. MR. LETOURNEAU: At this point the county would request to withdraw this case. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, case withdrawn. That brings us to number three under hearings, which would be Eric and Dayle Westover. And to the Board, there was a letter added at your seat this morning as part of this case. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of Ordinance Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Article 2, Section 22 to 26.B, subsection 104.5.1.4.4. Description of violation: Permit number 1999110448 for the pool was abandoned and never C.O.'d. Location/address where violation exists: 5891 Star Grass Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio #3822680001. Name and address of owner /person in charge of violation location: Eric and Dayle Westover, 312 West Thatch Palm Circle, Jupiter, Florida, 33458. Date violation first observed: August 16th, 2010. Date owner /person in charge given Notice of Violation: August 25th, 2010. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: September 19th, 2010. Date of reinspection: September 21 st, 2010. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. Page 27 16 11 B6 *' October 28, 2010 MR. PAUL: For the record, Renald Paul, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20100017039, dealing with violations of Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Article 2, Section 22 -26.B, subsections 104.5.1.4, abandoned pool permit, location at 5891 Star Grass Lane, Naples, Florida. Service was given August 25th, 2010. I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the evidence. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. PAUL: I'd like to present Exhibit B -1, which shows a picture of the pool in the back of the residence. Kind of blurry. It's through a screen. And Exhibit C -1, which is the inspection history of the original permit. As you'll see towards the bottom, there was two inspections that was not completed. It was the final electrical and the final pool that was not completed. And at this time this permit is on canceled status. This case began on 8/16 of 2010. I was on -site. I observed that Page 28 1611 B6 *'" October 28, 2010 -- the pool in the rear yard. At that time I took photos. And after research at the office found that prior owners had obtained Permit No. 1999110448 and had completed all inspections except for the two. As I said, at this time the permit is in canceled status. At that time the property was in lis pendens, and I had forwarded the case to our foreclosure team to see if they could work with the bank on getting this resolved. The notice of violation was sent out certified mail because property owners do not live in this county. On 9/21 of 2010 after research found that there was no permits applied for. I hadn't received a phone call from the property owner, and the return receipt was signed and returned to us. On 9/25 I returned to the site. Violation still remained. Still hadn't received a phone call from the property owner. And after that I prepped the case for the hearing. On 10 /1 of 20109 I posted a notice of hearing at the residence and the courthouse and we're here today. Violation still remains. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. I think service was done well, because we did get a letter from the respondent stating to the facts. So I don't think that's an issue. Do we have any questions? MR. KAUFMAN: Is this also a violation because it's a pool that's obviously stagnant and green? MR. PAUL: Yes, it is. There is another case. MR. KAUFMAN: There's another case on that? MR. PAUL: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: First we need to find if a violation exists. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion that we find the respondent in violation. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) Page 29 1611 B6 October 28, 2010 CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, violation exists. Does the county have a recommendation? MR. PAUL: We ask that the Board order the respondents to pay all operational costs in the amount of $81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Respondents' required to obtain any and all permits as required by Collier County for the pool or obtain permits for removal of the pool and obtain all required inspections and certificate of completion within "X" amount of days of this hearing or be fined "X" amount of dollars for each day that the violation remains unabated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation the county may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion, questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Would anyone like to fill in the blanks? MR. KAUFMAN: I'll give it a stab. It looks like they're going to -- if this is -- I think this is in Page 30 161:1 B6 October 28, 2010 foreclosure, which will probably muddy the waters a little bit. But should somebody try to fix this, they would have to get a permit. MR. PAUL: Correct. MR. KAUFMAN: And that would probably require, I don't think it's -- it would take more than 60 days to get a permit and have the last two inspections. I don't know if that existing permit can be redone or -- MR. PAUL: They would probably have to apply for a new one. MR. KAUFMAN: So I would recommend that fines start accruing after 60 days. The amount of fine would be $100 a day. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: To clarify, we're accepting county's recommendation, 60 days with $100 per day fine. Any discussion? MR. ORTEGA: Yes. Because they are final inspections, or the two are final inspections, the county may open that up to clean it up, so you don't have to redo it from day one. MR. KAUFMAN: I don't know if this is a separate case that may be before the magistrate as far as the maintenance on this pool. MR. PAUL: Yes, it would be a separate case -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Mr. Ortega -- MR. PAUL: -- if they choose not to clean it. MR. ORTEGA: For time's sake. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I think you're saying that they might not have to re -app it, they would just simply open it, just for the finals. MR. ORTEGA: Because it's finals now. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Maybe it would be quicker than -- MR. ORTEGA: Perhaps. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We do have a motion. We have a second. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? Page 31 161 1 B 6 M' October 28, 2010 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sixty days and $100 per day. MR. PAUL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And that's the -- looks like the end of our public hearings. However, we do have one interesting situation. The attorney for Palm Lake, LLC, who has five cases being presented to us today for imposition of fines was in court this morning and wanted to come speak to us and I believe ask for an extension of time. He submitted a letter, two -page letter that basically describes all of the work that they have done towards the five cases. And in the conclusion he alludes to an extension request, but yet does not state it. If we start hearing those cases, you know, typically the way it works is we either vote up or down on it. And if that's the case, fines would start to accrue. I wanted to see if I could maybe poll the Board and see if the Board was willing to grant an extension given the written letter or if it's something where we just want to go ahead, impose the fines with the understanding that we could always abate them later. MR. LEFEBVRE: Mr. Kelly, question I have for you. Was he planning on coming to this meeting after the court case? CHAIRMAN KELLY: He said he would get out of court at 10:45, 10:15, something like that, today. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chair, what we could do is hear these Page 32 161 1 B 6 4`1 October 28, 2010 other impositions of fine first and see if he is here, and then deal with it if he's not here. At that time then we can amend the agenda if he is here to request -- MR. KAUFMAN: Or we could take a one -hour break. MS. RAWSON: Well, you never know when you're going to get out of court. I mean, that was his best estimate, but, you know, without any control of that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I like Jen's idea. We do have respondents waiting in the audience. Let's go ahead and move on. We'll go ahead and move to old business. Case number one, which is Ivy Jean Nebus, Judy Ann Blake and Betty Jo Robertson. And I believe there is correspondence in your packet. It was part of your packet that was left here this morning to go with this case. Investigator, if we could swear you in, please. (Speaker was duly sworn.) MR. BOX: For the record, my name is Investigator Box. I'm with the Code Enforcement here in Collier County. This is the Board of County Commissioners versus Ivy Jean Nebus, Judy Ann Blake, Betty Jo Robertson, the respondents. The case number on this is CEAU20090015258. The violations are violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 5.03.02(A) and the Florida Building Code 2004 Edition, Chapter One, Section 105.1. The location of the violation is 3994 Mercantile Avenue, Naples, Florida. Folio number is 275560003. The description of the violation is an unmaintained and unpermitted fence. Past orders. On July 22nd, of 2010 the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board which is OR4591, Page 1673, for more information. Page 33 16 t 1 66 October 28, 2010 The respondent has replied (sic) with the CEB orders as of September 23rd of 2010. The fines to date are described as the following: Order item number one, fines at the rate of $100 a day for a period between September 21 st, 2010 and September 23rd at 2010 for three days for a total of $300. Order item number five, operational costs of $81.15 have been paid. And the total amount due is $300. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have a question. What is the address once again? MR. BOX: 3994 Mercantile Avenue. MR. LEFEBVRE: Because on the imposition of fines and lien hearing, the address is 3991 Mercantile. MS. WALDRON: It should be 3994. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do I hear a motion? MR. KAUFMAN: I make a motion we abate the fine. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All the fines have been abated. Thank you, Investigator. Moving on to case number two, Lisa Dasher, Page 34 16 Irl g6, 1, er 28, 2010 CESD20090002945. And again, there was correspondence left at your desk this morning. (Speaker duly sworn.) MR. SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. This concerns case CESD20090002945, Board of County Commissioners versus Lisa Dasher. Violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i) and the Florida Building Code 2004 Edition, Chapter One, Permits, Section 105.1. The location is 3551 Carson Lakes Circle, Immokalee, Florida. The folio is #25577800404. And description of violation is that patio in the rear of the property without Collier County permits. Past orders. On October 22nd, 2009, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See attached OR book and Page 4506 and 2523 for more information. The respondent has complied with the CEB orders as of September 7th, 2010. The fines and cost to date are described as follows: Order number two, fines at the rate of $100 per day for the period between June 26th, 2010 and September 7th, 2010, 74 days, for a total of $7,400. Item number one, operational costs of $86.43 have been paid. And the total amount due is $7,400. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the Board? MR. ORTEGA: Yes. When you say patio, was this a structure? MR. SNOW: Yes, it was. It was attached. MR.ORTEGA: Attached. MR. SNOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any further discussion? Page 35 16144' T6 October 28, 2010 MR. LEFEBVRE: Originally it was a stipulated agreement where she agreed to correct the problem within 120 days. We did then give her another 120 days to correct the problem and she still went over basically two and a half months. So I think some kind of fine is in order. I think maybe not the $7,400, but I think there should be some kind of fine. MR. SNOW: If I may add, if the Board would remember, this is the woman who had to investigate was it feasible and financially possible for her to keep the structure. She did hire a contractor and the contractor gave her a quote on it. That was her original intent. And once she did that, it was not -- she felt it wasn't feasible for her to do that, that's what -- and then she had to get the permit and they did all the work themselves. So we do request some leniency from the Board. MR. KAUFMAN: Did she contact Code Enforcement during the time where the fines were accruing to say that she needed more time, or -- MR. SNOW: That she was progressing. It had already gone past the time and she was progressing. She had the demolition permit and she and her family were removing it. It's just -- that's why she's not here today to plead her case before the Board, because she's at work. I think anybody that has a job in this economy is fortunate and I think that's the reason she's not here. And she was in the office, I would say, weekly, giving us status updates and letting us know. MR. DEAN: I'd like to make a motion to abate the fine. MR. UESPERANCE: Second that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. Page 36 16 B 6 October 28, 2010 MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Carries unanimously. Thank you. Moving on to the next case, which is CESD20090017586, Maria Alma Plunkett. We do have another case, but we have to read them separately. (Speakers duly sworn.) MR. SNOW: She does have an interpreter. Do you want to swear her interpreter in? (Speaker duly sworn.) MR. SNOW: This concerns case No. CEB -- CESD20090017586, the Board of County Commissioners versus Maria Alma Plunkett, violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41 as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The location is 1901 Immokalee Drive, Immokalee, Florida. The Folio number is 128520006. And the description, a carport and room added to the primary structure without first obtaining Collier County permits. Past orders, on May 27th, 2010 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. Respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4583 and Page 2962 for more information. The respondent has complied with the CEB order as of October 4th, 2010. The fines and cost to date are described as follows. Order number one and three, fines at the rate of $200 per day for the period between September 25th 2010 and October 4th, 20105 10 days, for a Page 37 1611 B6 October 28, 2010 total of $2,000. Order number six, operational costs of $80 have been paid. The total amount to date is $2,000. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, is there any questions from the Board? MR. KAUFMAN: You said that the operational costs have been paid? MR. SNOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: There was an amended imposition of fines charging document left at the desk. That's changed that and also changed the final amount to 2,000 instead of 2,080. If there's not any discussion, I'll entertain a motion. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, do you want to hear from the respondent? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we need to? It's up to you. Would you like to add anything? MR. SNOW: She doesn't hear well. [ MM1l,U11,110 111 =05] MR. SNOW: They were diligent in trying to comply. Again, it's the financial issues involved with doing what they did. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to abate. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. case. 161 1 B6 rrl October 28, 2010 Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Tell her that there's no fines on the first We'll hear the second case now. MR. SNOW: This is CEB case number CESD20090017585, the Board of County Commissioners versus Maria Alma Plunkett, the Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41 as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The location is 1809 Immokalee Drive, Immokalee, Florida. Folio number is 128480007. A carport and shed constructed without permits. The past orders on May 27th, 2010, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4583 and Page 2868 for more information. The respondent has complied with the CEB orders as of September 29th, 2010. The fines and cost to date are described as follows. Order number one and two, fines at the rate of $200 per day for the period between September 25th, 2010 and September 29th 2010, five days, for a total of $1,000. Order number five of the Board, operational cost of $80.29 have been paid. And the total amount to date is $1,000. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the Board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to abate. MR. DEAN: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 39 1611B6 '"1 October 28, 2010 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, we also abated or completely got rid of the fines for the second case. Let her know that we say thank you very much for working hard to work with us. And have a good day. MR. SNOW: We thank the Board very much. MS. PLUNKETT: Thank you very much. INTERPRETER: Thank up very much. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Back to that attorney situation. We are now at our last five cases. All five of them are for the same respondent, Palm Lake, LLC. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chairman, should we maybe take a 10, 15- minute break. We'll give the opportunity for the attorney to show UP. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great idea. So moved. So we'll break and come back at 10:15. (A recess was taken.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, we'll call the meeting of the Code Enforcement Board back to order. Next case, actually next five, but we do have to rule on each one individually, is going to be Palm Lake, LLC. And Mr. Erickson, we are in receipt of your letter. And we're kind of at a junction here where we either need for hear the cases for the imposition of fine on all five of those or we amend our agenda and presume that the letter you submitted was a request or a motion for an IU- 16 1-1- B6- October 28, 2010 extension of time on those cases. So we're kind of waiting to see, you know, kind of the intent of the letter. MR. ERICKSON: Well, the intention of the letter was twofold. One was to bring the Board up to date as to where we're at here and the problems we're incurring. And the second one is to -- obviously the imposition of fines is a critical juncture of these proceedings as I see it. And it's to request a continuance of the imposition of fines so that we can, quite frankly, figure out a methodology as to how to move forward with this. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, if I could, I'll stop you right there. We'll go ahead and amend our agenda, see this as a motion and then we'll hear more behind the reasons and we'll vote from there. MR. ERICKSON: That would be fine. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, great. In that case I'll entertain a motion to amend the -- MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to extend the -- or change the agenda for today. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, so now this is a motion, which is part of our public hearings, and we can take each case individually or hear them as a whole and we just have to vote individually. Page 41 16 Ifir B 6 October 28, 2010 MR. ERICKSON: That would be fine. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Azure, do you have a recommendation, you want to do them all as once? (Speakers duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Azure, do you suggest we just -- sorry. MS. WALDRON: Let's let Mr. Erickson state what he's asking for since we moved these items from imposition of fines and it's his request at this time. MR. ERICKSON: So far this is a -- as the Board's aware, this is a difficult situation. It's a -- there's numerous violations that have festered in this park for years. And what we've done, I believe, is made substantial corrections and progress on the issues that are directly related and under the control, direct control, of the park owner. We may not have completed everything. For instance, the electrical, I understand there needs to be a final payment. There's been inspections. But other than that all the electrical's been completed, which was the most serious, I believe, certainly considered the most serious of the situations. The trash situation, trash and litter, it's been cleaned up, it's been looked at, it's been better. Then they come back and it's messy again. That's an ongoing problem with a community of this sort. I'm not sure -- in that respect they have certainly done things, they've cleaned up things and then it's gotten worse again. What we really have is a difficult situation on -- we've had -- another aspect is the unlicensed vehicles. I spoke with Ms. Sorrels yesterday and apparently most of the unlicensed vehicles were taken care of and then she tells me that she was back there recently and two more unlicensed vehicles are there. Again, park residents bring the vehicles on. An ongoing problem. But we did take care of about three or four of the unlicensed vehicles. So we have addressed those issues. The most significant issues clearly are the unpermitted structures Page 42 161 1 B6 r- 0 October 285 2010 and flood issue -- you know, things built below the flood level. And the unpermitted structures, I believe just about all the unpermitted structures and setback violations, things of that nature are -- involve property, mobile homes, units owned by private individuals. And that's where the real problem comes in. And that's the concern I have is whether it is being properly addressed and what is the proper way to address it. One of the things I pointed out in the statutes I came across in doing research on these matters, is Florida Statute 723.083. And I'm not sure exactly where it fits in here but it's an interesting statute. It's in the mobile home park chapter of Florida Statutes. It's a short one and I'll read it to you. It's entitled Government Action Affecting Removal of Mobile Homeowners. And it says no agency of municipal, local, county or state government shall approve any application for rezoning or take any other official action which would result in the removal or relocation of mobile homeowners residing in a mobile home park without first determining that adequate mobile home parks or other suitable facilities exist for the relocation of the mobile homeowners. And I bring this out. I think it's -- I'm not sure if it applies to this situation or not. Clearly we have a situation to where when we were first -- when I was first before this Board, one of the discussions was whether or not the park owner could force these people, evict them because of these violations. Again, that's questionable as to whether they could evict them. But if we are talking about evictions, we're clearly talking about the removal or relocation of mobile homeowners. And that -- this statute, and I think the board is probably aware that the mobile home park statute has significant restrictions on a mobile home park owner's ability to remove people from the park. It's a very complicated process. And it is my view that basically what needs to be done is this is Page 43 161[1 B6 } October 28, 2010 not just an owner of land fighting code enforcement. It's much more than that. Because the entire park, with about 60 to 70 residential units in the park, all of them are affected by it. There has been, and my understanding is there has been disruptions. The people in the park have been told -- they're aware of these things going on. They're not really aware of the specifics. Most of them are lower income. Very few of them quite frankly speak English. They communicate. They do have a resident in the park who speaks both English and Spanish who communicates with them. They were told at the outset of these problems, and the unit owners have essentially ignored it. Nobody's gone out to correct the problems existing with their mobile homes. And so it would be my suggestion that we work out some sort of arrangement where code enforcement meets with these people individually. It almost has to be done on an individual basis with these people as to what needs to be done. Obviously the number overriding concern is the safety and well -being of the park residents. Next, you know, we do -- understandably at some point things have to be brought up to code, or I'm not sure what the means are, if there is even means for waiving certain matters, whether things would be grandfathered in. I mean, again, at the initial hearing on this we went through a history of this park, and the history indicated that it was started in I believe 65. Most of the development took place in the early '70's. I've been led -- I saw somewhere that there's never been a permit pulled in this park for like 15 years. Obviously there has been significant additions. Just about every mobile home in that park has an addition to it. When I walked around the park it's just obvious that just about every mobile home in that park as an addition. And my expectation is that probably 90 percent of those were done without proper permits. And so it is my view that this matter does have to be addressed Page 44 161 1 B6 ""' October 28, 2010 but it has to be addressed through the government, through the park residents and the owner of the park in a more mutual workable solution to see what is available to people. And that's why we're requesting that the assessments, there has been improvements made here, and we're requesting that the Board refrain from imposing the fines. I mean, I looked at the fines here, it looks like it would probably be over $1,000 a day as to the fines that are to be imposed on this park for right now. And this is a park as I understand it that's upside down as far as the mortgage. It was purchased I believe by this current owner in 2006, and we all know what that generally means. And it's something that this community needs to deal with. And I'm just suggesting that there may be a better means of dealing with it to see if we get the park residents more involved in this. Because it's going to require the park residents' cooperation. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Erickson, one short question. The individual units that are in this park. Are they tenants or do they own the property? MR. ERICKSON: My understanding is that it's probably 80 percent, 70, 80 percent of them own their mobile home. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'm talking about the land. MR. ERICKSON: Oh, the land's owned by Palm Lake, LLC, no doubt about that. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So they rent the spaces. MR. ERICKSON: Yeah, they rent lots from the Palm Lake LLC. No question about that. And I have -- I've researched it. And I found that as the landowner, they're responsible for the code enforcement. That's my understanding as well. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Let me help bring some clarify. And if I'm wrong we can, you know, have that kind of discussion so that everybody is clear. Page 45 161 1 B6 " 4 October 28, 2010 You mentioned the statute, the mobile home statute. I believe that the cases here revolve accessory structures added on to the original mobile homes. And I don't think we're talking about actual evictions for people from the home itself. I think it's just removing those accessory structures. You also stated that, you know, a lot of these were, maybe even all of them were added to these original mobile homes without permits, and that it was a long time ago that they were added. We know from prior case history that there's a definitive statute or ordinance here in Collier County since 1969 that requires all structures on a property be permitted. And even in '69 they talked about such items as setbacks, which is a few of the violations that we talked about today. Code enforcement and the violations that have been filed against the property will need to be addressed. Today we need to listen to the motion and try to come up with a time frame to give you the latitude necessary, or to say, you know, listen, we've given you enough time and that's how it's going to be. But I don't think there's anyone that's not willing to work with you. But I definitely -- we need to move past the fact that a violation exists or not, because we have found than it does. Now it's what can we do to work with you to get the violations corrected. MR. ERICKSON: I agree. I agree. There's no dispute that violations exist. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is the property currently for sale? MR. ERICKSON: It is listed for sale. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is it under contract? MR. ERICKSON: No, it's not under contract. MR. LEFEBVRE: He's not under contract. What I'm worried about is that currently this owner is biding his time, basically. And by not imposing any fines there won't be any more fees tacked on to this property when ultimately it goes to sale. And I'm worried here that Page 46 16'I 1 B6 " October 28, 2010 we're -- we have to weigh the safety and well -being of these people versus the owner. And it appears here that it seems to me that the owner is trying to skirt maybe some additional fees so when he faces the bank in a short sale situation he won't have these fees tacked on to them. It's been neglected for quite some time, and I feel that the safety of these people is of utmost importance, and we need to definitely take that into consideration. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Gerald, I want to add just a little bit to your concern. Correct me if I'm wrong, Diane, but if a property is sold short sale, there's no requirement for a code inspection; correct? MS. FLAGG: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So there is a real potential that if it does sell that the new owner unsuspectingly is buying all of these problems. MS. FLAGG: Because you have heard these cases and those orders were recorded, when the -- if there's a title company, an attorney involved in the search, they will find those orders in the record. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right, but what I'm worried about is if, let's say we grant another six months, it goes under contract, it closes, there won't be any fines attached and therefore the owner won't incur any extra cost or at this point potentially the bank won't incur any additional cost. I think that this problem has been ongoing for quite some time and that we need to take into consideration that he has a responsibility to these people to correct these issues. I know some of them are brought on by the tenants, but for the respondent to ask the county to go individually to the tenants there I think is totally, totally inappropriate. It was a problem that was brought on partially by the owner not keeping track of what was being done to the property or purchasing a property that had these issues already on them. So I think it's definitely the owner's responsibility to Page 47 16 Ii 1` B 6 October 28, 2010 go to the tenants to get these issues corrected. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Further comments? MR. ORTEGA: I concur. MR. KAUFMAN: It seems to me that most of the problem seems to be you fix something, the tenants break it again. I remember that the original case, there were new documents drawn up as far as the tenants having to adhere to certain rules and regulations that were established in the park; is that correct? MR. ERICKSON: I believe so. I really haven't looked in -- I know we raised that issue and that was discussed. MR. KAUFMAN: And I agree with Mr. Lefebvre that it's not the job of Code Enforcement to go to the individuals, it's the property owner who Code Enforcement has gone to. And that's their responsibility, unless I'm wrong. But what has to happen between the owner of the property and the tenants to stop violations from occurring so that it can be fixed once and for all? MR. ERICKSON: Well, the main problem that I see is it's not really recurring new violations and things of that sort. The problem is the stuff that's already built. I just think -- and the concern is some owners have left just because there's a lot of concerns in the owner -- within the park that this park is going to end up being closed, which clearly is a possibility with these situations. So under that scenario, under that understanding, people quit paying rent. The people aren't going to spend money, go out and spend a few thousand dollars to take out their living room that they use that, especially if the park's going to be closed later anyway. And so that's why the concern I have is if in fact it's such that everybody just ends up moving out of the park, then there's no way to keep the parking going, he's going to end up in foreclosure and the county could very well have a bigger mess on its hands. That's the way I look at it from a practical point of view. O- I61fT B6 ` October 28, 2010 What is Collier County facing? Yes, we can put the fines on here and we can impose fines of $2,000 a day, which are -- would add to the mortgage that's already, you know, I believe they would be subordinate to the mortgage. The mortgage comes first when it does sell or gets foreclosed. MR. KAUFMAN: I don't believe that's true. MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't think that's true either. Diane, do you know in fact, or Jean, do you know in fact if these assessments, if there is a fine if that is -- MS. RAWSON: I think it moves to the top, doesn't it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's primary. MS. FLAGG: The county has a super priority lien. MS. RAWSON: I think it does. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. MR. KAUFMAN: I guess you have to separate the cases. In the case with the cars with the untagged vehicles that were cleaned up and now others have come in there, has the owner of the park gone to those people to try to resolve that situation? MR. ERICKSON: Right, he's gone -- as far as my understanding is, they've gone to everybody with the cars and they've got them -- people working on getting the licensed vehicles. I believe there's a couple of RV trailers nobody really even knows who owns, and it's probably going to be almost impossible to figure out how to get licensed. MR. LEFEBVRE: Can I make a suggestion. I think the best way of doing this would be to go through each case individually and give a quick synopsis of what has been done to correct the issue. And then we can look at these individually and say okay, we can give more time for this case or no, we can't. I think that's probably the best way of going about it. We're talking about -- we're lumping these all together and we just can't do that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We do have a good general overall O- • 16 1 1 B6 October 28, 2010 picture of where the respondent stands. So I agree, Gerald, great idea, we'll go through each one individually just as they are in order in our documents, and -- MR. ORTEGA: Quick question for the investigator. When you were out there, these structures that are unpermitted, are they habitable or non - habitable? MS. SORRELS: For the record, Azure Sorrels, investigator with Collier County Code Enforcement Board. They would be unhabitable. They are below flood and the additions are built onto the mobile homes. They were not elevated so they are below flood. MR. ORTEGA: Okay, let me rephrase the question. Is it a porch that's been added or is it a bedroom that's been added? MS. SORRELS: I can think of one, maybe two that are actually porches, the rest have been living space, living rooms, bedrooms, yes. MR. ORTEGA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right, so the first case is going to be CENA20100002928. This one is the litter situation. If the litter comes into compliance but then due to lack of policing litter then accumulates again, it turns into a situation where its a repeat offense, correct? MS. SORRELS: It would not be a repeat offense until it's been adjudicated and that violation has been abated. If it recurred, yes, correct, it would be a repeat. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I only ask you that because I wanted to point out that it would really behoove the owner to make sure that he not only comes into compliance but then stays in compliance, whether it's an on -site manager's responsibility to clean up the trash himself or what, because those fines will then almost -- they can go all the way up to four times the original amount. So in the litter situation, how are we doing? MS. SORRELS: If I could make a couple comments just so I could clarify a couple of things that he had mentioned. And I think Page 50 161 "1 ` B6 " October 28, 2010 Mr. Lefebvre or Mr. Kelly had already mentioned it. The county is not asking the park to be closed. I understand that there is a Florida statute that might apply to that. But they have the options of abating the violations, fixing the property maintenance and also obtaining the proper permits for the additions and so forth. So the county has never asked the park to be closed. As for this particular case, the county would recommend that we impose the fines on the litter case due to the fact -- excuse me, let me back up. It was mentioned about the property owner informing the residents, the tenants of the area about the laws that he might have in effect, which are from what I read through here, are pretty much in accordance with the county ordinances. And according to the property manager on -site, he had gone through and issued one of these to everything single one of the tenants and they had signed saying they had received it. So with that being said, when I went out and made the site visit yesterday and seen some of the violations in regards to this particular case in the litter, yes, in some of my site visits litter has been cleaned up. As of yesterday, I go back out and I see new litter in place. In my -- let me take that back. The way it comes across is that the property manager is not enforcing any of these with the tenants so they are, you know, choosing to do what they will. In the rules and regulations that he handed out, they are able to fine them, according to these rules and regulations. As far as -- I can't speak if they have been fined, but they have been made aware of what they can and cannot do inside that park. CHAIRMAN KELLY: If I could, just real quick, just to make sure we're all on the same page. It's not the Code Enforcement Board's duty to instruct a landowner how to go about enforcing these, just merely needs to get done. And I appreciate the information, but I also want to point out that it's just additional information on how he's attempting to take action. Page 51 16111 c� � t er 28, 2010 MS. SORRELS: Correct, understood. I just wanted to make sure that it was brought up, because it was questioned. So I just wanted to make sure everybody knew that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, it's good, because at least in my mind it looks as though the owner is trying to push some of that responsibility onto the residents, which is excellent. We just don't want to see it all get put to the residents and we continue to, you know, try to hide behind that as a defense. If you own the property, you own the responsibilities, unfortunately, Mr. Erickson. Okay. MS. SORRELS: Just as I had mentioned, I made my site visit yesterday and there was new litter that I had observed from the original pictures of the hearings throughout my different rechecks throughout this time frame. And it's everything from piles of beer cans that had been once -- has once been removed and now they're back, to tires to plywood, to bags, buckets, all types of different things that are newer than what was there the first time around. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Mr. Erickson, you can of course object to any of this because we don't have any proof to say -- except for the testimony. MR. ERICKSON: I believe she can testify as to what she observed, so I'm not going to -- you know, I don't question her, she's been very up front all along. MS. SORRELS: I do have photos, if that helps. MR. ERICKSON: My concern on that is that -- twofold. One is the report from the Health Department that I submitted at a previous hearing. And quite frankly, I believe that an issue such as the litter should be deferred to the Health Department. A lot of these issues I believe should be deferred to other agencies, to the Health Department. I understand Code Enforcement's responsible for the unpermitted structures and things. But the litter, when the Health Department Page 52 16111 $*! T6 October 28, 2010 comes in and does their regular inspections and gives a report that yeah, there's problems, but it's cleaned up, overall it's satisfactory, I think that that should be given great weight. And here again, I don't think that a need to assess fines at this time on the litter, they cleaned up. Maybe we do have to come up with a little bit even better process as to how the litter is going to get cleaned up on a weekly basis. But again, there's been certainly no indication that the owner himself is causing the litter or that he's been excessively lax in allowing the litter. Apparently it was cleaned up from these initial reports, and it comes back. It's an ongoing problem that does have to be dealt with. But I don't think it's the most serious problem facing this park right now, and it's not a health - serious health -wise that has to be addressed and has to be maintained. But I believe that that quite frankly is something that the Health department reviews on a regular basis and has done so and has been satisfied with. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I can understand what you're saying, you know, using a third party to help justify to what level things are acceptable and whatnot. It's kind of a gray area in this particular case, since it was found that a violation exists. I believe we're looking to get to a point where no litter exists for a consecutive period of time. And I think once that occurs, then we can go ahead and close the case as complied with and, you know, move on. MR. KAUFMAN: I have one question. Would extending -- since we're taking this case by case. Would extending or doing a continuance on this particular case serve any purpose going forward if you had another month or two months to work the issues regarding this particular case to bring it into compliance? MR. ERICKSON: The only purpose I can see is that understanding now and establishing an ongoing policy as to how the litter situation is going to be addressed. My understanding is that the litter situation was essentially taken Page 53 16 11, B6 October 28, 2010 care of and it comes back. So that's what we've learned in the last couple of months is that it can be cleaned up but it's obviously going to come back, and it needs to be addressed in a way that there needs to be some park procedure is what I'm gathering right now. There needs to be some park procedure added that's going to take care of the litter, whether it's putting a dumpster out there that gets emptied every month or every week or every two weeks, whatever, something along those lines that could be worked out satisfactorily with Code Enforcement that's going to take care of this. Obviously we can't keep people from throwing beer cans in the adjacent -- or it's very difficult to. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think that policy and procedure should have been put in place within the period that we gave you to get this corrected, which was, I think 60 days, roughly. Those should have been put in place. I'm at a very hard juncture to give much more leeway on this. I feel that we should impose the fines and then if in fact this is corrected, we could then look and reevaluate the -- what fines there are at that point. So I make a motion to impose the fines. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any further discussion? MR. KAUFMAN: I have. On the -- has anybody been -- they've probably been threatened. But has anybody been removed from the park for violating the that were established that were presented, I don't know, 30 or 60 days ago when you were here last? MR. ERICKSON: No, not that I'm aware of, not since these proceedings. We had two evictions that took place, that were taking place right about the time that these proceedings began. MR. KAUFMAN: But had nothing to do with -- MR. ERICKSON: One of the proceedings, one was one of the units that we have a demolition permit for that was kept unacceptable. Page 54 16 I Bb October 28, 2010 And the other was just some very rowdy problem residents that had to be taken care of, that had to be eliminated from the park. MS. RAWSON: Just a moment of clarification. Mr. Lefebvre's motion is really a motion to deny the respondent's motion for an extension of time. And then we'll get to the other. MR. LEFEBVRE: I modify my motion to deny the motion for extension of time. MR. L'ESPERANCE: And I modify my second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good catch. MR. LEFEBVRE: And now can I make a motion to impose the fines? MS. RAWSON: Well, let's -- I'm going to do separate orders, so let's do one thing at a time. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have to get through all the motions first. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, very good. Any other discussion, Mr. Ortega? MR. ORTEGA: Just one comment that, we're looking at obviously trying to work with the situation. But at the end of the day it's the owner's responsibility regardless, whether it's Health Department, whether it's dumpsters, or whatever. I just want to bring that up to light. MR. LEFEBVRE: It just seems like the respondent here stated that he wanted Code Enforcement to work with the individual tenants. Now he's saying that he feels that there should be another department, Health Department working. He just keeps on -- he keeps on saying it's not our problem -- MR. ORTEGA: The owner is responsible, period. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right, exactly. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I think the implication was hey, the Health Department says it's okay, you know, come on, that's another government agency, give that some weight in your decision. I think Page 55 ib 111 B6 October 28, 2010 that's -- if I'm correct. MR. ERICKSON: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So any further discussion on this motion? MR. LAVINSKI: I'd like to ask the investigator, was there any date in time that you can say that was in compliance regarding the trash? MS. SORRELS: I'm glad you asked that because I was going to clarify that. There has never been one site inspection where the property has been completely clear and free of litter. There's been improvements, yes, but never completely where I could say the violation had been abated and closed. MR. LAVINSKI: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good question, Jim. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor of denying the motion for continuance, signify by saying aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, so that motion has been denied. No fines have been imposed yet, that's at a later juncture if we do that. Next case. This is going to be case number CEPM20100004292. And this is the electric issues, if I'm not mistaken, the pipes where the lines weren't buried and the electrical conduits and meter Page 56 I61 d B6 October 28, 2010 boxes and whatnot that were exposed. MS. SORRELS: Correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sir? MR. ERICKSON: On this one briefly, it's my understanding that the only thing remaining to be completed is the payment of a final inspection cost, I believe and of a couple hundred dollars. And I spoke with the electrician yesterday and he indicated he's waiting for that check from the owner and expects to get it in the mail today or tomorrow and that that will be taken care of. MS. SORRELS: That is correct. Under the 13 permits that were issued for the FP &L stations and other electrical issues, all of them but four have been C.O.'d. The remaining four, the inspections have been conducted between August and September and they were passed on their final inspection. There are four pending fees, three of $60 and one at $5.00. So as soon as those pending fees are paid, they would receive their certification. MR. LEFEBVRE: Can we continue this till next month? CHAIRMAN KELLY: That was going to be my suggestion. Does the county wants to remove this case in the chance that it will be paid in the next 30 days. If not, you can put it on our next agenda. MS. SORRELS: We'll go ahead and withdraw then -- or continue it to the next hearing. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Under old business, imposition of fines, case number six has been withdrawn by the county. Okay, case number seven is CEV, as in Victor, 20100003082. And this is in reference to the unlicensed and inoperable vehicles that are stored on the property. We already talked about that generally, but MR. ERICKSON: I don't think I have anything further to add. CHAIRMAN KELLY: What's the position of the Board or the county on the reoccurrence of vehicles? Page 57 16 Ill B6 October 28, 2010 MR. LEFEBVRE: Have they ever been in compliance? MS. SORRELS: No, they have not. MR. KAUFMAN: Is there a particular vehicle or two that exists from day one that is the problem? MS. SORRELS: Well, yes, the travel trailers, the RV travel trailers that would require a currents license plate have not been licensed. And as Mr. Erickson had stated, it's because they're not sure who the owners are to get them licensed. All of the original unlicensed passenger vehicles have either been licensed or removed. However, due to my site visit yesterday, two new ones had been brought on to the property. I do have photos, if you would like to see that. And I did speak to one of the vehicle owners, who stated that yes, he was aware it was unlicensed and yes, that he had been spoken to -- he had been spoken to by the property manager that we could not have it there. So he was aware that unlicensed vehicles were not allowed. MR. LEFEBVRE: Are these two recreational vehicles occupied? MS. SORRELS: No. The one was originally and now it is not. MR. UESPERANCE: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: And then there's still one that they use for maintenance, correct, of the park? There's a vehicle that's used for maintenance that is there? MS. SORRELS: That is correct. It's like a flatbed type pickup truck that they supposedly use for maintenance throughout the park, but it would still require, because it is considered a vehicle by DMV, would require to have a current license plate attached to it. MR. ERICKSON: Just briefly in response, it is my understanding that if you have a -- I'm not positive of this, but it's our understanding, this is what I was told by the park manager, it's his understanding as well as, that you are allowed to have a vehicle unlicensed that's used for maintenance that does not leave the premises. I. _ _ lb('] I B6 " October 28, 2010 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Just as I understand motor vehicle law, that's true. For instance, farm equipment is allowed to not be licensed as long as it doesn't drive on a public road. But I mean, you would know better than I. MS. SORRELS: The way I understand it from the DMV, this vehicle has got the capability of traveling on a road, so therefore it would have to have a current license plate. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any suggestions from the Board? MR. KAUFMAN: Would granting a continuance on this offer the owner of the property sufficient time to have the unregistered vehicles removed, or we're going to be in the same position 30 or 60 days down the road? MR. ERICKSON: I think -- I'm not positive, I believe one of the units that we have a demolition for is maybe one of the RV's that were abandoned. I'm not positive about that. But if we're -- again, if we're down to getting that one vehicle registered that's used for park services, I would assume that could be taken care of. And then addressing specifically the two units that have to be removed, the RV's that have to be removed or demolished, I would assume that should be able to be taken care of if we -- to resolve this, rather than have fines imposed. MR. KAUFMAN: I'm just thinking, if I had a piece of property and there was a vehicle on the piece of property and nobody raised their hand that it's mine, it could have it towed off the property and it would be done. MR. ERICKSON: That problem -- and I'm not sure of this. There's a very good likelihood that these properties are being rented and the park is receiving rent from these properties. And the park needs as much income as they can get, obviously. And that may, you know, why I would assume the park manager or park owner is not interested in having the vehicle demolished. But again, that's his responsibility to either get a license or to Page 59 16 111 B6 October 28, 2010 have it taken care of I recognize that. MR. LEFEBVRE: He might be interested in removing it if he is charged a fine of $200 a day, so -- MR. ERICKSON: That's right. I agree. And then that involves having the tenant who lives there -- say again, I think that yes, it's the owner's responsibility. But there's other people involved here, there's citizens of Collier County, there's people that live in this place that lose their place to live under those circumstances that it definitely impacts the people of this county, the people that live in this park. CHAIRMAN KELLY: When you originally mentioned that other statute, there was a part two of that. And part of the requirements were to look into whether or not another form of housing was available to the people who were being evicted. And I'm not an attorney, but I think in this climate of economic housing glut availability, I think you would have a hard time proving that we couldn't find other housing here in the county if they were evicted. MR. ERICKSON: Probably -- interesting aspect of that, the way I read that is that would imply that these people can move their mobile homes to another mobile home place. Probably the reality of this is there's, I think, as most of these mobile parks, most of these mobile homes cannot be moved. MR. KAUFMAN: Especially if the license plates are not on the vehicle or not up to date. MR. ERICKSON: Again, I know I was involved very much in the Greystone case and I know there were very few mobile homes that were actually removed out of that park when it was closed down because quite simply these -- MR. KAUFMAN: So there are two types of homes there. There are trailers, mobile homes without license plates, probably without tires. MR. ERICKSON: Right. .1 161 1 B6 " October 28, 2010 MR. KAUFMAN: They don't need to be licensed by DMV. And then you have other ones who have tires and they do need to be licensed. MR. ERICKSON: I believe the vast majority of them are actually mobile homes. There's only a few of the RV's that have to have licenses, and these are things that have been there for a long time and again probably could not realistically -- I would assume that the two that have been referred to could not realistically be moved. MR. KAUFMAN: If the tires were removed and the license plates -- the expired or nonvalid license plates were removed and they fit the -- I don't know whether you put them on concrete blocks or whatever with the proper tie - downs, would that be in compliance? MR. LEFEBVRE: That was exactly where I was going to go. MS. SORRELS: That would actually have to be decided by the Building Department. And the reason being is if the tires were removed, they would have to meet the Land Development Code requiring tie -downs and other things, sewer, connecting to sewer and utilities and things of that nature. So I couldn't really say if they did that if it would be in compliance. If they did, they would have to obtain permits to do so. MR. KAUFMAN: So then there's another opportunity to resolve the situation by not cutting the baby in half, as you will, but maybe given sufficient time that could be tracked down and either fix it one way or the other. MR. ERICKSON: I would request that, that -- and we could get a definitive answer what we're going to do with these remaining units. MR. KAUFMAN: Why don't we grant a continuance on -- 30 days on that as well. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion to grant the 30 -day extension. Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a second. Page 61 16'I 1B6 *i October 28, 2010 Is there any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: I would like to ask Mr. Erickson, if we do grant the 30 days, it wouldn't be just to find out what you want to do, it would actually be to comply. Would that be enough time, sir? MR. ERICKSON: It would be enough time to certainly get started -- you know, again, to comply, I'm not sure what would be involved. I don't think it would be enough time to get a title to an abandoned vehicle, but it would be enough time to have the process instigated to get a title to an abandoned vehicle. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, the scenario would be 30 days is up, the following meeting we'd be right back in this position, possibly imposing fines on something that wasn't in compliance yet. So -- go ahead, Azure. I just don't want to extend and then be in the same position. MR. ERICKSON: I agree. MS. SORRELS: Gentlemen, my apologies. I spoke too quickly, I should have thought before I answered. To -- again, I would still leave it up to the Building Department and the Zoning Department. But from past history on other cases that I have had, those type of vehicles, with the tires removed and tied down would still be considered -- it would have to be zoned TTRVC, travel trailer rental park, not -- and this is zoned mobile home. So I don't -- I'm not saying that it's not -- it can't be done, but it would possibly be required to have the property zoned TTRVC for travel trailer. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Still, given the assumption that we can't do that and it would be a situation we would just have to remove the unit, would 30 days be enough to remove the unit? MR. ERICKSON: It should be enough to remove the unit. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, do we have any -- MR. LEFEBVRE: So to be perfectly clear, we're looking at 30 Page 62 16I 1 86 "" October 28, 2010 days, if you come in front of us that the problem will be resolved, abated. I just want to make that perfectly clear. Correct? MR. ERICKSON: I understand that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Correct, Mr. Kaufman? MR. KAUFMAN: Yes, absolutely. MR. LEFEBVRE: And the respondent has stated yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. VESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, on that case it's 30 -day extension. And Jean, you've got the case number on that one? MS. RAWSON: 3082, yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good. Next case, CESD20100004059. This is the big one. This is the one that refers to the additions and structures and carports that were added to the mobile homes without permits. MS. SORRELS: I'm sorry, gentlemen, my apologies. CHAIRMAN KELLY: No, that's all right. There's a lot of paperwork. MS. SORRELS: Just for clarification, we are discussing the ones for the unpermitted structures and additions; is that correct? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Right. Page 63 1611 B 6 October 28, 2010 MS. SORRELS: There hasn't been any changes regarding the additions or the alterations made to the mobile homes. There has been two demo permits that have been issued. One is for lot three, which is actually -- it applies to this case, but there's actually its own separate case with the Special Magistrate. And then lot 49, which is completely about this case, the demo permits have been issued. When I spoke with the contractor earlier, he has not received the okay from the owner to start demolish. But as other permits being applied for, there has not been any other permits applied for. However, lot 33 did remove a carport. Unfortunately they did not obtain a permit to do so. CHAIRMAN KELLY: They get an after- the -fact and just paid the fees? MS. SORRELS: Again, it was at my site visit yesterday, and I had not had an opportunity to speak with anyone. And as a matter of fact, when I spoke with Mr. Erickson yesterday, amongst everything else I forgot to mention that that had been removed. I do have a picture, if you'd like to see it. But that's where my status is for the permits. MR. KAUFMAN: I have a question. If there was no permit to put it up, why would you need a permit to take it down? CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's one of those anomalies. But it is an actual ordinance, and it's real. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Was this one of the -- MR. ERICKSON: The question I had for Ms. Sorrels, is how many -- if she knows, how many units are we talking about? MS. SORRELS: For -- that has unpermitted -- MR. ERICKSON: Unpermitted. MS. SORRELS: Out of -- there's 60 lots. I don't believe all of them are occupied. I believe two or three are vacant. And then there's two mobile homes that appear to meet all of the Land Developments Page 64 1611 ' October 28, 2010 codes, and they're part of the mobile homes, which would be the screened porches. So the exception of the five, all of them have additions that are illegal, whether it be carports, living space. MR. ERICKSON: So that's what I was getting at here. We have basically 55 homes that people are living in that are not in compliance. And how do we -- I don't have the answer right off the top of my head as to how to deal with this. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Let me address that statute again, because the statute refers to evicting someone from the home. We're not evicting them from the home, we're just evicting them from the part that wasn't permitted, that was built onto the home. So I don't think the statute applies. Although, like I said, I'm not an attorney so I really don't know. MR. ERICKSON: I agree. I could argue one thing, and I certainly would expect the county to argue that it's not -- that the -- taking off an improperly added room does not mean somebody has to move out of there. CHAIRMAN KELLY: The problem that -- and we're not the county, we're really the go- between between both parties, and we try to be as fair in all our rulings. But the part that weighs on my mind is -- this is just a scenario, we hope it's not true -- somebody built this little addition onto the side of a mobile home, they ran some electric, the electric wasn't run properly, it starts a fire and someone dies in the fire. And we have to diligently try to work with landowners to abate those situations so that they don't happen. Even though they might not have happened for the previous 15 years, the fact remains that without an inspector properly looking at these, you know, the potential of threat remains. MR. ERICKSON: But the concern I have is that obviously I suppose the alternative of the landowner is to evict everybody that Page 65 16141 B6 October 28, 2010 doesn't comply. Well, if he's evicting people that aren't complying, he is essentially -- the statute says which would result -- you cannot do an official action which would result in the removal or relocation. Obviously that would result in the removal or relocation of these people. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I think what we're stating is that you're not evicting the people from their home, you're simply telling them they can't use a room of that home that isn't really supposed to be there in the first place. So they might not have enough space or it might be a little cramped, or they might have to -- some of the people might have to seek other places to live. But the truth is it's more of a real security issue to have them stay in something that hasn't been approved to live in. MR. ERICKSON: I understand that. And I understand that's the crux of all the issues here. The concern again I have, this has been a security issue that has gone through how many hurricanes and how many -- it's been going 15, 20 years, and can we resolve it or do it -- does it need to be resolved in a matter of four months or is resolving it in a year excessive? That's where I'm coming from, basically. If this takes a year to resolve, I don't see that as a huge detriment to this county. And that's what I'm looking at. Because if we've got 55 units that have to be dealt with, I think we can't -- we need to talk with each unit owner I guess and find out what they're going to do, what can be done or whether that effectively shuts down the -- to me that effectively shuts down the park. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I don't think we need to rehear this particular -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: No, okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess the question I have is, since our ruling, what has the respondent done to try to enforce or try to get Page 66 16 11 1 B6 October 28, 2010 these people to get the problem corrected. Obviously we know that something's been done, because one carport's been removed. What has been done -- I mean, I hear all the time that oh, it's the tenant's responsibility, tenant's responsibility. But these issues run with the landowner. And if it takes -- and I don't know what the law is, but if it takes the landowner going in there and removing the unpermitted parts of homes, since he owns the land, if that's possible, he needs to be held accountable. Again, we need to have some accountability. What has he done so far to have this corrected? MR. ERICKSON: He's notified the people and they've done nothing. That basically is my understanding. He's notified the people, and quite frankly, as I expected, these people don't -- most of them don't have the money to do it. The landowner, the owner does not have the money to go in and take out the added -on rooms, and simply doesn't have the means to do that. And whether he has the legal authority to go in and take away their private property, I think that's very questionable too. I don't know what legal authority he has to do that. I think he would have to go through a process of evicting them first and taking care of it that way. That's why I say this is a very problematic issue here. MR. KAUFMAN: I'm harking back to the extension of time issue that's in front of us. If a year was granted, is there any reason why anything would be any different than it is today? And quite frankly, I don't think a year, six months or two weeks would have any change. If you're not listening to me in 60 days, why would you listen to me in 90 days? So I don't think that granting an extension of time on this would serve any purpose. MR. LEFEBVRE: All I see is if we grant an extension time, be it 65 days, 180 days, it only gives the landowner more opportunity to sell this property and not have any fines attached. I just don't see it to Page 67 16 Ill B6 October 28, 2010 be any benefit at all. I make a motion -- MR. ERICKSON: May I respond to that? This is the benefit: There's nothing that would help better than to have this property sold, and obviously a new owner who takes over this property is going to be taking over this property with full knowledge of this situation. And so in my view that is the overall answer to this whole problem is getting the property sold. Now again, whether a property like this can sell in this environment is another issue. But quite frankly, the sale of the property, I've always thought that that is the most likely and -- the best remedy to this problem. Because a sale of the property, it's either going to have to be sold to somebody who's going to come in and spend the millions of dollars that's going to be necessary to reconvert this to a qualified mobile home park or it's going to be torn down and developed into something else. MS. SORRELS: Gentlemen, if I may, I'm sorry, can I say something? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sure. MS. SORRELS: The county is going to leave it up to you to guys to make the decision of this, but I just wanted to at least mention -- and Mr. Kelly did address this already, but two instances I really want to point out is two different lots. I don't know if you recall from the pictures, but we actually have a kitchen that's been moved out of a mobile home -- sorry. We have a situation on two different lots, and if you recall the pictures, one is a lot where the kitchen has actually been removed from the mobile home and is now into an unpermitted addition that is -- in no way meets Florida Building Code, Land Development Code. We also have another lot that has an addition made to the mobile home, and we have a family of four living in this one room with a bedroom and a hot plate. OM•i 161 1 B6 ' October 28, 2010 MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me stop you right there. I make a motion to deny the extension. MR. VESPERANCE: CHAIRMAN KELLY: discussion? I'll second that motion. Motion and a second. Is there any (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: My discussion was -- is just real quick to add to this before the vote. I was really pushing for this one to try to get some more time for you, but then you admitted that the only way to fix this is to sell it and then I was like, all right, no sense pushing anymore. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, so the motion for extension has been denied, and that was on Case 4059. Got that one, Jean? MS. RAWSON: Got it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: The last case is going to be CEPM20100003098. This is the one pertaining to maintenance violations. MS. SORRELS: Correct. And my testimony's pretty much going to be the same as the site development case, which is for the 1611 B6 October 28, 2010 unpermitted structures. Nothing has been changed, repaired, altered or even permits applied for or issued to fix some of the property maintenance issues on these particular units. And then also, no boarding certificate has been issued for the windows that have been boarded on multiple, multiple mobile homes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is there any questions from the Board? Or Mr. Erickson, do you have anything to say? MR. ERICKSON: No, the only comment I would make on this one, and it kind of relates back to the other one too. Again I understand, as Ms. Sorrels says, as she pointed out in the last one, there's two units in particular that have serious problems. I was not aware -- you know, as we said, there's 55 units in the last one to have problems. Two of them in particular have very significant problems. Those are the type of things that I think clearly need to be dealt with and I will work with her to deal with that whether the fines are being assessed or not being assessed, quite frankly. And the same applies to this one. That's what I've done. You know, it's been my view on this all along is the ones that do -- are safety and serious problems of that sort do need to be addressed. And clearly we need to make sure there's no broken glass windows in the place and things of that nature. In this particular case I wasn't really aware until I got the motion for imposition of fines that this is actually -- looks like three cases in one. There's three different fines being imposed in this one case. And I did not quite -- I did not even fully understand it. One issue is flood elevation, one is improper permits, and then one is maintenance, as I understand it. So I find this one somewhat confusing in the fact that there's three sets of fines from this one case. MR. LEFEBVRE: Jean? MS. RAWSON: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Does this case exceed what is allowed per Page 70 1611 Bb October 28, 2010 day per fine on a first offense? So it's 750 a day. MS. RAWSON: Yes, I think you can give it 500, isn't it? CHAIRMAN KELLY: But it's on each violation. MS. RAWSON: Right, you can do so much on each violation. I don't have the old -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: There's the three -- MS. RAWSON: -- order in front of me. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Three different violations, $250 per day each, but all in the same order. So is it by order or is it by violation? MS. RAWSON: No, it's by violation. MR. ORTEGA: Is there people living in these places? MS. SORRELS: Most of them are occupied, yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask a question. What has been done to try to rectify this? MR. ERICKSON: Well, dealing with the -- again, this is part, as far as I can see, part and parcel to a large extent with the previous case, that things that are there for flood level violations are much the same as things that are there that -- without permits or encroachments. And so again, this is something that has to be dealt with on a unit -by -unit basis. And we were quite frankly looking for direction and cooperation from the Board as to how best to deal with this with the community, with the Palm Lake community. Everybody in the community is involved in basically this one or the other one. And these are the ones that I believe would be best handled by addressing the most serious problematic situations, getting them dealt with and then figuring out where to go on the others. MS. RAWSON: I can answer the first question. On the order of July 27th, I think paragraphs six and seven are incorrect. Paragraph five is a $250 fine for each day the violation in paragraph one is not corrected. Paragraph six should read paragraph two. And paragraph seven should read paragraph three. So we need to probably correct that, not only on the record, but Page 71 1611 B6 October 28, 2010 I'll do a nunc pro tunc order. So that makes this a valid order, because it's per -- $250 per violation. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is it a situation where we should pull this case, get the order correct before we go and try to impose any fines? MS. RAWSON: Well, that probably would be the legal thing to do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, in that case you've batted better than a 500 today. Out of the five cases, three went positive for you. There then leaves two. If the county agrees to withdraw that case that ends in 3098, then it leaves the two. We'll go ahead and move on from public hearings. We'll go back to old business, imposition of fines. The two cases that remains, we'll do the first one. This is the litter violation. It is CENA20100002928. (Speaker duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. This may be just a formality, unless somebody from the Board or the county or the respondent has anything else to add. We denied the motion for an extension of time. We're now looking to possibly impose fines. If we could, Azure, would you like to read this into the record, please. MS. SORRELS: Yes. Violation, Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 54, Article 6, Section 54 -181 and Section 54 -179. Location: 3131 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 61842240009. Description: Litter consisting of but not limited to wood, metal, buckets, glass, furniture, plastic, and other debris scattered throughout the property. Past order: On July 22nd, 2010 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to Page 72 161JtOR4g, Zo�a correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4591, Page 1636 for more information. The respondent has not complied with the CEB orders as of October 28th, 2010. The fines and cost to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at a rate of $200 per day for the period between September 21 st, 2010 through October 28th, 2010, a total of 38 days, for the total amount of $7,600. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number five, operational costs of $80.86 have been paid. Total amount to date, $7,600. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Anything further from the Board or from the respondent? MR. ERICKSON: Well, I would just ask the Board to consider what has been discussed here, that there has been substantial improvements. I think the testimony, as I recall, the evidence was that it got a lot better, it's gotten worse, it's gotten better, and so that should be taken into consideration that it has been addressed. CHAIRMAN KELLY: In that case, any further discussion from the Board? If not -- MR. LAVINSKI: I think this obviously appears to be one of the easiest ones to correct. And even if the manager has to go out there at 6:00 every morning and just double check. But yet it hasn't been done, hasn't been corrected. So I think if the easiest one hasn't been done, I don't have much hope for the rest of them. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Entertain a motion to either impose or not to impose. MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion we impose the fines as stated. CHAIRMAN KELLY: A motion. Do we have a second? MR. ORTEGA: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded by Mr. Ortega. Any discussion? Page 73 16 1i B6 1 October 28, 2010 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response). CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries unanimously. The next case is going to be CESD20100004059. This is the case related to the structures and additions added without a permit. Azure, would you like to read it? MS. SORRELS: Violations, Collier County Land Development Code, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(1) and Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article 2, Section 22- 26(B)(104.1.3.5). Location: 3131 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 61842240009. Description: Property has several unpermitted structures, additions and/or alteration to sheds, carports, screened enclosures -- screened enclosures converted into living space, additional rooms, installation, alterations made to electrical wiring and installation alteration made to plumbing work. Past order: On July 22nd, 2010 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4591, Page 1651. The respondent has not complied with the CEB order as of Page 74 16 cpo�'r zg, 200 October 28th, 2010. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and three, fines at a rate of $250 per day for the period between October 21st, 2010 through October 28th, 2010, eight days, for the total of $2,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number five, operational costs of $81.15 have been paid. Total amount to date, $2,000. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is there any discussion by the Board or comments from the respondent? (No response.) MR. ERICKSON: No comments. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to impose. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the fines will be imposed. That is the end of our imposition of fines. Moving on to letter C, a motion to rescind the original order of J. Peaceful, LLC, I think it's supposed to be. CELU20090010758. (Speaker duly sworn.) Page 75 1611 96 October 28, 2010 MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Mr. Chami, who is the owner of J. Peaceful, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to look into this matter. And the BCC, acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals, granted the use of the U -Haul business as a permitted use on this property, so that thereby pretty much nulling the code case. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Entertain a motion to remove the case -- the order. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to remove. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Remove or rescind? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Rescind, sorry. I really messed that one up. It's rescind the order. Any discussion? MR. DEAN: Is that a must? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye, CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Under the consent agenda, which we already approved, there were five items that were sent to the County Attorney's Office. Is there any reports? MS. FLAGG: Yes. The current Blight Prevention Program, as Page 76 16 Ir 1 B6 October 28, 2010 of last week, the banks have spent $1,833,500 to abate code violations in Collier County. They've abated 1,478 violations. So just last week that was a savings of $15,412 to the Collier County taxpayers. In addition, last week there were 257 new code cases opened, just in that week. There were 803 property inspections. There were 116 cases closed with voluntary compliance. There were 92 lien searches requested. And as you recall, that's that new program that we worked in coordination with the Naples Area Board of Realtors. It's really catching on. The realtors are doing a good job in informing their clients that they need to do a lien search. And we are continuing to find that when they do request that lien search, the buyer of the property has learned that there are open code violations on the property, so that prevents them from buying the property and not knowing that there were issues on the property. And the investigators are still averaging 53 cases each as an average across the department. Just a quick report on the Economic Recovery Task Force that one of your members participates in. There's a SWAT team led by Brad Schiffer, which is the commercial retrofitting SWAT team. That program is now fully operational in that if a company is seeking a permit to either retrofit an existing commercial building and/or to build a commercial building, that that SWAT team, which is comprised of professionals, fire code officials, architects, permitting officials will sit down with them at no charge, review the permits -- review the plans with them to make sure that the plans are in accordance with the codes, and then the permitting section will actually assign someone to carry that permit request through. And most recently there's a new business that created 110 jobs on Vanderbilt Beach Road, Bokamper's, Kim Bokamper, the Miami Dolphins football player, and that business has already been opened. He got his permit in 20 days and the business is now opened and Page 77 161 1 Oc�o e �er 28, 2010 operational. That concludes the report. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Very good, thank you. The next meeting date is going to be November 18th. It is going to be located down at CEDS on Horseshoe Drive. So don't come here. And if there's nothing further, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. MR. DEAN: Motion to adj ourn. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR.ORTEGA: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: See you next month. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:34 a.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD KENNETH KELLY, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on , as presented or as corrected MOE Fiala i ! C 41 t[ r 7 �Ef�E� Henning T November 4, 2010 DEC a 8 2010 Coyle Coleita r or C'gjjty Comm""I%NSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida November 4, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: ALSO PRESENT: Mark Strain, Chairman (Absent) Melissa Ahern Donna Reed - Caron, Acting Chairwoman Diane Ebert Karen Homiak Paul Midney Bob Murray Brad Schiffer Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager Thomas Eastman, Real Property Director, CC School District Misc. Corres: DO: 03 � l Page 1 of 7 rlem f �� t - s %o' 161 1 Noven-.ber 4, .2010 ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Good morning everybody, and welcome to the Thursday, November 4th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. If you'll all rise for the pledge of allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Good morning. Our Chairman Commissioner Strain is still oat sick. We wish him a very speedy recovery. It's obviously not easy, when you get old and down and out, it's not a good thing. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: We don't all mean that. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: You'll be there soon. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Ms. Homiak, could you please do the roll call? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Eastman? MR. EASTMAN: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms. Ahern? COMMISSIONER AHERN: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Midney? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms. Caron? ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Strain is absent, Ms. Homiak is here. Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms. Ebert? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Klein? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Here. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: ** *Okay. Our next meeting is the 18th of November. Is zverybody planning on being here, barring anything unforeseen? Okay, great. ** *Approval of minutes for October 7th. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Motion to approve. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Thank you, Ms. Homiak. Do I have a second? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Second. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Thank you, Ms. Ebert. All those in favor? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Motion carries 8 -0. Okay, thank you. ** *And BCC repoos.. MR. BELLOWS: Yes, on October 26th, the Board of County Commissioners heard the petition Page 2 of 7 16 Nov 074, 2010 � PUDZ -AR -1408. That was the rezone from agricultural to a CPUD for the Corkscrew Commercial. That was approved on the summary agenda, subject to the Planning Commission recommendations. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Good. Thanks, Ray. ** *There will be no chairman's report, since we have no chairman. * * *So the first item is consent. And that is PUDA- 2007 -AR- 11961, Sonoma Oaks mixed use PUD. I don't know if you need to say anything. Does anybody have any issues with what's before -- MR. YOVANOVICH: We're comfortable with the language that's presented. Obviously we worked with your staff, so we think it accurately reflects the motion. Do you need me to say that on the record? ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Are you all set? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yes. Do you need a motion? ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: We need a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I make a motion we accept the consent agenda item as represented in the hearing. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Second. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Okay, all those in favor? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Motion carries 8 -0. Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Badabing, badaboom. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: ** *Our advertised petition which was for the Town of Ave Maria has been continued. And do we have a date? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, that will be on the December 2nd commission meeting. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: 12/2. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Question, Donna. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Go ahead, Mr. Schiffer. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ray, one thing. In the packet it states that the SRA was administratively approved. What's he referring to, that the amendment -- I mean, the reason we're holding this is because he wants to match the SRA amendment application. So has it already been administratively approved? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. The applicant submitted a petition for an amendment to the master plan that basically reallocated 50 acres off of Camp Keis Road to a position off of Oil Well Road. Staff at the time felt that it had met the criteria for administrative criteria to the master plan as specified in the Land Development Code, but there was an issue that subsequently occurred in regard to the access road to that town center, and it's our opinion now that that would require a formal amendment to the SRA to adopt a master plan that has a revised access point. And that was the purpose of this continuance of the DOA was to allow the SRA resolution to be presented at the same meeting with the DRI. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So in the prior review where it states that it's already been administratively approved, that will be updated. MR. BELLOWS: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: The other question is that nowhere -- at least that I noticed in might review, so you can point it out if it is -- does it state that the uses are going to be prorated to now what is going to be four Page 3 of 7 1611 P7 ber 4,'2010 towns. I know you number them 2 -A and 2 -13, but they're at opposite ends of the project. MR. BELLOWS: The applicant's here, but I don't believe we're that far along in the process. This was just to amend the map itself. But maybe the applicant can provide more information on their timing. MS. PERRY: Margaret Perry. We do not allocate square footages to town center 2 -A, 2 -13, one or three. We have a total square footage that we're working with within the DRI, and those square footage allocations are determined at SDP. So we're not saying at this location there's going to be -- absent this there's going to be so many. It will be allotted during SDP review. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But you have some allocation already for the existing town. MS. PERRY: Yes, we do. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Because theoretically we kind of violate the concept of mixed town use center. For example, you put all the residential in one town, all the commercial in another town, all the retail in another town. MS. PERRY: I don't think that's the intent, Mr. Schiffer. I think there will be a mixed use in each of the town centers. It's not going to be strictly commercial, residential, it's going to be mixed use town center. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Rather than call it 2 -A, 2 -13, why don't you call it four? MS. PERRY: Truthfully, because that would have required a language amendment one, two and three. We would have had to go back and -- I know it sounds silly, but to cross through and underline now there's a new town center four, and the uses within the SRA for town center two are very broad, and we didn't want to revise charts to add another column to town center four when it's the same uses that we're proposing. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. I mean, it does look a little strange that 2 -A and 2 -13 are not contiguous. But I'm done, thank you. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Thank you. * * *So now we can go on to old business. And that concerns a schedule for our watershed management plan workshops. Mac Hatcher. MR. HATCHER: Mac Hatcher, Stormwater, Environmental Planning. Good morning, Commissioners. I sent you all a memo detailing a proposed schedule of stakeholder meetings, and the EAC and Planning Commission meetings that we've expanded to accommodate the desires of the Planning Commission and the Environmental Advisory Council. This schedule is going to the Board of County Commissioners for approval on Tuesday. What we've set up is a couple of meetings a month, from now until March. And then hopefully a BCC final meeting in March or April. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Okay. I have a question on the November. It says two stakeholder meetings. That's not including today, right? I mean -- MR. HATCHER: It's not including yesterday and today, correct. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Thank you. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I have a question. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Go ahead, Bob. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: It's good that you're having the workshops. You took the message that we were giving you. But given that the idea was to get the stakeholders more involved, how will that impact what you've already presented in terms of isn't there -- logically there's going to be a change in some of the approaches? Some manifestation of change is bound to occur. Do you anticipate that? Do you anticipate what you're going to be doing? What should we anticipate? MR. HATCHER: I don't really anticipate a great deal of change other than bringing it out and offering the opportunity for more involvement. We're going to spend the first two groups of meetings, November and December, going over the issues that we've already presented to you all, seeing if the public does indeed have questions that need to be resolved further. And then we'll pick up with the alternative analysis. MS. MURRAY: And if they do and there are significant issues, what will that do to impact what you're intending? MR. HATCHER: It may cause things to get strung out further. Page 4 of 7 161 } B7_7 November 4, 2010 COMMISSIONER MURRAY: You anticipate that is what I'm -- MR. HATCHER: Do I anticipate it? I don't anticipate it, but we recognize that it may exist. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay. Thank you. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Thanks, Mac. Anybody else -- COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: I have one. So the workshop that we had on this was finished? I thought it was going to be continued until today. I mean, you know, the content that we were discussing. We wrapped it up last time? ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: No, I think that the next time that we workshop it as a CCPC will be this December meeting. And I guess I'm going -- I'll ask next, is that part of a regular agenda meeting? Is that what your intent was here, Mac? MR. HATCHER: Yeah, I was planning on coming to your December meeting and making a presentation. I'll be happy to adjust that schedule. We're far enough out that I can accommodate a separate meeting, if that's what you all would prefer. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: I think Ray would have to tell us what the schedules look like. And I would assume you're talking about doing the second meeting in December, because you also have to have two December stakeholder meetings in here at some point as well, so -- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, the -- it would be the -- pull out my calendar here. Would be the second meeting in December for the Planning Commission. And that looks like that would be on the 16th. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Mr. Midney, if you had a question that you wanted to ask now, I mean -- COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Well, it seems like if we're really not in the workshop, we should probably put it off until then. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Until December? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Yeah. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: In the meantime, you can always ask Mr. Hatcher anyway. But we'd like to know what your concerns are, so -- COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Well, we're talking about conditions and alternatives. Mostly what I see and the material that we've gotten is kind of models and sort of descriptions of what we already have. When you talk about alternatives, what are you planning to present? MR. HATCHER: The list of projects that were gone over at the meeting last week, and the proposed changes to the regulations and policies will be evaluated as much as they can with the model. The policies and regulations can't in most instances really be modeled, but the projects can be modeled and their impact on the water quantity and water quality can be assessed to a certain extent. And also the cost of those projects will be evaluated. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Is there any possibility that the conditions and alternatives might talk about creation of new natural resource protection areas or NRPA's? MR. HATCHER: Yes. The habitat portion has not been discussed yet. And what we'll do is present the revised functional analysis that we were proposing and work that through the stakeholder groups. And if there are any changes to our wetland or preservation policies that seem like they would provide significant benefits, then we'll go that way. If there are large areas, then it may need to go to a natural resource protection area or some other recommendation for additional revised density. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: The reason I'm asking is because our chairman in the meeting that I missed when we were talking about the EAR hearings asked if the Camp Keis system might logically be a NRPA, because it was equivalent to one. And if you go back to the summary of the GMP goals and objectives, the CCME, they said that the criteria for a NRPA is -- let me just find it. That it would be a major wetland system and regional flow ways were used as criteria to establish the NRPA overlay district. These areas include high functioning wetland systems and conser -- not all conservation land. So anyway, it seemed as though getting back to -- originally I had brought this up to be part of the EAR, since it had originally appeared in that format when the Camp Keis system was put in the same function as the rural fringe wetlands. And then it was sort of put -- well, it was really part of the Immokalee Master Plan. Page 5 of 7 161G.1 9% No,,,ember 4, 2010 It seems that me that what it really probably is doing is the underlined CCME rules which woltld classify these as I think a NRPA. So I would like to see that looked at when this comes back with the watershed management plan. MR. HATCHER: Well, as I indicated before, when we do the functional assessment, we will be providing an assessment of the functions not only of the wetlands but of the uplands as well. That area has been proposed in the Immokalee Area Master Plan for additional development restrictions. The rest of the Camp Keis Strand issues is designated as a Rural Land Stewardship Area. So we'll take a look at the functioning of the habitat and the existing development restrictions that are on it and make a recommendation and then accept comments on that recommendation. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Okay, good. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Anyone else? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: I know we have one speaker. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, Nicole Ryan. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Nicole Ryan. MS. RYAN: Good morning. For the record, Nicole Ryan, here on behalf of The Conservancy of Southwest Florida. And The Conservancy absolutely supports this extension of the watershed management plan deadline. We thank staff for meeting with us, talking this through and proposing that extension. Though we do still have a lot of serious concerns about the planning process and how this is moving forward, we don't want this extension to be simply more time to present the same material with not having an open mind making changes. So we need to make sure that this really gets us to meeting state water quality standards. We would ask that you send a brief letter to the County Commission supporting this extension, you know, bringing it back to that focus of meeting state water quality standards. And I also wanted to bring up the issue of just looking at this glass half empty. We don't kno-vv what the BCC will do with this next Tuesday. And if the BCC pulls this off the consent at agenda and if they say go ahead and meet the December 2010 deadline, that means that there's going to have to be a lot of work done between now and December. So I would ask that you have the ability for your second November Planning Commission meeting to then discuss watershed management plan issues. Because if we have a December deadline, there's not a whole lot of time there. So I just bring up that issue as sort of the contingency plan in case. But I believe that this extension is a good thing. Your support certainly to the BCC will believe helpful, and I appreciate the time to comment on this. Thank you. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Thanks, Nicole. I think it was obvious that we had consensus on this board to request this extension. We thought it was equally important. And I don't think we meant that just as a perfunctory okay we added a few meetings and we don't have to do anything in those meetings. That was not the intent. I think staff understands that's not the intent, and it certainly wasn't the intent of this board. And I don't know how everybody feels about writing a letter to the BCC. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yes, most assuredly. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: I'm fine with that as well. So I'll take care of making sure that they get a letter from us before Tuesday. Good. Thank you. ** *New business. Melissa? COMMISSIONER AHERN: I want to make sure when -- Ray, when the floodplain management comes back to us, if we could get a copy of the DSAC minutes. MR. BELLOWS: Okay, you want the -- that was from yesterday's meeting? COMMISSIONER AHERN: Correct. MR. BELLOWS: I'll let Robert know and we'll make sure that the minutes are provided. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: Thanks. I think Melissa had said that there was a rather lively discussion, and that we probably all would do well to read those minutes. So I think that's a good idea. Page 6 of 7 161 1 B November 4, 2010 ** *All right, public comment. Our vast public out here. (No response.) ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: I don't see anybody from the public. And so I think here it is, 8:51. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Second it. ACTING CHAIRWOMAN CARON: We are adjourned. Thank you. * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 8:51 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DONN REED- CARON, Acting Chairwoman These minutes approved by the board on 2- 2 - JU as presented or as corrected Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc., by Cherie' R. Nottingham. Page 7 of 7 1611 B7 _ I_::- I I 1 December 16, 2010 r r k Hiller TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE Hdhhlhg I COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIOl'oy1e ris;�ners Naples, Florida Colettss December 16, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: ALSO PRESENT: Mark Strain, Chairman Melissa Ahern Donna Reed -Caron Diane Ebert (Absent) Karen Homiak Barry Klein Paul Midney Bob Murray Brad Schiffer Heidi Ashton- Cicko, Assistant County Attorney Nick Casalanguida, Growth Management Division/Planning & Regulation Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager Thomas Eastman, Real Property Director, CC School District Misc. Gomel: Dew.. Page 1 of 45 %M t Gies to: 01 16 I 1 B7 December 16, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the December 16th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. If everyone will please rise for Pledge of Allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Roll call by the secretary. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Eastman? MR. EASTMAN: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms. Ahern? COMMISSIONER AHERN: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Midney is absent. Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr. Strain? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms. Homiak is here. Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms. Ebert is absent. Mr. Klein? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Ebert mentioned she had another commitment today, and I'm sure Mr. Midney is fighting traffic to get here. ** *With that in mind, addenda to the agenda. Are there any changes from anybody? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nick, we're on schedule with everything then? MR. CASALANGUIDA: (Nods head affirmatively.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ** *Okay, Planning Commission Absences. Our next meeting is December 25th. Is everybody going to be here? You guys are sharp this morning. Our next meeting is January 6th. Anybody know if they're not going to make it for that meeting? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray, you're not going to be here? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm just coming back from out of state. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I won't. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And Ms. Homiak will not be here. That will leave five of us, maybe more with Paul and Diane, so we should be okay. ** *Approval of minutes. The meeting that we have for minutes is November 18th. Are there any comment:;, changes? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If not, is there a motion to approve? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Ms. Homiak. Seconded by? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. Page 2 of 45 y 1611 RACember 16 2010 COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries, we're down to 7 -0. ** *Ray, BCC report/recaps. Are you going to talk about the -- let me mention what happened. I was at the meeting at the request of the board for the Davis Reserve that we spent six hours on. And if you recall, that was kind of a long, drawn -out and confusing process in the end. But thanks to Commissioner Fiala and discussions she had with the applicant and the actions at the meeting on Tuesday in which the board had asked me to attend in case they had questions, the developer had agreed to go back to the drawing board more or less and come back with a project that is more in line with the community with a cap on the density of five units per acre. The support from the community in that area was overwhelming and it worked out well for everybody. So I think that was a really good conclusion. And I think part of the way to get there was this board's actions in ferreting out the issues. And so it worked out well. We did our job and the board did theirs, so -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Is he going to change the GMP first? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, good. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, all that's being redone and it will come back to us in probably a much more appealing form for the community. And it was a good move. And Ray, I didn't mean to take your thunder. MR. BELLOWS: No, that was -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But since I attended the meeting too I thought it was pretty interesting. MR. BELLOWS: It was very interesting. And I think -- you're right, you will see a rezone once the comp. plan amendment is fixed and that change occurs. The board also heard the PUD amendment to the Sonoma Oaks PUD. That was approved 5 -0 by the board, subject to the Planning Commission recommendations. However, they also entertained a change by the applicant to address an issue raised by Commissioner Caron about the height of the ALF in the commercial tract, and they presented a revised plan to show that the height would be limited to 42 feet zoned height. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. BELLOWS: The board accepted that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Great. MR. BELLOWS: There was also a continuance of two items, the DOA and the SRA for Ave Maria, and that will go in January. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. And that was a result of an advertising issue. MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ** *Chairman's report. The arbitration occurred this past week on Saturday and Monday. I was a witness on the county's behalf in the arbitration hearing. It was an interesting hearing. And it went on for two days. I did not stay around after the first, I had other things to get done, but I can tell you one thing that I learned that I am surprised at is the varied amount of interpretations that were supposedly intended but not in my opinion revealed to us and others during the process. And I think as we go down the road when we have opportunities to adjust or clean up the LDC language so that intentions are clear for any effort that we have, whether it's the SBA's, whether it's our regular language, we need to start paying a little more attention. Because I thought we had done a thorough job, and I was shocked at the interpretations I was hearing in those two days. And, you know, we just need to go back and maybe we need to amend the LDC to make things better. So it's an opportunity down the road. Page 3 of 45 161 1 B7. December 16, 2010 ** *With that, we'll move into the consent agenda. We have one item, which is the golf course driving range at 6500 Airport Road North from last week. We have a series of stipulations; I think it was maybe four or five. They're all incorporated into the plan. Does anybody have any problems or questions concerning those? Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I mean, one thing I thought we were going to get today was some evidence on how high to make the net. I mean, I know we gave it a maximum of 60 and we asked them to locate it where they intended to put it on the plan. But it looks like they're going to put it on the plan and make it 60 feet. So I think a 60 -foot high net is a huge visual burden to the neighbors, and I was kind of hoping I was going to see something that would show where it could be lower and then where it would have to be higher, looking at how golf balls go and -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And there was -- yeah, Ms. Mac'Kie, please, help us. Because I know we had a long discussion about the possibility of changing the height, tapering the height and all, and there was some research that was going to be done. MS. MAC'KIE: There was, and -- (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Cherie'. Normally we don't have testimony at consent hearings, I forgot to do that. Appreciate it. MS. MAC'KIE: We did agree that there would be research. And what we tried to do was to reflect on the plan exactly what we think you allowed us to do. We went back and listened to the hearing, and the words on the plan are the words that were in the motion. Because we wanted to be very careful that we were not overreaching. The fact is that the net will be varying in height, as you indicated that it likely would logically be. In some places lower, in some places higher. I wish that it said averaging 60 feet, but I didn't get that from your motion, so we said in no case to exceed 60 feet. So I'm not exactly -- what we tried to do was to reflect exactly the words of the motion on the plan so that we didn't go outside of our motion. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And if you did listen to the tape, remember that leap of faith comment I made that we're trusting you to come back and kind of show us that. I know what the motion said is a maximum. For example, I can't see how a guy on a tee can hit it 90 degrees 60 feet. MS. MAC'KIE: No. Well, Karen says she can. But the point is -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: See, I could. MS. MAC'KIE: And I couldn't hit it at all, so that doesn't matter. But the maximum height that you -- we know that it cannot be less than 60 feet -- cannot be more than 60 feet. We commit to making it less where it can safely be less, but in no event higher than 60 feet. If they want -- if they determine that it needs to be higher than 60 feet, that's a come back in and ask again. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But how are we going to know -- I mean, how are you go about designing it? I mean, it's easy to just make it 60 feet. I think it's tough to go the other way. MS. BISHOP: We're actually going to hire someone to do this if we get approved at the Board of County Commissioners, and then provide the staff with the report from that professional. There's all kinds of stuff out there. We only had a couple of days to get the package back in to you guys to get to the consent agenda, so we didn't have time to get someone hired to do the assessment and get it all back in. When we get to the Board of County Commissioners and we get blessed with them, then we will hire the professional, we will provide that information to the staff and to our neighbors. Because there is an opportunity, from what I'm understanding from the phone call, we spoke with the guy who's done quite a bit of netting in this area. He said there is an opportunity that we may be able to drop the tees as low as 30 -- I mean drop the net as low as 30 in certain areas along that view corridor. And just based on his conceptual idea of what we had to do, I think that right there where it's going to be in front of the neighbors is going to be a little bit lower than 60, maybe even 40. But until we will get it finalized we don't know that answer yet. So we put on the plan exactly what the motion said so that we have the time when we go to SDP to provide the research that goes along with the final design. Page 4 of 45 16111 B F6, 2010 COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. Because I think -- I mean, the intent was that that's what we do here. So what you're saying is on this leap of faith we'll give it a second hop to the commission chamber. MS. MAC'KIE: Essentially, yes, sir. Except that as I mentioned in the last hearing, this isn't your staffs first shot at this. You know, they have permitted -- this isn't the first time we've had a driving range in Collier County, and they have enforced whatever the rules are that they will require us to comply with or what we will comply with, understanding that it can't be higher than 60 feet. You know, they will tell us, make it 10 feet, make it 20, make it 40, make it 60, but in no event more than 60. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But what I'm concerned about, the application came in without any mention -- you know, the net was not something shown or described, so I'm worried about it. But we can move it from here. I mean, it's got to take a second hop. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I have another suggestion, but Mr. Murray, did you want to say something? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'd only continue the argument and I don't care to do that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you have any doubt that our intention was that you vary the height of the net not to exceed 50 (sic) feet? MS. MAC'KIE: We have no doubt at all about that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: On number five, if we inserted the following language, the first line and second line: Netting to catch errant golf balls shall be installed along the northern and southern edges of the driving range. Then I would suggest we enter varying in height, not to exceed 60 feet, and as depicted on the Pulling Driving range conceptual plan. MS. MAC'KIE: That would be perfectly acceptable to us. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because you have it on the map. But to be honest with you, maps aren't always -- when you record those and you try to pull them up and read that fine print, I can tell you, most of the time it can't be read and it becomes very difficult to track it down. So if we enter that language in there, I think the intent is clear, and then I'm sure that with the staffs input at the Board of County Commissioners meeting, if you don't have more concise information by then, it could be pulled from the consent agenda and discussed, which I don't think you may want if that -- MS. MAC'KIE: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- happens. So I think the encouragement is there then. So does that work with the Planning Commission members? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm good. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think that stays in line with our original motion. Okay, anybody -- MS. MAC'KIE: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- else have any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor of the motion to -- I mean, all those in favor of the item -- well, we've got to get a motion. Is there a motion with the stipulations? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: I'll make it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Mr. Klein. The motion, does that include the corrected language that I read into the record? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Homiak, with the language? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. Page 5 of 45 161 1 Decor 16 2010 COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7 -0. Thank you very much. ** *Next one up is by an unknown land use attorney. Let's see, Bruce Anderson. There used to be a guy around years ago by that name. It's PUDA- PL2009 -742, the Barefoot Beach Property Owners Association, Inc., with amendment to the Lely Barefoot Beach PUD. All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Disclosures on the part of Planning Commission. Anybody? COMMISSIONER CARON: I spoke to Mr. Anderson. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I spoke to Nicole Ryan. And our discussion was about The Conservancy's role in this. That was part of the PUD amendment in '06. Okay, Bruce, it's all yours. MR. ANDERSON: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is Bruce Anderson. I'm here to represent the Barefoot Beach Property Owners Association. They are the property owners association for Unit 1, blocks A through K at Lely Barefoot Beach. The purpose of this amendment is to correct a conflict between the PUD document and the recorded plat for Unit 1 by relocating 15 approved but unbuilt dwelling units to Unit 1. The PUD currently authorizes only 91 dwelling units to be constructed in Unit 1. However, there are up to 106 buildable lots in Unit 1. 132 were originally platted, but some of them have been deed restricted to only allow one home on two lots that have previously been combined. Without the PUD amendment, there are going to be some lot owners in Unit 1 who cannot build a home because the PUD limit of 91 is less than the number of buildable lots in Unit 1. After the 91 st home is built, any property owner in Unit 1 who applies for a building permit for a new home would be denied by the county. The 15 dwelling units being relocated to Unit 1 are coming from development tract DC -1, which has been developed as The Cottages at Barefoot Beach. That area was authorized for up to 60 dwelling units; however, only 15 of those 60 were constructed. The area in question, The Cottages, are down here. And those dwelling units are being moved from here to here. Approval of this PUD amendment will correct the conflict. And the authorization to build the 15 homes applies only to Unit 1, not to any other part of Barefoot Beach. And the total number of dwelling units authorized to be built in the PUD will not be increased. And I'll be happy to try to answer any questions that you have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are there questions on the part of the Planning Commission? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Mr. Schiffer. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Bruce, point on the map the area that they're being moved into? It's -- I'm not that familiar with Barefoot, but isn't it multi -story along the waterway and then is it the lot behind it that this goes to, or where you're putting your pen? MR. ANDERSON: Where I'm putting my pen. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. And those are single - family zoned, correct? MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So that doesn't change. Is the DC -1, The Cottages, is that built out or is there -- MR. ANDERSON: Yes, yes. Page 6 of 45 161 1 Decem er 16, 2010 COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So the other 30 units you're leaving behind, or essentially there's no room for them. MR. ANDERSON: Well, I can't say that, because I don't know. But they're not allocated anywhere but The Cottages area, and it is built out. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But in the future maybe there would be something, okay. I'm done, thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, any other questions of the Planning Commission? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bruce, just a couple small ones. In reviewing the PUD, I like to go back and read the original documents and make sure the commitments have all been met. This is something I just want to make sure we're cleaned up. There's a reference in the original PUD to Tract B, which is the recreational tract, and all the developer commitments were supposed to be completed on that tract. Do you know if they've all been done? MR. ANDERSON: I do not. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's an old PUD, so I'm -- but they were supposed to have them done before the 50th residential building permit. I don't know if they've been done either, but I'm hopeful they have. It's just a question. Because, I mean, I have no way of knowing it. Thank you. MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thanks, Bruce. Nancy? MS. GUNDLACH: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner with the Department of Land Development Services. And staff is recommending approval of this PUD amendment. And I just have a little bit of additional information for you. The Conservancy is supposed to review this particular PUD amendment, and they have. And they have issued a letter of approval. And I want to thank Nicole for providing that in such a timely fashion and bringing it to our attention that this is something that The Conservancy is supposed to do. And I apologize for any inconvenience that we have caused you. So with that, if you have any questions, it would be my pleasure to answer them. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any questions from the Planning Commission? (No response.) COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: No, I don't. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nancy, the only thing, that agreement with The Conservancy was made as part of the PUD, and so however, the staff needs to earmark those so that it gets caught from now on. We need to make sure that's done. MS. GUNDLACH: Yes, we are working on that right now. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes, because we did have that crop up the last time Barefoot was in here when it was a single - family home on a utility parcel that they wanted to change the zoning, rezone it. And that same issue came up then. So it should have been corrected then. MS. GUNDLACH: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And from a perspective of your own research and even the applicant's, they're asking for 15 units on the premise that most of those empty lots have been built on or some of them have been doubled up. I had to go to the plats and pull them up and make sizes readable. Then I went to the aerials and pulled all those up. And then I had to overlay each house on the plat to see if the numbers that they were asking for were even close to reality, because the last thing we needed would be for them to come back in here again because they missed a few lots. It was difficult to do, but it seemed to coincide what they're asking for. I think though in cases like this when Page 7 of 45 tuber 16 2010 r> j a7 that may occur again in the future, it would be better if we had the applicant supply that information on an overlay so we know exactly why they are trying to justify the numbers they're asking for. MS. GUNDLACH: Okay, we can do that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just a suggestion to -- MS. GUNDLACH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do we have any members of the public that wish to speak, Ray, registered? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, we have one speaker. Nicole Ryan. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I wish to make note, Nicole was at the arbitration hearing on Saturday, and I appreciate your very careful and concise articulation of the issues on that day. You did a good job. MS. RYAN: Thank you, I appreciated being able to participate. Thank you. For the record, Nicole Ryan, here on behalf The Conservancy of Southwest Florida. And I too wanted to bring up the issue of how do we make sure when we have settlement agreements such as the Lely Settlement, Deltona Settlement, that the signatory parties that need to review and sign off don't hear about the petition when they read the Planning Commission agenda. So I know, I've discussed this with Nancy and Bruce, and I think everyone in this room is going to certainly make it a better effort on that. The question is, when you have different representatives, different staff, how do we trigger that. So I'll certainly be working with staff to maybe find some mechanism that will correct that in the future. I did want to state for the record that The Conservancy has signed off on this PUD amendment. We too were a little frustrated at where will the units go, will 106 units be sufficient. And so this map may help to visualize it a little bit better. The kind of pink lots, the salmon color lots are the built lots where there is the single - family homes. There are the yellow lots, which are vacant, there are 15 lots there. And there are six parcels where there is a single - family residence, but there is the allowance for two residences. So when you ask where will these 15 units be moved into, they will be essentially moved into some of these yellow vacant lots, and perhaps some of these lots with the crosshatched markings where there's one residence but there's the ability for two if something would happen and that house would come down. So this may help you visualize exactly what is being requested today. And just for the record, our approval does come with three items that we believe are valid and accurate. The first is that the amendment will not result in any additional impact to open space or preserve areas within the Lely Barefoot Beach PUD. Second, the amendment will not result in additional encroachment to natural resources beyond what is is already allowed through the PUD and the Barefoot Beach settlement. And third, as the amendment is relocating density already contained within the PUD, there will be no increase in the overall number of units within the development as a result of this amendment. And these facts being true and accurate, we do approve this amendment. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you very much, Nicole. Does anybody else -- oh, Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: I think we should let The Conservancy do our mapping here. At least we can read this one and count. MS. RYAN: We have some great staff that does a lot of wonderful things with maps. I can't take credit for it, but they make me look good up here, so I very much appreciate their efforts. And I also made a copy of this for the record. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody else have any questions? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Just a comment, I wish that was in our initial package, that would have saved me some head scratching. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's why I said to Nancy in the beginning, I actually did that, and then I found out Nicole did it. And we're pretty close. We both came to the same conclusion, so it all worked out well. But it does help to have that stuff in the future. Another comment to staff. We received a copy of the PUD in our packet. But when there's a superseding amendment to the PUD, it's handy to have those too instead of having to dig them up. Then we -- everybody may Page 8 of 45 16 Id 7 Oecember 16, 2010 have seen this earlier. Go ahead, Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: I was just going to make a motion to approve with the stipulations from The Conservancy. And I don't believe there -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't remember if there were any of staff. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- are any stipulations from staff. No, just the three stipulations from The Conservancy. So I'll make a motion to approve -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'll second. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- Petition BDA- PL2009 -AR -742. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: (Indicating) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray made the second. By the way, Bruce, do you have any objections to the stipulations from The Conservancy? MR. ANDERSON: No, I do not, but I do want to make clear, when we say open space, these vacant lots are open space and obviously they're going to be. They're not included within that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Understand. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark, I have a question on that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Is there anything in the PUD that would allow to have happen what the stipulations are preventing? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can you read the stipulations, someone, back to us carefully? And we'll make sure that we don't have any issues with them that would trip us up in the future. It would be good for the record to have it read again anyway. MS. GUNDLACH: The stipulations are: Number one, the amendment will not result in any additional impact to open space or preserve areas within the Lely Barefoot Beach PUD. Number two: The amendment will not result in additional encroachment to natural resources beyond what is already allowed per the PUD and settlement. And number three: As the amendment is reallocating density already contained within the PUD, there will be no increase in the overall number of units within the development as a result of this amendment. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The only one I think we may want to clarify is the first one in a sense that the open space doesn't apply to the buildable areas of the lots in question. COMMISSIONER CARON: I think you can say required open space. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But again, there's nothing in the PUD that would allow those conditions. First of all, the last one is a statement, not even a condition. The -- I mean, is there anything that moving this density would allow those to be violated? Is there any reason there's a concern? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, I don't think there is, but Nicole? MS. RYAN: I don't believe so. But I think echoing what Commissioner Strain mentioned about unless we have it stated and restated and restated, you just never know how someone may reinterpret it in the future. So yes, we believe that what they're requesting is consistent with this. We just wanted to make sure that that was again stated on the record. And I absolutely agree, we weren't intending that those buildable lots be considered as open space. We consider the open space to be the park and recreation areas. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And my concern is the predictable results of something -- Bruce is right, theoretically some -- we're all gone, it's 20 years and some guy says hey, you can't built build it, you're covering open space. And if we don't need them, I don't think they should be put in there, that's just my comment. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Well, A, I think we can easily take care of that and reference required open space and preserves, so that takes care of that. And secondly, as we just found out here today, if we don't carry these things forward, then they're lost. I mean, we have somebody who's supposed to be reviewing this. I mean, that should be a red flag up in front of Page 9 of 45 1611 Decemb,,r 16, 2010 everybody. And somehow that now twice for us has gone by the board. So I think carrying these things through is a good thing. It doesn't do any harm, we've added the c,,iveat that it's required open space. Everybody knows the intent is not to impede buildable lots. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Lely Barefoot Beach has been a difficult project for quite some tim.- because of its age. The map that is the site plan is so weathered in the recorded documents, you can't make heads or tails of what's going on. I have in the past when we've brought this up, whether it's been a coastal construction setback line issue or an amendment to the PUD, I create a binder where I try to keep the Lely stuff together so I can pull it up right away. It's as thick as this, just with their ordinances. So I think that any refresher as to some of the issues isn't bad in this case, especially with the lack of detail that we can pull up from record. So I mean, I don't see where it hurts this time. I generally -- Brad, I think you're 100 percent right, we try to hone down on our documents so we're not repetitive. But in this case it might help because of the age of the project. So with that in mind, I would support the motion with the change, slight change to refer to requires_ open space, if the motion maker and second accept those. Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: (Indicates.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I forgot who the other -- COMMISSIONER CARON: I made the second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron, yeah, I know you accept your own language. Okay, any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries again 7 -0. MS. GUNDLACH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Nancy, appreciate it. MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bruce, good to see you again. You're rare around here. ** *Okay, next item up is the -- where's Tim Hancock? Oh, Fred, you're coming in. Tim didn't even bother showing up today, okay. Okay, the next item up is PUDZ- 2007 -AR- 11381, the Marsilea Villas, LLC. And it's next to the Royal Palm International Academy off of Livingston Road. All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Disclosure on the part of Planning Commission? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I had a meeting with Tim Hancock and Fred Hood over -- and most of the issues centered around an easement that had not yet been identified in regards to its language. They have since provided the easement and resolved the issue, thankfully, and you'll hear more about that during the hearing. Fred, it's all yours. MR. HOOD: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. My name is Frederick Hood and I'm with Davidson Engineering representing the applicant, the Henning Group for the Marsilea Villas PUD rezone. With me today is Bob DiBacco, he's the project manager on this project with the Henning Group. Page 10 of 45 16 i B7 December 16, 2010 The application before you is a request to rezone a 10.25 -acre agricultural zoned property to a residential planned unit development known as Marsilea Villas. The proposed RPUD will allow the construction of a residential development permitting no more than 27 single- family homes. The resulting density of 2.63 units per acre is approximately 66 percent of the base four units per acre permitted in the urban residential subdistrict for the Growth Management Plan. The Marsilea Villas property is located approximately a half a mile from -- west of Livingston Road. It will be accessed by -- on this aerial you can see we have a proposed and it's actually getting under construction now, proposed access road extension of Entrada Avenue. That spans at approximately half a mile, it's 2,900 feet. Once the extension road is complete, it will service both Marsilea Villas and the Inprjial Golf Estates single - family residential development situated to the immediate south of our property. The Imperial Golf Estates development is zoned RSF -3. The property to the west, north and east is owned by the Royal Palm International Academy, and it's currently vacant but zoned as Royal Palm International Academy PUD. As briefly mentioned earlier, the Marsilea Villas property is located within the urban residential subdistrict. This future land use designation contemplated in the Growth Management Plan provides for higher densities in areas with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. The base residential density in the subdistrict is four units per acre. I pointed out earlier that the applicant is only seeking to construct a maximum of 27 single- family homes, which is a density of 2.63 units per acre. I mention this because the potential yield for the proposed development could be higher with a different unit type, but our client has decided to maximize quality of the proposed development by eliminating the unit type to single - family units with traditional front and back yards for home - buying families. This unit limitation was also designed to promote and continue the character of the existing neighborhood's present and close proximity to this project. I'll switch over to the MPP. This rezone began with the idea of creating a small gated residential community that would be compatible with its neighboring properties and their existing and proposed uses. The neighboring property that hugs the Marsilea Villas property on three sides is owned by the Royal Palm International Academy. The property owner for the Royal Palm PUD filed a Site Development Plan some time ago with Collier County for the construction of a school campus with a variety of recreational activity (sic), fields, water management areas and native vegetation/conservation areas. Currently the property remains vacant, but if in the future it is constructed, the design of the Marsilea Villas PUD has contemplated the necessary and vital pedestrian interconnection to the Royal Palm International Academy through a boardwalk path between the preserve situated on the Marsilea Villas property, as you can see on the right side of your screen, to gain access to and from the future school campus. Marsilea Villas' next closest neighbor is the Imperial Golf Estates single - family residential development to the south where the property lines meet for these two projects. The proposed homes to be developed within Marsilea Villas will not only be buffered from the homes within Imperial by the required 10 -foot Type A landscape buffer on our side of the line, but by an existing park that exists on the Imperial side of the line, ranging from 20 to about 60 feet in width. Outside of compatibility with the project's neighboring properties and developments, the issue of traffic was also addressed. In the last TIS provided by Davidson Engineering in July of 2009, the addition of the proposed 13 peak hour directional trips from the Marsilea Villas development onto the segment of Livingston Road that stretches from hm-nokalee Road to Imperial Street would have a maximum impact of .4 percent, producing a very minor impact on that Livingston Road segment. In conjunction with seeking an environmental resource permit from the South Florida Water Management District, we have worked very closely with environmental review staff to provide the necessary native preservation requirements on site, in addition to the 15 percent requirement of native communities on -site, which comes out to be about three - quarters of an acre. An additional 1.14 acres have been set aside, totaling 1.89 acres of preserve on the property. .66 acres of this preserve area in that section is, again, to the right of your drawing at the top. It is the crosshatched and not stippled hatching. That area, we've worked with staff to actually clear all exotics and replant all Page 11 of 45 f �II 16 1 .' December 16, 2010 three strata of what's required in the LDC. This is also defined a little bit better within the EIS that staff was provided. The remaining 1.23 acres will be preserved after being cleared of exotics, and both sections of the proposed preserve area will be monitored per the EIS and Land Development Code standards. Lastly, one concern that may have come across in reviewing your packet, and Commissioner Strain mentioned this earlier, was the issue of utility access for the project. Through two declaration of easement documents, our client has the ability to run utilities into the Entrada Avenue extension right -of -way from Livingston Road to our project. Other options through working with adjacent landowners may be available and will be investigated further as a part of the platting process. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you. Questions of the Planning Commission? Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I have only one. This is two stories and you have it -- from a zoned height to an actual height you have 12 feet. From 35 to 47. MR. HOOD: Should be -- let me just check and make sure that's not a mistake on our part. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm looking at Exhibit B, development standards. MR. HOOD: Yeah, actually, I think that is a mistake. We meant to have it about seven feet above that. So it should be 42 feet. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Thank you. That's a bit better. Okay, that was my question, thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I do, Mark. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: This sidewalk deviation, you want to run it down one side of the cul -de -sac. But if you look at the entrance, you're coming in on the opposite side of that, thus requiring everybody to cross over it. So why did you choose that side? I think I see why you chose the sidewalk at the entrance where it is, just because it would require moving it over I think if you didn't. MR. HOOD: Right. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Why did you choose that side of the cul -de- sac? And could you move it to the other side? MR. HOOD: I think we could move it to the other side. I'd like to speak with my client before we decide to completely just go over there. I think the reason was -- well, on the east side of it, we put it on that side because it was just a better connection to get to the lake to go around with that deviation, that path that's going to be within the lake easement. So that was the reason there. As far as on the east side, why we didn't put one on the west side, the only thing I can think of would be, just looking at it right now, it's kind of small, would just be space limitations. It's pretty tight in that corner. And what we were trying to do -- actually, now that I'm looking at it, we were trying to get a sidewalk access to that extension road. And the way that it's clipped at the corner on the east side, we'd have to, you know, get an easement from Royal Palm to drop that sidewalk into -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I understand why at the entrance where you have it makes a lot of sense. My question really is, though, can't you just -- I'm not sure it's a good idea to have people crossing the street at a corner and stuff like that. So to me I think it would make more sense if you put the single sidewalk around the thing on the opposite side of the road. And I can't see where that would be a problem. You do essentially circle; the cul -de -sac. One quick question. The shape of the cul -de -sac, not having a -- you know, you have like a sharp corner to it. 'You don't think you're going to survive subdivision with that, do you? I mean, that's -- you've got to have a curve here. MR. HOOD: Well, to be honest with you, this plan here is very conceptual. We've actually gone through -- we're gearing up for the more detailed engineering review, and we've got other plans that show that a little bit better. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah I'm sure, because it doesn't corner. Page 12 of 45 16 0-1, B7 December 16, 2010 But anyway, my question is could you flip the sidewalk? And then I guess you could answer that. The second point that I have a concern is the properties to the south -- and you're right, there is a park there. In all probability, will that be a rear lot yard where you have 20 feet? Because I don't like the 10 -foot buffer. But if it's going to be your rear property line and the way you subdivide, you'll have 20 feet, which would relieve that concern. You know what I mean? In other words, when you subdivide these lots, is there any chance that that southern boundary would not be the rear property line? It could be a -- MR. HOOD: I see exactly what you're saying. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: You could eliminate any concern or any problem with the layout if you added to your table that, you know, you would maintain a 20 -foot -- MR. HOOD: Width there. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- setback at the perimeter of the properties. MR. HOOD: Bob, would you be okay with that? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Fred, I'll tell you what, we'll take -- you caft"Mten to suggestions, and when we go to staff report speakers, you need to confer with your client and then you can come back up and clarify the issues that are outstanding. MR. HOOD: Sounds good. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: That's it, thank you. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I do have another question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray? Anybody else have any first? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Mr. Murray. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: All right. I noted that David Weeks on June 18th had written a memorandum and he related to the TCMA the Northwest Transportation Concurrency Management Area. And it relates to Policy 6.3. And there were five options I believe it is of the management methodology. And I didn't note which one you folks had decided to accept. Do you have that attachment fee? MR. HOOD: Yeah, I'm just flipping to it now. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners? For the record, Nick Casalanguida. And I was not sworn in, so just -- (Speaker was duly sworn.) MR. CASALANGUIDA: They only apply the TCMA rules if they chose to do a north, south, east, west corridor analysis. If they go link -by -link on concurrency, they don't have to meet those TCMA guidelines. Where Livingston has enough capacity, they wouldn't be required -- MS. MURRAY: I noted there was a lot of capacity. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I realize that, 1,200 and some odd. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. So whenever you're on a link that's failing and you're taking advantage of the network, then you have to use those -- you have pick off that list. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So this is moot. MR. CASALANGUIDA: This is moot. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay, thank you. MR. CASALANGUIDA: You're welcome. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: You got off the hook. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any other questions of the applicant? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred, I've just got one I want to kind of get my hands around and that's the roadway you're going to be using to access your project. Does your project intend to develop prior to the finalized connection to Livingston Road? MR. HOOD: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So that connection to Livingston Road is the connection you're relying Page 13 of 45 161 t 1 16, 2010 upon? MR. HOOD: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I noticed that you have an access to the Imperial Lakes Golf Estates to the south. And I don't know what the responsibilities are to your development versus the maintenance and traffic flows within the Imperial Lakes project. Has that issue come up at all in your discussions with the neighbors at all? MR. HOOD: On the question about maintenance, I'm assuming you're talking about maintenance for the entire -- or just that section? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I notice the county doesn't take on the maintenance of those areas -- MR. HOOD: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- so I'm just wondering how that's being done, especially if you're causing them to have more maintenance problems. Do you guys have any agreements, was any required? MR. HOOD: It's actually all a part of those access easements that I was referencing earlier. There's -- I think they're about six pages long. And there's statements in there about maintenance, as well as access and utilities. So it's split up between every person that has easement -- access to this easement from Livingston all the way down to Imperial. But for this specific section, I'm not absolutely sure what the agreement is. I could try and get that information for you, if you'd like it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just want to -- and I'll probably ask Mike Greene when we get into the staff discussion where they -- you know, what research they may have done to look at the impacts on the adjoining road systems. Even if the county didn't maintain them, what obligations were there to make sure they are maintained. Okay, anybody else before we go to county staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Nancy? Boy, you're the star here today. You get them all. MS. GUNDLACH: They just seem to come in bunches. Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner with the Department of Land Development Review Services. And staff is recommending approval of the Marsilea residential PUD. And we do not have any stipulations for approval. It would be my pleasure to answer any questions you might have today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, does anybody have any questions of Nancy? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I do. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Brad. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Nancy, do you have any concerns if the sidewalk was moved to the other side of the cul -de -sac? MS. GUNDLACH: I do not have any concerns. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And do you have any concerns if we put a requirement to keep the setback 20 feet from the perimeter, which is essentially the south property line? MS. GUNDLACH: I do not have concerns with that. Let's just back up to the sidewalk. Perhaps we should ask transportation if they have any concerns with that, transportation staff. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, let's finish with you, because Mike's going to be here for a couple other questions. MS. GUNDLACH: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm done, thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions of Nancy? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've got one, Nancy. It's in your staff report on Page 15. It's under Environmental Advisory Council recommendations, Item No. 1, third line down. And I want to know from your department what it means. MS. GUNDLACH: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It talks about exotic vegetation removal and it says: If revegetation is not occurring Page 14 of 45 161 �t ` 87 December 16, 2010 naturally -- this is after they removed exotics and possibly caused problems with native vegetation -- then additional revegetation measures may be required. Do we have standards on what those additional revegetation measures are and how they are triggered by the word may be required? MS. GUNDLACH: We have environmental staff here today that could assist us with that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I'd like LDC cites on that. And if not, I'd like to have the County Attorney's opinion on how we enforce that sentence. MS. GUNDLACH: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And she's right behind you, but I'll make sure I have no others of you before we go to her. MS. GUNDLACH: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I don't, thank you. Environmental then. Thank you, Nancy. MS. ARAQUE: Hello. Summer Araque, Environmental Section of the Land Development Services. And to answer your question, all of that is in the Land Development Code in 3.05.07. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So if we have an exotic vegetation removal permit issued and they for some reason destroy a lot of the natural vegetation in the process and it doesn't grow back as it should, we have a provision in our code that's enforceable that they would have then come in and revegetate? MS. ARAQUE: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then why do we have a statement in here that says it may be required if it's in the code? Wouldn't it be required? Or is it optional? MS. ARAQUE: Yes. But in this case there are quite a few exotics in this preserve, so we wanted to make sure that it was very clear that recreation is most likely going to be required. So for anybody who purchases this property, a developer, it's very clear to them of what they need to do on this property. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, but I think the statement isn't clear. I think our code is clear. The way the statement's read, it seems like you are providing an option to the developer so that if revegetation is not occurring naturally then additional vegetation measures may be required. I think our code says they are required. So I'm wondering why we want to give them that latitude, and why would the EAC do that? MS. ARAQUE: I would probably have to look at the -- I think that's in the PUD document. It specifically states in the -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it may have been added to the PUD as a result of this request. I'm just wondering, how does this request clarify the shall provisions of our code? And I just am trying to make sure we don't provide -- I was in a situation on Saturday where I found out we provided loopholes we never knew about. I want to make sure we don't provide anymore. MS. ARAQUE: Okay. I would want to actually look at the PUD document to see what that says. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nancy has it. MS. ARAQUE: This is the staff report? MS. GUNDLACH: This is describing the EAC's recommendation. MS. ARAQUE: Do you all have the PUD document in front of you? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. MS. ARAQUE: Maybe if you want to pull to that sheet. It's Page 7 of 7, exhibit F, item D. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hang on. COMMISSIONER CARON: And D does say shall. MS. ARAQUE: This is what we look at to make sure this is correct. Do you have 'any questions about that language? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. But I still have questions about the recommendation from the EAC. The recommendation is not talking about the language that I believe is in the PUD. Let me read the PUD language. It says: Native plantings in all three stratas shall be required to be added to the preserve areas where there is removal of non - native or nuisance vegetation. A planning plan shall be submitted at Page 15 of 45 161 1 B7 M-�; December 16, 2010 the time of application for plat or SDP immediately following the approval of the rezone. Great. That's not what the question is I have is. The question I have says: If revegetation is not occurring naturally, then additional revegetation measures may be required. I think they're two different items. One is saying that whatever you destroy, you've got to revegetate it. But then this one seems to say if it doesn't come back, we might require you to put something else in there. And I'm trying to understand one from the other. I don't see the -- if we have a code that says if the revegetation does not come back and reoccur that it has to be again implemented, and it's a shall condition, why are we providing a may condition in a stipulation that would more than likely be approved if we went and approved staff stipulations? MS. ARAQUE: I can't explain what the EAC was saying. Probably their intent here was to replicate exactly what staff was saying. So it's probably -- this stipulation here is probably what we put into the PUD document. I would really have to go back and research the EAC minutes to know specifically if that's exactly what they said. Nancy, was this taken directly from our staff report? MS. GUNDLACH: Uh -huh. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let me try to understand. Exhibit F, Item 1.1.D. Do you agree that that's talking about the initial planting revegetation after the initial clearing of exotics? MS. ARAQUE: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, let's go back to the question I have and the EAC requirement. In here it says: If revegetation is not occurring naturally. I think they mean after we've attempted to plant it after the exotics have been cleared. Do you believe that to be the case, or not? MS. ARAQUE: I would have to go back and look at the minutes to see exactly what they said. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But we're being asked today to approve this project with recommendations, and I don't believe the recommendation is needed in regards to the way it's stipulating things as a may when we have a code that you're testified to says shall. So, you know, I'm not in favor of that stipulation as it stands today. I think it muddies the water and doesn't clarify it. If we have code that's already clear, then let's live with the code. You have statements in there that require the initial revegetation -- the initial vegetation of an area that's been cleared. I'm not sure why we need to mess it up. So that's all I'm trying to get -- MS. ARAQUE: I agree. I think we're all on the same page, actually. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well -- MS. ARAQUE: I think it's just a matter of the verbiage. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- if we were, then this recommendation wouldn't have been here in the first place. But needless to say, I appreciate your time. Anybody else have any questions on this issue? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think next is Mike Greene. Thank you. MR. GREENE: Michael Greene, Transportation Planning. Good morning. What questions do you have for me? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Brad, I think you had one first. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mike, this sidewalk, do you have a concern moving it to the other side? The reason I'm pushing for that is that right now they have people crossing over at a curve to get to the sidewalk on the other side. MR. GREENE: Transportation planning and the LDC actually call for sidewalks on both sides of the streets. Unfortunately on -site and private developments, transportation planning does not have purview over these particular items. We would encourage, if you have to cross the street, though, that it would be further away from an intersection or a curve where there's better visibility of pedestrians. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. But in my case -- okay, so your comment is you should have it on both sides. What's the reason. But they do want a deviation. So if you had a choice, do you think it's best on this side? Or do you see any problem with -- I mean, I don't Page 16 of 45 16I f DILer 16, 2010 want them to cross at that intersection, you don't want them to cross at that intersection. So either bring it further down and have them cross further down -- MR. GREENE: With the extremely low volume of traffic that they're going to have on these roadways, I don't see a problem in crossing, as long as it's moved back from the curve in a safer location. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. The other question here would be the -- they didn't provide a profile of the 50 -foot right -of -way, so I'm not sure. But do you think there would be the ability to park on the street? MR. GREENE: From what I've seen of the construction plans for the roadway, I do not think that there will be enough area to park on the sides of the road. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So if somebody has a Christmas party, people are parking on the road. Unless they invite two people or something. And if there's multiple Christmas parties, is there a problem with -- I mean, because there will not be the ability to park on the swale or the grass area then. MR. GREENE: I haven't seen the plat for this neighborhood, so I can't say if they're going to have an area for common guest parking or not, or if it's just strictly single - family homes that will consume all of the area. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody else have any questions of Mike? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike, the road shows access to the connection to Livingston, which I know the county's not maintaining, but it also provides access through the community of Imperial Lakes. In your department in reviewing this, are you comfortable with any provisions for maintenance and responsibilities that would occur as a result of the additional traffic through the private communities in that area? MR. GREENE: As long as this is very clearly stated that the county will never have responsibility for maintenance, we don't have a concern in that this is all private. And it's between the landowners and the developments that have legal access to utilize these easements to decide how they're going to put together their maintenance requirements with each other. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Under the transportation section of the PUD it says: At no time shall the county be required to accept maintenance responsibility for the -- and this is singular -- roadway serving this project. Why don't we pluralize that, because you have two roadways serving the project. MR. GREENE: That would be acceptable. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That's all I have. Thank you, Mike. Anybody else have any? COMMISSIONER CARON: Mike, excuse me, do you get copies, though, of all the agreements that are being signed? Do you keep records of that as well? MR. GREENE: In some cases we do, in some cases we do not. In this particular case we do not have copies of maintenance agreements between the other developments. But what we had to as part of Marsilea Villas make a requirement of, that they provide evidence that they have legal rights to the access easement, because they were not one of the original parties to it. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. So you do have that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But you just brought up a question that started my conversation with Fred and Tim last week when I asked them, I see your roadway easement was on the plat but I didn't see where you had the right to bring utilities in. Roadway access does not mean utility access. Well, they didn't even have that with them, they had to go find it. And they did since notify me they have that right by another easement. And you seem to be addressing most of the easements going out to Livingston Road. Do we know that the access easement is in fact viable going through Imperial Lakes? Have you reviewed that? MR. GREENE: The -- what I've reviewed are the access easements and the easements that were put in place as part of the plats of Delasol and Mirasol, that would only extend from the edge of Imperial out to Livingston Road. Because this access easement to Livingston has been identified as part of a required rear access to Imperial for a very long time. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, but obviously they have -- if they wanted to, they could go to the west by going down through lmperial and winding around that project. MR. GREENE: I'm not sure where the gate is going to end up. I'm under the assumption through the construction permits that Imperial will be re- gating their connection at some point near their property line. Page 17 of 45 161 1 B7 December 16, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Heidi, do you have any -- did you do any research on the easements? MS. ASHTON- CICKO: Well, I did confirm that the petitioner /property owner does have legal access. Okay, I did confirm that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: To? MS. ASHTON- CICKO: To it's site. There are a number of easements, some are platted, some aren't. And then there's even an older easement that's underneath some of the platted easements. There is an agreement between Milano, Delasol and Imperial and Marsilea Villas that addresses the Milano Tract R. And there is agreement as to who would be responsible for that. I don't recall as the platted easements -- I believe they're dedicated to the public. I don't recall in the plats whether or not they specified the maintenance responsibility. Most likely it did. And then there is this segment that goes across the Imperial Golf Coast (sic) property, which I don't believe is probably addressed. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know, from -- if this project had a straight run down that 60 -foot easement going out to Livingston, it wouldn't have as many questions from my perspective. But because it connects to Imperial Golf Estates and they have an equal opportunity then to go either direction, I'm more concerned that we're not putting them into a situation where they could have a problem with Imperial Golf down the road, especially if they changed -- if they become gated to a point where they decide they don't want these people to use that road. Just what kind of rights are there? I was assuming that may have been looked at before today's meeting, but it's more of a problem for the landowner in Marsilea than anybody else. COMMISSIONER CARON: I know that Imperial Golf Estates and Marsilea have been working very cooperatively together on working out all the issues for easements, both for the road itself and for utilities and everything else. This has been a very long process for these people to get their back gate here, which is a genuine safety issue. So I know there's been a lot of cooperation. I'm a little surprised we didn't see some of those agreements. But again, they are also private agreements, so I guess the county's really out of it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Heidi. MS. ASHTON- CICKO: I believe that you could put as a condition that they'll pay their fair share towards the maintenance of the access road to Livingston. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I mean, I think if those agreements are already in place -- again, I don't want to muddy up the water. I just want a confirmation that the issue had been looked into and the agreements that are needed are there so that the county's not caught in a trap down below at some time in the future. So that's all I'm trying to realize here. And if you're from a legal perspective satisfied and if transportation is satisfied at this point, I'll go forward with that. Anybody else have any questions of transportation or anybody? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any public speakers, Ray? MR. BELLOWS: No public speakers for this item. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred, would you like to come up and address the issues that were outstanding that you wanted to confer with your client on? MR. HOOD: Yes. Okay. We have three issues. The first one, Mr. Murray was asking about the 47 to 42 feet high. See if we can split the difference and go to 45? We just need to make sure that the units that they're going to design to put in here are going to be, you know, high enough. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't even know if Mr. Murray's objective was to get you to lower anything in the first place other than try to understand what you were asking. Mr. Murray stepped out. When he gets back, we'll -- MR. HOOD: Okay, I'll ask that question when he comes back. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Personally, I didn't have a problem with your 47. It's actual height, which means chimneys or other things, and that's not abnormal to be 12 feet above your regular height. MR. HOOD: And if we're okay with that, you know, we'd be better off leaving it at the 47. I'm just -- I Page 18 of 45 1611 IR7ber 16, 2010 wanted to make sure that he didn't have an objection to it. Our second issue was Mr. Schiffer brought up about the sidewalk on the opposite side of where the longer sidewalk is on the east side -- or on the west side, rather than it being on the east side. I'm sorry. The issue with that sidewalk, I kind of eluded to before, we've got kind of a corner issue with pulling it onto the other side. But if we were to pull -- it's a possibility that we could pull the sidewalk that is on the north side of the right -of -way to the south side and just wrap it around the other way so that it's consistent and we won't have that issue. I think that may address your issue. But we just want to be careful with this, because looking at the more engineered drawings, our lot depths for the units that we -- for front and rear yard, it's very, very tight on that back end. And that kind of leads to the third question about the additional 20 feet from that vacated right -of -way on the south side of the property line. We had actually planned on once that was vacated using that area for that lot depth. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Brad. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: You have a rear setback requirement of 20 feet. MR. HOOD: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And that would probably be the rear property line. So, I mean, I'm not asking you to double up on that. I'm just saying is that if for some reason that wasn't a rear setback, it could be maybe a side or something funky the way you lay it out. I wouldn't want units 10 feet off the property. MR. HOOD: No, no, that's not the intention. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So, you know, the 20 feet I'm looking for is from the -- MR. HOOD: Property line. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- property line of the perimeter of the site. MR. HOOD: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Which there's nothing in your documents I don't think that would affect. So the unit won't go back. I'm not sure of your description of the -- where the sidewalk would go, though. So in other words, the sidewalk's within the right -of -way. MR. HOOD: Right. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So if it's on the south and west side of a cul -de -sac, in other words, it comes along the south and goes up the west and then goes around the cul -de -sac, that would still put it where you have the connection to the lake, or where do you intend to have that connection to the lake? MR. HOOD: Connection to the lake is going to be within the lake maintenance easement. So it will link up on either -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, it doesn't matter. So in other words, you're going to go around the cul -de -sac anyway. MR. HOOD: Um -hum. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So I'm not sure what you described as your alternate to that. MR. HOOD: Basically flipping where you see the sidewalk on the north side of the right -of -way to the south side of the right -of -way, to just go around the opposite direction. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. MR. HOOD: So that we don't have the break. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So continue where you come in on the sidewalk -- MR. HOOD: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- and never have to cross the street. MR. HOOD: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, that's what I was looking for. MR. HOOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And then on the roof -- what? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, he said on the north side. You also have a sidewalk on the east side of the north -south section. Are you moving that sidewalk too? MR. HOOD: No, no, we're moving the entire sidewalk that is the longer loopy one to the south side of the Page 19 of 45 B 161 1 December 16, 2010 right -of -way, if you're looking at the diagram like this. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The south side and the west side then? MR. HOOD: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the sidewalk's going to go on the opposite side of the street. MR. HOOD: Exactly. Yes. I guess I could have said that, couldn't I? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wow. Okay, Brad? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And then the other point is that I'm also a fan of leaving the actual height the way it is. The only thing you punish by lowering it is the slope of the roof. MR. HOOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And Mr. Murray, while you were gone the discussion came up about the height. Fred asked for a compromise. And since you weren't here -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I heard -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- we weren't sure where you wanted to stay on it, so -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I heard all of the comments, so -- there's a speaker in the room in there. I have no objections if that's a fairly common practice. It seemed a lot of distance beyond the zoned height, but that's fine. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I do have one more. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Fred, what about my concern for parking on the street way? In other words, you don't have a road section here, so you're asking for the deviation without that. Which is not common. Where would people park? In that party situation, where are the cars going to be? Is there going to be room for them to be at least half off the road, or what's going to happen there? Because the reason the 60- foot's a good right -of -way width is it does give you grass on both sides for overflow parking. MR. HOOD: I don't have an answer for you right now, but I can look at that and get you some information on how we would address that, even if it's going to be -- you know, the driveways will be longer or wider. I'm just not sure of the actual footprint right now. Maybe -- I haven't looked at the engineering drawings yet so I can't, you know, tell you exactly where those cars would be in a party situation. But that's something I can get back to you, if you really wanted to look at it. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, we typically worry about that if it's a through street. A local street like that that's at a dead end we're not as concerned if they have a special event. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I mean, these guys are way off. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I mean, to get to them is difficult enough. I mean, so it's -- okay. So if one lane of the street was taken up with parking, people are still getting around, so -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: It would be a nuisance to the neighborhood but not for through public traffic, so it's, you know, one of those issues that -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, I'll drop. I fold, thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have anything else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred, do you want to rebut any of the comments? MR. HOOD: I don't want to rebut anything. I just want to make sure that we're going to look at the sidewalk issue. If -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let me -- I'll read you what I believe are the stipulations, you can tell me if you agree or not. MR. HOOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to move the sidewalk to the opposite side of the street; that's a simple way of saying it. You're going to have a minimum 20 -foot setback to any of the property lines that are on the external boundary of the project with any structure. We're going to remove the EAC stipulation as staff indicated to the extent it was needed, it's incorporated Page 20 of 45 161 1 De er 16, 2010 already in the PUD. We're going to pluralize the reference to roads on the transportation section of the document. Any of those cause you any heartburn? MR. HOOD: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good. COMMISSIONER CARON: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, let me close the public hearing and Ms. Caron made a motion to approve, with the stipulations as read? COMMISSIONER CARON: As read. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray seconded. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7 -0. You're done. Thanks, Fred. MR. HOOD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ** *Okay, we have an item -- one left on our agenda. I meant to -- I should have noted in the beginning, the staff has a CP- 2010 -1 amendment for the Vanderbilt Beach Road neighborhood commercial subdistrict that was continued. Doesn't have a continued date, but I'm sure we'll see it in the future. ** *And the last item up on our current agenda is CPSP- 2010 -2. It's the staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and map series in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. David? MR. WEEKS: For the record, David Weeks of the Comprehensive Planning Section. Mr. Chairman, if we could go back to Item 9.C, the request for a continuance. One, I want to clarify -- correct the record that that was not at staffs request, it's at the petitioner's. That's incorrectly stated on the agenda. Secondly, the date would be January 20th. That's five weeks from today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. MR. WEEKS: And I believe we do need a motion and vote on that, please. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, is there a motion to accept the continuance request to January 20th, 2011 ? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Mr. Schiffer. Seconded by? COMMISSIONER CARON: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. Page 21 of 45 O16, 2010 COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Nobody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7 -0. Thank you. Okay, David? MR. WEEKS: Commissioners, this is a county initiated amendment. Most of these amendments are -- or all of these amendments were authorized by the Board of County Commissioners, either I'll say explicitly or in general. Most of these I would characterize as housecleaning. They're updates to a lot of maps within the Future Land Use Map series, a few text corrections and restructuring and so forth for proper reading and whatnot, but there are a few that certainly staff would acknowledge are of substance. The First Amendment of note is to Policy 5.1 in the Future Land Use Element. And this is a policy that addresses properties that are zoned consistent by policy. That is, the zoning on the property does not conform to the Future Land Use Map, but nonetheless through some past actions has been deemed to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, nonetheless, and therefore is allowed to develop per that existing zoning. And this policy also provides for a rezoning that can occur to the property, so long as the density or intensity of use is not increased. For example, if a property was zoned RMF -12, it was consistent by policy, that property could be rezoned to another residential zoning district of the same or less density, but could not be increased. Similarly, in the case of a commercial rezoning, a rezoning to a lesser or same intensity of use could be allowed. The specific change that's being requested is to allow for combinations a. °properties with different zoning districts, and then to allow a redistribution of the use intensity. The specific sub - paragraph D of Policy 5.1 already provides for residential properties to be aggregated and the density to be redistributed throughout, as opposed to being segregated. If you have one property zoned RMF -6 and another zoned RMF -12, for actual development purposes if they came. in as a single project, they would be limited to six units per acre on the first site and 12 on the other; there's no blending ability. But this policy presently would allow for a rezoning to occur to blend that density. The request here is to allow the same type of thing to occur with nonresidential zoning. It could be a shifting of commercial uses from one location to another, but you cannot increase the use intensity, you cannot exceed the acreage. You've got one acre of commercial today, after the rezoning you still have one acre of commercial of the same or less intensity, but it could be located differently. It does have to go through a rezoning, so that means it goes through the public hearing process to determine if it's appropriate for that use to be shifted to another location. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's make sure we have -- if there are any questions on each item you bring up. Anybody have any questions on David's comments on that issue? Go ahead, Ms. Caron. COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, I just wanted to ask, obviously this has come up somehow. Can you give me an example? I want to make sure that we're not opening a can of worms. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's the same question I was going to ask. Someone decided to -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Because obviously you weren't just sitting around one day going, God, why don't we have blending on commercial? MR. WEEKS: We do that sometimes. COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, right. MR. WEEKS: This particular circumstance involves property owned by the Bayshore /Gateway Community Redevelopment Agency down off Bayshore Drive. The CRA owns property and they have a rezone pending right now to create a PUD allowing amongst other things a performing arts theatre is what's proposed. And the Board of County Commissioners did previously designate that Bayshore /Gateway area as a cultural district. And so that's part of their efforts to fulfill that designation to bring -- help attract that type of development to this area. The particular properties, and there are several of them that comprise this proposed PUD, have multiple zoning districts, various residential and some commercial. Page 22 of 45 161 i.. ecember 16, 2010 I'm not sure if the CRA's PUD actually needs this provision, but it certainly brought it to light, the potential for relocation and how it could be beneficial. - COMMISSIONER CARON: Then why aren't we limiting it just to Bayshore /Gateway? MR. WEEKS: Because I think the provision makes sense to be applicable across the board. If you have properties that have some commercial -- some non - residence zoning and have some residential zoning or maybe two commercial zoning districts, it might make sense to allow for the reallocation. It might result in a better development scheme, a more compatible development. COMMISSIONER CARON: It might, David, you're right, that could happen. But you haven't actually gone forward and analyzed any other places where this might be applicable, right? MR. WEEKS: No, no. Because consistent about property maps, there's a lot of properties on there. But that's why I want to emphasize again, it requires a rezoning. It does open the door, but it opens the door to make the request. If it's determined that this is not appropriate, you're not achieving a better compatibility, or it's not a better project, then I believe based upon the zoning criteria in the LDC, the county has the authority to deny that request. COMMISSIONER CARON: I don't know, I think it would almost be better to let people come forward on a case -by -case basis and let them -- you know, I think we're -- we potentially could be opening a can of worms. And I don't know, because I haven't analyzed where this could happen or where it couldn't happen. I question changing the FLUE for something that we could easily take care of for Bayshore. I mean, they're a separate entity, they're an overlay to begin with. We could make it quick and simple and easy right there and not effect anybody else in the rest of the county. MR. WEEKS: We certainly could, if that's the direction. COMMISSIONER CARON: I don't know how anybody else feels. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As soon as you are done, we'll be -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Go ahead. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions? Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I mean, I'm not sure exactly -- Dave, so what that would mean is if you had two acreages with two different densities or commercial zoning that you could move this one to here and that one to there or keeping the same acreage? MR. WEEKS: It would allow for that. I mentioned the example of the CRA's property, again, just as an example. They have multiple zoning districts. They have some residential and some commercial. So potentially it could literally be a flip- flopping, let's put the commercial from the left, let's put it on the right side and put the residential on the left side. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. So what you're essentially saying is you can take the pieces out and put them back on the property in the exact same acreage -- MR. WEEKS: That is correct. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- any way you want from that point on. MR. WEEKS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, good. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, this may not be applicable, but I'm just thinking about Wolf Road. We had a situation one time where one parcel lay this way and the other part -- they wanted to join it. I don't know if you recall that. And there was -- the GMP just simply precluded that. And everybody agreed it seemed logical, and I think this body passed it anyway. But would that be an example of something of that sort where the parcel owner here required that parcel as well and they wanted to benefit from that? Do you have any recollection of that issue? MR. WEEKS: I don't. But I would -- the concept sounds the same. I would remind you again though that this provision would only be applicable to one or more properties that have been deemed consistent by policy. So you could combine two or three or four multiple parcels, but at least one of those has to have been deemed consistent by policy. You could be blending two properties deemed consistent by policy or one property deemed consistent by policy with another one that is simply consistent with the Future Land Page 23 of 45 16 I �1 B7 December 16, 2010 Use Map. But that limitation of at least one property being consistent by policy means that it is limited in its applicability. We can't go to just anywhere on the map and say let's put those two properties together. MS. MURRAY: That's your safeguard is what you're saying. MR. WEEKS: It's a limiting factor. I mean, there are still a lot of properties out there on those consistent by policy maps, but it's not all the properties in the urban area. It does limit. MS. ASHTON- CICKO: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, ma'am. MS. ASHTON- CICKO: If the goal is to apply to nonresidential property, what we already have for residential and commercial, then I'd suggest that -- or I'd like the opportunity to work with Mr. Weeks to flesh out the language, because I think it can be more simply stated. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have no problem with that. David? MR. WEEKS: No, none. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. What is the process, though, after today, if you have to work on something? Is this coming back to us then on -- I mean, it will come back on consent. But is this a -- this is considered a transmittal, right? MR. WEEKS: Correct. MS. ASHTON- CICKO: Yeah, I'd ask that we continue this one and hear this particular section with the VBR. You're continuing the VBR five weeks, right? You can continue this, still stay within the advertising period and then everything will be heard by the board at the same time, correct? MR. WEEKS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But that's one of the options. I wanted to ask you, the consistent by policy through 5.9 and 5.13, that is a limited number of acreage in mostly the existing urban area of Collier County; is that right? Or does that apply to everywhere now? Those policies are older policies for the zoning reevaluation process, weren't they? MR. WEEKS: That's correct. And those properties that are identified are probably the 99 percent located within the urban areas. There's a few isolated properties outside. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any of those properties at the area around 951 or Rattlesnake Hammock? MR. WEEKS: No, no. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Because I know there's some issues there with a larger project coming in and potentially maybe they would be looking for density blending of some nature regarding the activity center moving into the fringe areas that were to the east. But I want to make sure we're not opening ourselves up for -- MR. WEEKS: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- commitments there. MR. WEEKS: No, not at all. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So this then is primarily urban area and primarily properties in a limited number based on the zoning reevaluation criteria back years ago. MR. WEEKS: Correct. Just to summarize what those properties are, they're properties that were improved; that is, already developed, as defined by that ordinance that implemented the zoning reevaluation program. And a variety of properties that were granted exemptions or certain applications approved through that zoning reevaluation program were based on compatibility or a vesting principal; they were able to retain their zoning. Those properties are the ones that are identified as consistent by policy. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know, it's real hard to track those properties. And occasionally it's missed. It's ironic, there are some pretty good entitlements out there for those property owners. And most of the time they don't know it because of the way it's written in the code. There is a list of those properties in an ordinance, but they're all done through a legal reference. It's very hard to track them down. I've come across a few of them for people, so -- MR. WEEKS: Unless we've missed some, all of those should be identified on those consistent by policy maps. We made the effort when we first changed the policy in correlation with establishing the maps. The objective Page 24 of 45 a� Et7ember 16, 2010 was to make those properties readily identifiable for everybody, certainly including staff, not just the public. Because we need to know when we're applying our Growth Management Plan and zoning regulations what properties are treated differently. And those are in a different category. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, if we are done with the questions in this section -- I do think we ought to take a break. We're at a good point. We'll come back and fmish up in probably short order. So let's come back at 10 after 10:00. Thank you. (Recess.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, welcome back from the break, and we were right in the middle with David's presentation on the GMP. So David, why don't we just move forward. We were on Page 2, I believe. What I'd like to do, David, is after each topic, if there's a break point, just to see if we have any questions, that might be easier as we go along. MR. WEEKS: Certainly. The next proposal is number two on Page 2 of the staff report. And that's to revise the office and infill commercial subdistrict regarding its applicability. Right now the office and infill subdistrict applies to a property that abuts commercial zoning on one or both sides. But if that adjacent commercial zoning is within an infill subdistrict, it will not qualify -- cause the subject property to qualify. And the rationale is just like within the office and infill commercial subdistrict itself, there is a no piggyback provision. The idea is that you have an infill property, and if you're allowed to tack on again and again and again, you'll end up with a lengthy strip of commercial, not meeting the intent of infill. So similarly there's a provision that if an infill subdistrict has partial zoned commercial within it, it would not cause the adjacent property to qualify. There's at least one circumstance -- actually only one circumstance that I know of that the result I think is nonsensical. There's a piece of property on Pine Ridge Road -- I think I have it to put on the visualizer. The property's on the south side of Pine Ridge Road, just east of Livingston Road. To its east is -- it's highlighted in blue. To the east of it is property zoned commercial that's within an activity center. Based on that, the property would quality as having customer zoning on one side. On the other side in part is commercial property, a PUD, but that property is within one of these infill subdistricts. Therefore, this subject property would either be viewed as not complying at all with this criteria of the subdistrict, not being eligible for commercial zoning at all, or would be viewed as abutting commercial on one side only. And one of the requirements for properties that abut commercial on one side only is that it must transition. Well, in this case you'd be transitioning from commercial zoning on two sides of approximately the same intensity; c -3, C -4 type uses are allowed in those two PUD's. The result again, I would tell you I believe is nonsensical. You really -- there is no transition. You've got commercial zoning on both sides of you. And this proposed language would allow for this particular property then to qualify for commercial zoning to be the same as the commercial zoning on both sides. The subject property there is about 13 and a half acres. It does have -- you can see on the zoning map the ST boundary. And visually looking at it, it does appear to be a lot of wetlands on the property, so the development potential may be limited. I mention that in particular because this subdistrict has a maximum size limitation of 12 acres, but if any -- a larger property can still qualify, but any acreage in excess of 12 has to be limited to open space type uses. But that's the specific property anyway that this would benefit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: David, unconfuse me, please. MR. WEEKS: I'll try. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I keep on hearing in my mind here this infill is 10 acres. Is that not applicable because it's an activity center, or am I in error about the infill being 10 acres or less? Or is that residential infill? Page 25 of 45 1611 07ber 16, 2010 MR. WEEKS: Resident -- it does get confusing. Residential infill used to be 10 acres in size. Several years back it got changed to 20 acres. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I missed that. MR. WEEKS: Okay. For this office in infill for commercial, the size limitation is 12 acres, or I probably should say 12 acres of developable property. Like I was just saying, you could have a property that's larger than 12 acres, but no more than 12 can be developed commercial, the balance would have to be left in open space. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That helps me, thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? Oh, Heidi? MS. ASHTON- CICKO: I think I can comment to clarify. Because I think I understand what this is attempting to accomplish. I think with the language without the change, if you're adjacent to office infill or you're abutting office infill, then you don't qualify to take advantage of this. Correct? MR. WEEKS: That's correct. MS. ASHTON- CICKO: So what you're changing is you're saying that you don't qualify if the only abutting property that would make you qualify is office infill; is that correct? MR. WEEKS: That is correct. MS. ASHTON- CICKO: I think we can also revise that to make it a little more simply stated as well, if -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I think what we're going to do today is walk through, give you comments and come back with the final language when we -- MS. ASHTON- CICKO: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So in the end I think all your suggestions will be worked on, the way it's heading. David, the PUD to the east is a commercial PUD, mostly, right? MR. WEEKS: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The P for the fire station is a public facility. The PUD to the west is a residential PUD, right? MR. WEEKS: No, it's a commercial. It's a shopping center. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, okay. That's what I was going to -- now, if this property wanted to change the GMP in order to be consistent to what they're trying to do now, they would have to come forward with a GMP amendment, right? MR. WEEKS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So why are we doing that for them? I mean, who's the push behind this, just out of curiosity? MR. WEEKS: I proposed it because I became aware of the circumstance through discussion with an agent. To my knowledge there is no petition filed for this property, no rezoning. But in the discussion about the applicability, the agent was asking me questions about how would the office and infill commercial subdistrict apply. And in that discussion I realized that in my opinion this is an unintended consequence, so we're trying to fix it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you feel it's an unequitable consequence? Or is it equitable left as it is? I mean, we've got to be fair and equal to everybody. And I'm just wondering, are we providing an advantage to some individual because of for whatever reason over what anybody else would have to do to accomplish the same task? MR. WEEKS: Well, there's no question that it's going to benefit one landowner. I still go back to it's debatable as to whether -- I would take the position that with the language as it presently exists, the property would qualify for commercial zoning. But I would suggest that the plain reading of the language would mean that the subject property would be limited to what the subdistrict refers to as low intensity office and other commercial uses. So I believe it does qualify for commercial zoning, but of a lower intensity. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What's wrong with that, on a street that's got a miserable track record for traffic congestion? I mean, I'm just wondering, why are we opening ourselves up for someone to come in with a project that's now going to be able to qualify by the GMP for higher intensities when this area is one of the worst roads in Collier County. MR. WEEKS: My thought process is simply this: Why require property to develop with lower intensity commercial when it's sandwiched between two properties of high intensity commercial? That is the very type of Page 26 of 45 16f1 B7 December 16, 2010 circumstance that this subdistrict was intended to accommodate, a property that's relatively small in size, located on a major roadway that is sandwiched between higher intensity uses. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I'm glad it's coming back, because between now and then, I think the uses of the PUD to the east and -- I know what's -- I vaguely remember what's there by memory, but it would be good to see what their flexibilities are and their built -in development standards. So we'll take it up when we come back in January as well. MR. WEEKS: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Again, as with the last one, you found this one piece of property that it affects. But have you analyzed how many other properties this will affect? MR. WEEKS: This one I have. There's a -- besides the office and infill commercial subdistrict itself, there are six infill, commercial infill subdistricts within the Future Land Use Element. And as I looked at those, I only identified two that I believed had -- well, no, there are none, no properties that are similarly situated. There are no properties that have commercial on both sides like this one does. The others are just abutting the infill subdistrict on one side only. The change to this policy would not affect those properties. This -- I believe from my evaluation, this is the only property that would benefit from this change. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And the effective change is to allow a higher intensity commercial? MR. WEEKS: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I think that's kind of -- it boils it down to what we need to consider when we come back in January on that one. MR. WEEKS: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Want to move on to the next one? MR. WEEKS: The third item, staff is going to withdraw. That's a very minor change, but it's a date change in the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road mixed use subdistrict. The reason for the withdrawal is the County Commissioners just Tuesday of this week directed staff to make some major amendments to that subdistrict. Number four, the bottom of Page 2, and number five that follows it are twins, they're just within two different designations. Number four is to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District sending lands, and number five is to the conservation designation. Both of these have a provision for essential services. And as the language currently reads, it's essential services necessary to serve permitted uses within the respective designation. But then if you look at the list of those permitted essential services, many of them are not accessory to the uses above. For example, you're allowed to have single- family development in both the sending lands and the conservation, so certainly a private well or septic tank would be viewed as accessory to those. But utility lines, sewer lines, lift stations, these are not accessory to the types of uses that are permitted in those designations. They're not accessory to typical agricultural development or to conservation uses or to low density residential. So simply what staff is proposing is restructure the listing. Take those that are not accessory to specific uses in the respective designations and list them separately. So they've been deleted in the case of number four, bottom of Page 2 of the staff report and carrying over to Page 3. The various ones that are not accessory to the permitted uses therein are deleted and then they're relisted below in a separate paragraph. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any questions on four or five from the Planning Commission? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: David, it wasn't that simply done, from what I can read. You didn't just take the language that was struck and move it into a new paragraph, you added something to it, right? MR. WEEKS: I added one entry. And again, on Page 3 under new paragraph G, I added water pumping stations and raw water wells. And the reason for this, number one, I would interpret that those are allowed anyway, but we have had raw water wells approved in a conservation designation. And again, the sending lands and the conservation designation in my mind are twins. I just wanted to put that in there for clarity so every reader could see them. And the general protocol is if an interpretation is made, the next round of amendments let's put that interpretation into the plan so that it's plain, clear for everyone to see. Page 27 of 45 16 I 1 87' December 16, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You want to tell us about the other issue you added? Let's start at the top of Page 3 under G. Essential services as follows: Necessary to serve. And before it always referenced a rural transition water and sewer district; now it's the urban areas. What urban areas are we serving in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District and the conservation designation? I'm just curious why that was added. MR. WEEKS: Yes. The rural transition water and sewer district exists within the rural fringe area, and in some cases between it -- between it and the urban area between the rural fringe area and the Estates. But you may have -- for example, the water lines, you could have the raw water wells out in the rural parts of the county or in the Estates, but the lines that transmit that water into the urban area to treatment plants could potentially in the future run through either the transition -- or rural transition water and sewer district or could run to the urban area. I mean, that's where presently our treatment plants are only located in the urban designated area. So in the future the potential is there for water lines, as an example, to run through sending lands. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And those water lines would be for water theoretically processed in a plant out there that serves the urban area water needs and then pumped back in this direction; is that kind of like -- MR. WEEKS: That's possible. But there's also -- I mean, that's one possibility. Now, I think we all know that there's future plans to develop water and wastewater treatment plants in the Orangetree area. And that simply just changes direction. You could still have the water being pumped from the sending lands and sent to the treatment plant there at Orangetree. Similarly, there's the potential to have sewer lines and lift stations that are pumping -- that those lines need to run through the sending lands to get to the rural transition area or to the urban area. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, just needed to understand the change. MR. WEEKS: Sure. And you're correct, there are more changes than I noted, thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I guess we'll move on to six. MR. WEEKS: This begins on the bottom of Page 3 of the staff report. A few changes to the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. The first is simply correcting a date. The second is to add a performing arts center type uses to the subdistrict. Presently for those portions of the subdistrict that qualify for commercial zoning, it's limited to the C -1, 2 and 3 zoning districts. As I noted during earlier discussion, the County Commission has designated the Bayshore and Gateway Triangle area as a cultural district. And there is an existing PUD that -- excuse me, a pending PUD by the CRA of that area. And one of the uses they are requesting is a performing arts center. Staff believes it's a reasonable change to make in light of the board's specific designation of the area as a cultural district. It is -- the use being added is a use that falls within the C -4 zoning district, so it is an increase of intensity in that sense. And because it would go through a rezoning process, the appropriateness of that use actually being added to that PUD would be evaluated during that process. On Page 4, letter C, clarify uses, that uses are allowed is provided by Future Land Use Element policies. Presently the overlay makes it clear that residential uses and densities can be allowed by Future Land Use Element policies. We discussed Policy 5.1 earlier; that would have some applicability here. But there's no recognition in the overlay that those same Future Land Use Element policies would be applicable for non - residential uses. And there is commercial zoning within the Bayshore /Gateway areas that are identified on those consistent by policy maps. I view it as nothing more than a cleanup. The policies already apply to those policies, but the overlays should have that cross - reference to the policies that everybody can read, clearly understand, yes, those policies apply here, they would allow for the potential for a zoning change for those commercial properties. Paragraph D on the staff report is to delete a development standard. This overlay is unique in the Growth Management Plan in that it specifies the number of feet allowed per story. We do have other provisions in the Future Land Use Element and the Golden Gate Master Plan that impose a height limitation within individual subdistricts, but that typically is a fixed number or it is a number of stories. In this overlay there's both number of stories for certain uses and the overlay specifies how many feet can be within a story. Staff recommends that be deleted. Leave that determination to the zoning process. And the LDC does contain two zoning overlays for this Future Land Use Element overlay area, both of which have height limitations Page 28 of 45 1611 B/ December 16, 2010 based on stories and maximum number of feet. And the staff perspective is it's appropriate for that to be implemented through the zoning action. If a particular project wants to exceed the height limits provided in the LDC, then they have two avenues to pursue: One is a variance application or, if it's a PUD, they can request a deviation. That's from the LDC requirement. The total number of stories is still a limitation in this Future Land Use Element overlay, but we simply would not longer be dictating the height of those stories. And again, the CRA's rezoning brought this to light. Because there is a proposed performing arts theatre in there. And a theatre typically, as you may know, it's usually a large building and it's frequently one story, and it's far more than 14 feet. This would allow for that type of use to be there if the board ultimately decides that a deviation or variance is appropriate to allow that use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, any questions on the Bayshore section? Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And number one, I think the intent, you have theatrical producers except motion picture. What do you really mean by that? I mean, an office for the producer or actual productions, or -- what is that intending? And is that where you're bringing the actual center in? Because -- MR. WEEKS: What I did was I went to the SIC Code and grabbed the one that allows the performing arts theatre. I think the point you're raising is that it allows things beyond just a theatre. I did not propose something so narrow as to say the theatre only, but instead the SIC Code that allows other I'll say related used. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. But you think -- okay, so theatrical producers means the building. Because the producer is an individual, normally, or individuals. So you're comfortable that that means the building. And then the exception for motion pictures. You wouldn't want to exempt the -- somebody filming the theatrical production, so could you add the word except motion picture studios? Because your intent is not to have a studio for motion pictures, correct? Or is your intent to not allow people to film the theatrical productions? MR. WEEKS: Let me find that exact language. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: It that also might limit, you know, the showing of movies. MR. WEEKS: I didn't bring that with me. My recollection is that LDC provision, though it uses the tern producers, as you said, it's not referring to a person, it's referring to a business or an operation. The except motion picture precludes the ability to have, as I remember, a movie theatre. You could not have a Hollywood 20 located here. But you could have a stage production; you could have bands, dancing, whatnot. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And could that stage have a screen and show movies then? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I hope so. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Could that stage also film a production? I mean, you don't want to limit that, that stuff. I mean, I think you could say, you know, that the movie houses are out and a movie studio is out. But I don't think you want to limit your -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Why would we want to even eliminate those? I mean, what's wrong with those? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Nothing. That's what I'm saying, keep them. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I mean, David, you might want to just leave the exceptions to the LDC implementation language and change the word producers to theatrical facilities. And then any exceptions to that, why don't we do what we normally do and put those in the standards in the LDC? MR. WEEKS: We could do that. What I was trying to do here was specifically capture the SIC Code listing for clarity. You put theatrical facilities, that leaves it up to interpretation. Maybe that's not a bad thing, but I was trying to keep it very clear so at the time of implementation, when somebody wants to come in and file a rezoning petition, they can look to the plan, they can see specific language, they can look to the LDC and the SIC Code and say oh, that matches exactly, that's what that means. As opposed to putting in a more vague term. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But this is the GMP. MR. WEEKS: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And you always advised us to keep the GMP less detailed and let the detail come out through the implementation of the LDC. And wouldn't we -- aren't we kind of getting into very specific uses here, Page 29 of 45 1611 ec7 ' ember 16, 2010 when actually we might -- and I'm not -- East Naples is starting to really come onto its own. They may have an advantage to have a nice movie house there. I don't know. I'm just -- didn't know if that would better come up at the LDC level than now. MR. WEEKS: Commissioner, I would agree, that generally that is a staff position, let's keep things more general and let the LDC take care of more of the details. But as far as uses go, one thing we do typically do, and you'll see it in the existing overlay, is it makes reference to the C -1, 2 and 3 zoning districts. So that provides that direct link to the LDC, it eliminates any question. If it's not in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, it's not allowed, unless it's been interpreted to be allowed within those zoning districts. And in this case since we're talking about a use, use the same type of logic, let's make it very clear, put that direct link back to the LDC for uses. But I'd be glad to try to be prepared at the continuance hearing to have the information about what the SIC Code allows. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, that would be helpful. Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, the -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Or Brad, did you finish? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: -- aside from the SIC Code, there -- I'm sorry? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Brad hadn't finished yet; I didn't know that. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Oh, go ahead. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I was going to say, maybe you might want to note it and just say live theatrical. And if the word producers legally makes sense, use it. And then that would eliminate your -- but again, carefully, you won't be able to show a movie in that -- on that stage if you're not careful. I think you might have an easier time saying what you don't want than saying what you do want. I mean, give a broad category and then take out everything. But if you don't want movie theatres, just say you don't accept movie theatres. MR. WEEKS: Okay. I'll check the LDC, SIC Code and also discuss this with the CRA staff. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That was going to be part of my question, whether or not the SIC Code is the only code that we use. I think we have a number of times talked about another code. That might be more broad or general and perhaps reference that. I can't remember, it's NAICS or something like that? MR. WEEKS: Yes. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And that might help in this regard. I would think -- I'm not sure that we want to preclude the development of the community as it is intending itself to develop. Again, I think the rezone area is where you really want to be constructive about restraint. Anyway, that's my thought. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? Brad? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: One more thing. Down on AE, this is the 14 -foot. The reason we did it, and 1, you know, designed some buildings down there, and that 14 -foot is a real pain in the butt. But the intent was is to have a high first floor. And when we did the initial review, the intent was that when you drive down the street, you have these nice uniform. And they were really focused on the first level. You know, why they did it on the other levels was always a question. So is the CRA comfortable with eliminating that? That was a big discussion at the overlay time. And the intention of requiring a tall first story I think does make sense in design. MR. WEEKS: They definitely support it. They initiated the request to have the height limit removed. And then from there it evolved into adding a use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: But they did it with respect to this one new use that they want, this theatre that they want to put in? MR. WEEKS: Yes, that was the genesis. But there are other uses. You think about a bank which frequently has a lobby, or certain office buildings may have a tall lobby. Page 30 of 45 16 P 1 87 December 16, 2010 If you're saying you're capped at 14 feet per story, that precludes that type of development as well. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. But it's not so much the first story, that if somebody wanted to make it 20 stories -- I mean 20 feet and have it be a two -story, you know, entryway that would be the probleri. It's coming down the other way. Because essentially what they had planned in the overlay was maximum of three stories. And with this 14 feet of height, it limited the height, the maximum height to 42 feet. Now, what you're telling me is that the CRA has analyzed this and they're okay tossing out that overall limit, not the stories. I understand -- stories was always an awkward thing to have in there, but Brad said there was some rationale for it in the beginning. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Dave, one thing, maybe leave something in there noting that the first story may not be -- or, you know, go back and get their approval, it's their overlay -- that the first story may not be less than 14 feet. That cures -- that may maintain the reason for it. On the upper floors was always the real pain. I think the 14 feet came because in building, a story can also have a mezzanine, up to a third and in some classifications a half of the floor area. So I think the 14 feet was a way to prevent you to really crank the story using the mezzanine trick. So anyway, just run that back and see what they want. If they don't want that sight line that was very important in the beginning, then they don't want it. But if they're throwing it away just to make a cultural center, they may want to reevaluate it. COMMISSIONER CARON: Because again, then why couldn't you narrow it and limit it to just cultural center and not blow up the entire rest of the overlay as a result? MR. WEEKS: Understood. But I'll just comment again that this is unique to the Growth Management Plan, and maybe that's not a bad thing, but it essentially stands out as a limitation. And it has been a problem for the CRA in this particular instance. And in discussions about a bank building, there's been interpretations of the LDC that would allow for the bank building if a part of it has stories and say you just have a lobby area but outside of the lobby area you have your traditional stories. And it would make things cleaner if we had clarity and uniformity between the GMP and the LDC. And if we eliminated this requirement in the GMP and totally leave it up to the LDC, that's more in keeping with how all other provisions are, they simply defer to the LDC for that level of detail. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark, one -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Mr. Schiffer. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And Dave, where it's really a problem, when you're doing the mixed use, you're up at the fourth level, the upper residential level. That 14 feet is a big waste of area and height. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So it needs to be changed, we just need to refine the way it's being suggested. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Just make sure we don't lose the -- remember, it's the downtown, the urban look of a tall first story, that's all. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And you'll get back to us on it then in January, David? MR. WEEKS: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And if that's finished with this discussion, let's move on to the Future Land Use Map and map series. MR. WEEKS: Most of the map changes, I think I said at the beginning, are cleanups. But the Future Land Use Map is one area that at least one might argue has some substance. And the last map we'll get to, the well head protection areas. Over the years the City of Naples has had a variety of annexations and the various maps are being proposed to be amended to reflect those. The Future Land Use Map, activity center maps, just about every map on the list falls into that category of revisions to reflect the annexations. The activity center maps themselves, all of them are being revised because of the underlying information that's shown there has changed. Zoning is identified there, and it's changed over the many years since these were last updated. Parcel boundaries, streets and street names, and the amount of development which is also depicted on these maps in a shading plus actual building locations and shapes. So again, to me housecleaning changes. Let me zero in on the Future Land Use Map itself, the county -wide map. On your staff report, Page 5, this would be letters B, C and D. And let me put the map on the visualizer. Page 31 of 45 1611 B7 -' December 16, 2010 The first area of change is the Golden Gate Estates Natural Resource Protection Area. And I believe in all three of the changes I'm about to go through, it's a matter of the map features being askew. The recommended change is to move -- and this is the proposed change, so it's already showing the correction -- is to move the NRPA boundary north towards 1 -75. Presently it doesn't touch I -75 at the north side. On the south side it extends south of U.S. 41. And in part that pushes the NRPA overlay on top of the Port of the Islands urban area. This corrects that. It moves the boundary to follow U.S. 41, to follow I -75 and to remove it from Port of the Islands urban designated area, which was never intended to cover. Second change: Letter C in the staff report on Page 5, number one, is in the vicinity of U.S. 41, County Road and State Road 29, and the Everglades City area. And this is to shift the border between the conservation and agricultural rural areas. Again, to clean it up so that it follows U.S. 41, moves slightly to the south and west to accomplish that. The boundary moves slightly to the west to follow County Road 29, and also expanding to the west so that it extends all the way to the area of critical state concern boundary. And I believe that's it for that change. And by the way, the ownership. The ownership of the areas east of 29, which this is where you arguably would say well, you've made a substantive change, because the present map shows that agricultural rural, now you're changing it to conservation. That's all owned by the U.S. Government. The areas in white, which is the agricultural rural area that's again, if you want to make an argument, it's substantive, it's being expanded to the west. All but I think one parcel of that is privately owned. So if anything, if you want to make the argument, then we've expanded slightly the rights of those landowners. But again, I suggest to you that's not the case at all, it's simply a map correction. That land, that white that you were seeing south of 41 and west of 29, is virtually 100 percent tidal wetlands. And then the third area is letter C in the -- D in the staff report. That is an adjustment to the boundary northwest of Immokalee along County Road 850. Where the present map shows the conservation boundary extending slightly to the north of County Road 850, and the map change is to have it follow County Road 850. And the ownership to the north is all private lands, large tracts and agricultural use. The conservation area to the south of CR 850 is all owned by the Water Management District. It's part of the CREW trust land. So again, a map correction. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any questions on the FLUE section number seven? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: David, the rest of the book is backup to the elements that we just addressed; is that how you're -- MR. WEEKS: There's one more map change, Mr. Chairman, of substance I definitely need to walk through briefly. That's on Page 6 of your staff report, number 12. That the Collier County well head protection areas and proposed wellfields and ASR's map. That map depicts the potable water wellfields that are permitted for withdrawal of a minimum of 100,000 gallons per day within aquifers that are most sensitive to contamination; that is, the surficial aquifer and the intermediate aquifer. The GMP, Growth Management Plan, requires us to maintain this map and to conduct a revision to the three- dimensional modeling, the hydrologic model, every two years. And as a result of that modeling effort, if necessary, to revise the map. And attached to your staff report is that 33 -page report. It is the technical basis for the map revisions. If you look at the map and compare it with the existing map, you'll see that all of the wellfields have changed, though most of them are minor. The most significant change is number one to the Ave Maria wellfield area. It is smaller and different shaped. And secondly, Port of the Islands wellfield has been added as they have installed some shallow water wells. You're probably aware that the Land Development Code contains the same map but has a map series in far greater detail. And within the LDC are regulatory components restricting certain land uses from being within the wellfield zones. This map in the Future Land Use Element has no regulatory provision. It is informational only. But again, it does set the stage for the Land Development Code maps. And finally, I would mention that there are special advertising requirements any time we go to amend this Page 32 of 45 1611 Ipcember 16, 2010 particular map. And those advertising requirements have been fulfilled for both this hearing and for the Environmental Advisory Council's hearing. Ray Smith, who's the director of the Pollution Control and Prevention Department is here, if you have technical questions. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I think we're then ready for any questions on the last item, which is number seven. And actually the balance of the book, which is supporting documentation to it. Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, I don't have a question on the well head, so if you want to get those questions in first, I just have another question on another map here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions specific to the well head? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think it's just me. I didn't want to disappoint Ray, he sat there all day, I've got to ask him something. Ray, on your existing well head map and future one too, we have other wells in the county besides the wellfields that are outlined there. And I'm just wondering, how do we address the open well that exists in the county? I know Marco Island pulls water out of what I used to think as a kid was a reservoir. But I think it's just a giant open lake north of 41 and east of 951. And it's not shown on your maps, and I'm just wondering, does that warrant the same level of protection that this process does for what I think you customarily deal with as well fields that are underground? MR. SMITH: For the record, Ray Smith, Pollution Control Department Director. The map that -- well, first of all, let me address the map and why I'm here. The Growth Management Plan requires that I review the map, this particular map that's required by 9J -5. And it's specific to wells, not surface water bodies. And I update this map based on the information provided to me by the utility representatives or stakeholders. That's the intent of this particular map. Now, to answer the Chairman's question regarding surface water bodies. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, just surface water bodies used for I guess -- MR. SMITH: For potable water sources. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- moderate extraction, like I believe -- MR. SMITH: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I believe that's what Marco Island's doing in that location I described. MR. SMITH: Right. There are specific criteria associated with potable water supplies that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection enforces regarding the drinking water obtained from that. In addition to that, the Pollution Control Department conducts inspections on businesses throughout the county that may be generating a hazardous waste that may be impacting the -- this particular drinking water resource. That happens throughout the entire county, surfacing groundwater. If there's any pollution complaints, we respond immediately to make sure that the -- any released materials are cleaned up. But bringing it back to DEP, DEP regulates any potable water sources associated with surface water and groundwater. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But the intention I believe of this map is to highlight to people who would be developing property in the general areas of the wellfields, that there may be special conditions or circumstances concerning pollution issues that they may want to adhere to. There's no indication on this map where the open well sites are, like Marco Island. Do you feel, from a perspective of your department, that if someone wanted to develop something nearby, that open well that Marco Island uses for their water supply, we don't seem to have any restrictions on that then; is that a fair statement? MR. SMITH: That's a fair statement regarding the LDC. And they're specific to the wellfields only. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SMITH: This particular map -- and I'm trying not to repeat myself, but 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 9J -5.006 requires that existing and planned public potable water wells and wellfield protection areas be delineated on this land use map that I'm proposing here today. Page 33 of 45 1611. December 6, 2010 Regarding the Land Development Code and the land uses associated with -- when I'll be back with these wellfield protection zones, we can take a look at the modeling of the Marco Island wells and propose that as an addition to the LDC when I come back. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just think if we're going to be real careful in the pollution standards that apply, why don't we look at them for all the water sources of a potable nature in the county. And maybe it centers on the definition of what you have to do regarding the -- you just read a section of I think 9J -5 and made reference to -- MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- what wells are. Do they define wells? Do they define wells only as a wellfield or a well head in the nature you show here, or is an open body that's used as a water source considered an open well? MR. SMITH: I don't believe they define an open body of water as a well. It's considered surface water body. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. You know, it's something you should -- if you want to consider it when you come back, fine. But I would be concerned for Marco Island's well site -- water site as it is. MR. SMITH: We can look at that through the LDC amendment cycle and approach it at that point. There may be some minor language changes to the LDC itself to allow that accommodation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Understood. Thank you. Anybody else have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I guess, Ms. Caron, we can go on to your other issues. Thank you, Ray. MR. SMITH: Sure. COMMISSIONER CARON: I'm back to David. It's okay. MR. SMITH: Thank you. COMMISSIONER CARON: I just had a quick question on the estuarian and bays map. And I was wondering why Wiggins Bay is not included. Probably our most important estuarian system. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think he did that just to see if you'd catch it. What page -- oh, it's just one of the maps. COMMISSIONER CARON: It's just in the back. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, that's fine. MR. WEEKS: About the fifth or sixth map from the back, from the end, behind the ordinance. And I don't have an answer. I don't know why it's not there. COMMISSIONER CARON: So perhaps you could check that out. MR. WEEKS: I sure will. COMMISSIONER CARON: Thanks. MR. WEEKS: I know this is a map that's been around for many years, and certainly we don't have any new bays, so I'll have to try to research that to see -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Could have been an oversight right from the beginning. MR. WEEKS: -- why, is there a size threshold or -- I don't know. I don't know. COMMISSIONER CARON: The river shows up on the rivers map, but so does the Gordon River, as well as Naples Bay. So I just was curious why Wiggins Bay -- thanks. MR. WEEKS: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Donna, maybe it's Hickory Bay? I mean, that's where Hickory comes out. No? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, any other questions of anywhere in this book before we release David and he can come back to us in January? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. David, I think you got the general changes or suggestions we have, and we'll look forward to cleaning it up when we finish in January with it. Anything else you had? MR. WEEKS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I do have a -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: -- point. I think it's a point. Page 34 of 45 16 11 Recemb er r 16, 2010 On Page 7 where -- under Environmental Advisory Council recommendation. Their recommendation will be presented at the CCPC meeting. And so you're the EAC? MR. WEEKS: Thank you. Another omission. The EAC unanimously recommended the map, the well -field map, be changed as proposed. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, David. MR. WEEKS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ** *Next item up on the agenda is old business. We are -- one item is continued. It would be the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance review. But we still have an update on the Watershed Management Plan with Mac Hatcher, who's been patiently sitting in the audience all morning. MR. HATCHER: Good morning, Commissioners. Mac Hatcher with the Stormwater and Environmental Planning Section. I'm here this morning to discuss briefly the model fertilizer ordinance and get your input at this point. Fertilizers are intended to stimulate plant growth. Generally they contain nitrogen and phosphores, at least. And applied to turfs and landscape plants they work fine. When they get into the water system, they send to stimulate algal growth, which can cause nuisance conditions. Fertilizers can contribute to non -point source pollution when they get into surface waters or groundwaters that will feed surface waters. Non -point source pollution is generally considered to be any type of pollution that's not from a readily identifiable source, like an industrial pipe or something that's making a continuing discharge. In 2009 the legislation created a statute that encourages local governments to adopt a fertilizer ordinance. And for local governments that have water bodies that are impaired for nutrients, nitrogen or phosphores, they are required to adopt at least the model ordinance. The model ordinance was developed with Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the University of Florida Institute For Food and Agricultural Sciences. It's intended to protect water quality. Local governments can adopt more stringent standards than the model ordinance, but they must support those with some documentation. And farms and agricultural lands are exempted from the fertilizer ordinances. And one of the primary provisions of the ordinance is a certification and training program. And the reason for this is that studies have shown that proper application of fertilizer produces very little nutrient runoff. Improper applications can result in significant discharges of nutrients which can then cause problems in surface waters. The model ordinance requirements. Again, training and licensing are the primary requirement. They require a six -hour training course that's been developed by Florida Department of Environmental Protection and EIFS. They include a prohibited period where fertilization is not allowed, the model ordinance. The prohibited period is any storm watches or warnings and when soils are saturated with water. The application rates are based on the new fertilizer label requirements which have recently been changed by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. They require a fertilizer free zone around impervious areas and water bodies. The free zone is set at 10 feet. You can come in as close to three feet if you use deflectors or drop spreaders that don't provide a lot of spray. They require a low maintenance area, which is an area adjacent to water bodies where grass clippings and landscaping trimmings are not allowed to be kept. But this is a voluntary situation in the model ordinance. Again, all agriculture is excepted from the ordinance. And the application practices in a model ordinance typically are that no fertilizer is allowed to be left on impervious surfaces. There have been a lot of local ordinances adopted by some of the communities adjacent to us. We've got a recommendation from the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. And I prepared this table to show the similarities and dissimilarities between the model ordinance and the other local communities. And also The Conservancy of Southwest Florida has proposed a more stringent ordinance which closely resembles the City of Naples and Lee County. You can see that the training is required for applicators in all instances, certification is required in all instances and in The Conservancy's. They also require a certification of the businesses that are hiring people to do Page 35 of 45 161 87ler 16, 2010 fertilization. The prohibition period, again, it's the watches and warnings for the model ordinance. And all of the other local governments have adopted what is commonly referred to as a rainy season blackout period. And goes from June to September. And The Conservancy has added those watches. Because of course storm warnings and watches can occur earlier than June and after September. The application rate, the labor requirements vary from two to seven pounds of nitrogen per thousand square feet per year, based on the type of grass that's present. You can't apply more than one count of nitrogen per application, and that's per 1,000 square feet, or half a pound of phosphores per year. The City of Naples and Lee County both require 50 percent slow release nitrogen. The Regional Planning Council recommended 70 percent slow release nitrogen. And The Conservancy has recommended 50 percent slow release nitrogen. The Naples and Regional Planning Council had the less than two percent phosphores. Both of these recommendations were made before the Department of Ag. changed the label requirements and reduced the allowable phosphorus content in turf fertilizers. The Conservancy of Southwest Florida requires no phosphores fertilizers. And that doesn't -- the label allows a no phosphores fertilizer to have up to .25 percent phosphores, so it's not necessarily a complete ban of phosphores. But phosphores is generally recognized as not needed for most soils in Florida. The fertilizer free zone is 10 feet in all instances, except for the Regional Planning Council, which recommended 25 feet. The Conservancy of Southwest Florida doesn't require -- or doesn't allow the deflector shield provision that allows people to get closer. Exceptions to the fertilizer ordinance: Agriculture and research in the case of the model ordinance, City of Naples allows for vegetable variance. Lee County allows a variance for new plantings and vegetables. And The Conservancy allows for vegetables and a few other specific instances. The enforcement is similar for everyone except for The Conservancy's allows for enforcement against the property owner and the City of Naples. And The Conservancy recommendation is that there be notification at the retail point of sale that notifies the consumer that an ordinance is in place restricting fertilizer applications within the municipality. And the Environmental Advisory Council has recommended that we consider The Conservancy's recommendations for more stringent requirements, and we're putting together a support document for that. The Conservancy has already submitted a support document, but it was received too late to post and make you all aware of it. But it's on the website now. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Questions of Mac at this point? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mac, as far as the information you're providing here today, can you get that to us in hard copy? These comparisons are good to have ahead of time. I certainly would like to look at them. And what about the notification to the applicators as stakeholders? The specialty sales, like I know there's a company, I think it's called Naples Fertilizer on Goodlette, and there might be others. Since they are considered under one of these categories, a notification would be the responsibility I would assume of anybody selling fertilizer. Have we gone to having any stakeholder meetings on this, or -- MR. HATCHER: We've got stakeholder meetings tomorrow. I have not contacted any of the potential licensees or affected industry yet. But I'm getting a list of the registered fertilizer applicators from the City of Naples so that I can inform them that the county is considering this. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think it would be good to get -- I mean, I'd hate to see us bring something into play that they didn't have an opportunity to -- just like we do with the other stakeholders in the other issues that we've asked to have stakeholders involved, this is no different. Not saying we necessarily agree or disagree with them, but it certainly would be good to have their input as well. And I hadn't seen any more data than what you provided in the packet, which is minimum. So anybody else? Ms. Caron? Then Mr. Murray. COMMISSIONER CARON: Just a quick question on -- it says here under certification turned what The Conservancy proposed, it says all venues. What does that mean? MR. HATCHER: That means that if you are hiring someone to do fertilizer applications then you should -- Page 36 of 45 161 lk_ ,, 87, December 16, 2010 what they're suggesting or requiring is that a decal be issued to the applicators and that the applicator provide his customers with a decal and the decal be posted. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. So it would still be to the applicators, but with some additional -- MR. HATCHER: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Mac, just to be certain that I understand what applicators is defined as, is that the individual that drives around on a vehicle or pushes a doohickey, is that the applicator or is that the supervisor of the applicator? MR. HATCHER: The ordinance does not require the individual to be certified. It would require that the business be certified. Any business that I guess is a commercial fertilizer applicator would need to be certified, licensed, trained. It doesn't mean that every individual would. The City of Naples has required that the business and 10 percent of the employees, with the additional specification that any crew that's out making an application has to have somebody that is certified present when they're making the application. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: If is that what's in the model ordinance? MR. HATCHER: That is not. That specific is not in the model ordinance. MS. MURRAY: Do you propose to apply that in there? Because I noticed The Conservancy also has property owners. They're trying to reach any individual who might have personal responsibility, it would is appear, anyway, personal responsibility to actually put fertilizer on the ground. And I'm concerned with the notion that we can get individuals in any large or even a smaller company where they send crews out and that supervisor may make the rounds to those crews during a given day and not be present and therefore not really supervising in the true sense what's going on on the ground. So is it our desire to increase the requirement or to leave it at that level of just the defined applicator? MR. HATCHER: I certainly agree, I guess, or think that the idea of more than the owner of the business should be trained. I'm not sure if I would support the, you know, requiring somebody on -site to be trained. Or at least certified. I think that they should be trained, but I don't think that they should necessarily have to be certified. I don't have a recommendation at this point. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: How would we enforce the ordinance if we leave what appears to me at least to be a gaping hole in the concept between the applicator as say the business owner or one of his hench persons and the person who's on the ground who has either the responsibility to mix chemicals or to apply particulate matter. How do we enforce that ordinance? What do we do? We just simply penalize them? But we haven't achieved the result that is intended, which is to start to get the whole process of fertilization under control. And I offer to you, at least for your thinking, that it seems to me -- and while I'm not a real enthusiast for major controls on people, I think in this matter, particularly, that I think it is better to have it more controlled than less. And perhaps none of the others on this board agrees with that, but that's my view anyway. MR. HATCHER: Well, I'll give you this consideration: We have two levels of licensing for these types of individuals currently at the county. One is for a lawn service business which simply requires an occupational license. The other is for a landscaping business, and that requires a professional certification license. There's a big difference in cost of the fee. The landscaping professional certification requires proof of insurance and this sort of thing. So there's an avenue to address things either way if you go with the professional license. You know, we may be cutting the lawn service guys out of this end of the business. That may not be a bad thing. But what I told the Environmental Advisory Council was that I would bring back costs at the next presentation to them and I will factor those types of considerations into that cost analysis when I come back to you all also. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Thank you. But I must acknowledge that I'm not sure what that gets at relative to what I'm arguing or issuing. MR. HATCHER: Well, it obviously doesn't get directly at what your point is. But the professional -- all of these ordinances will, I imagine, be enforced by our code enforcement staff. They need to observe an infraction to take enforcement action. They can take action against the individual in all instances, no matter how things are licensed. If we require Page 37 of 45 B7 1 December 16 2010 the professional license, then theoretically an infraction of an employee could be included as a business infraction, and the business license would then be at stake. And it obviously puts a lot more impetus on the business owner to train his individuals, whether or not they are certified or not. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well, that sounds like a remedy potential. But there may be a remedy somewhere in between there. But I'll give you an example, maybe it's real, maybe it not, but let's say a condominium association or an HOA is noticing that their turf is not looking as pleasant as they'd like to see it and the company explains well, we really don't -- we can't do that because this is not allowed. And so flexing their muscle they say to the company, well, we'll get somebody else who will. And there's an acceptance on the part of that company, a lawn company, if you will, to put in a fertilizer in excess of quantities and materials that would be covered by the model ordinance. Now, in order to catch them, the infraction would have to be seen at the time by the code enforcement person. I just don't know that if that were a scenario or there were multiple scenarios, whether or not the ordinance does anything more than just put something on the books without any real teeth. And that's a concern I have. MR. HATCHER: Well, I think that your assessment of the situation is correct. The model ordinance would probably not have much teeth in that instance. And I don't believe that any of the more stringent ordinances would either. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Oh. MR. HATCHER: The observation of the infraction -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Why are we doing this then? MR. HATCHER: -- still is the requirement of -- I mean, you have to observe the infraction in order to enforce it. You just have more stringent provisions in the case of -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Is there nothing in the ordinance that would allow to us test soil to see if there's a higher ratio of certain chemicals on the ground? Is there any means by which we can verify if we have a suspicion? The probability of having a code officer at the moment in time when something like that is being, you know, chemically mixed or walking around is very, very high probability it will not happen. But if there's a means by which our people who have skills and knowledge and training and can go about and take a sample and verify that there's compliance or not, then we're in a much better position to effectively control. And it wouldn't matter then about the scenario that I painted where they may try to enforce -- they being the condo or the HOA people -- trying to enforce something and yet the service company would simply say I cannot, I'd lose my business. Is that a possibility, doing something of that nature? MR. HATCHER: It doesn't seem like a practical solution. The applications -- you know, once you get a rainfall or an irrigation event, the fertilizers or some portion of the fertilizers, depending on whether they're -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: They break down. MR. HATCHER: They break down. They go into the soil. They're used by the plants. And to come back after the fact and make an assessment like that, you would have to have a gross violation in order to be able to -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well, you will respect the fact that my ignorance of the specific chemistries and that, I don't know that. I offer that as -- I'm sure somewhere along the line there may be something. Otherwise, I suspect that okay, we're being required to have a model ordinance at the minimum, but it seems to be a circular activity. MR. HATCHER: Well, I agree with you. And the thrust of the model ordinance is to increase education and training. And at this point in time the state agencies feel like that's adequate. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay. Thank you for that direct answer. COMMISSIONER CARON: It would seem to me, Mac, then the most important part of this ordinance -- I mean, given that we're trying to get people trained and certified. But the most important part actually is the application rate. And those things that if we follow what the Regional Planning Council wants, then even if people are somehow not doing it quite so correctly, the chances of it having an effect are less, because they put the most stringent requirements here. In terms of both the fertilizer free zone, the application rates, I think adding watches to the prohibitive period, all those things are the things that really need to be as tight as possible, as strict as possible, because we really are going to have no enforcement. Page 38 of 45 k 16 B7 December 16, 2010 MR. HATCHER: Well, it may seem like we won't have any enforcement, but I believe that it's gross misapplications in the past that have caused the most problems in this area. But I agree with you, that the Regional Planning Council's provisions are probably the most stringent. And the only I guess logic that I can provide to argue against that is that the maintenance of a dense area of turf that is very healthy prevents runoff and it facilitates the assimilation of nitrogen and phosphores. So the EIFS studies that have I guess been used to develop these guidelines show that when you have a very healthy turf and fertilizers are applied according to the label requirements, there is very little runoff of nitrogen and phosphores. COMMISSIONER CARON: Go ahead, Brad. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mac, just quickly, what do you think the certification cost -- I mean, the course would cost somebody? MR. HATCHER: The course that's been developed by Rookery Bay for the City of Naples, the current charge is $25. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And it says six hours in our -- so the guy sends people for -- I mean, it seems reasonable to have a certified guy on -site. Do they keep logs on projects, which essentially would try to show, you know, how they're compliant with these requirements? MR. HATCHER: Currently none of the model ordinances that I've reviewed require a log of applications for every application. The City of Naples, when they certify an applicator, they require -- they demonstrate that they I guess know how to do it, but they don't require it for each application. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And when you said the gross misuses, is that easily because somebody doesn't know what they're doing, or is that Mr. Murray's condo association pushing for a greener lawn? MR. HATCHER: I'm sure it's a combination of both. Obviously fertilizers that are applied to impervious areas or water is a direct contribution to surface water pollution. Gross applications where you exceed the label limits, you run the risk of damaging the landscape because fertilizers can kill when they're applied in too large a quantity. But the other obvious -- or the problem that would be a problem here is the potential to get runoff and going into surface water. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: All right, thanks. That's -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Anybody else have any questions? (No response.) COMMISSIONER CARON: Thank you, Mac. We look forward to your next update. And thanks -- oh, I'm sorry, we do have public speakers. I beg your pardon. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, first speaker -- or the only speaker is Amber Crooks. MS. CROOKS: Well, the good thing is that -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Speaking of people who have been waiting all day long to speak. MS. CROOKS: The good thing is that Mac's covered most of the information. But Amber Crooks from The Conservancy of Southwest Florida. I juts wanted to take this opportunity to discuss in a little bit more detail very briefly some of the components about the fertilizer ordinance. The Conservancy has recognized that nutrient pollution's a growing problem, not only in the county but all over the state. And so we've been -- our advocacy efforts have been lending to fertilizer ordinances throughout Southwest Florida, because it's clearly one of the best and most cost effective ways to deal with this non -point source pollution. And as Mac indicated, when we do get excess nutrients in our aquatic systems, there are potential adverse effects to water quality in the form of harmful algal blooms. And whenever you do get the harmful algal blooms, you'll see dimensioning dissolved oxygen in the water. And that's a one -two punch for water quality. You'll get fishkills, toxic shell fish. We've seen situations with algal blooms affecting human health, respiratory agitation and illness, and of course aesthetically a negative effect on our qualify of life and on our tourism economy. So we have been advocating for fertilizer ordinances all throughout Southwest Florida. Because if done correctly with the right measures, we can protect our water quality and we don't have to do it at the sacrificing, you know, a healthy attractive lawn. Page 39 of 45 Br 1611 December 16, 2010 Back in 2007 the Regional Planning Council, like Mac suggested, did their reasonable in model, if you will. Not a state model but a regional model that was specific to The Conservancy of Southwest Florida. And at that time the 22- member jurisdiction unanimously approved that resolution. And since that time there's been a domino effect all throughout Southwest Florida of municipalities that have adopted what ends up being more stringent measures than the state model ordinance. That includes Bonita Springs, Lee County, Naples, Charlotte County, Fort Myers Beach, Fort Myers, Sanibel. Two weeks ago Cape Coral adopted their fertilizer ordinance, which is more stringent than the state model. And we've also been working with Marco Island on theirs, and we expect that to be heard by their council in the next couple of months. And this is just a map that sort of depicts -- I don't know if you can see, and I can pass it around, I can put it on the screen. But the red dots show where a more stringent ordinance has been passed before the state mode l came out in 2009. In the green you can see scattered is post state model. So municipalities continue to adopt more stringent fertilizer ordinances, based on the needs of their communities, without any kind of problem. And so as Mac indicated, The Conservancy does propose fertilizer ordinance elements that are indeed more stringent than the state model that are comparable to municipalities that are in our area, such as City of Naple:,. Our proposal really is a piggyback of the City of Naples and very similar to what the City of Marco Island is currently proposing. I do have -- I don't know if you've seen our proposed ordinance, but I do have a packet for you, if I could approach and distribute these. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. MS. CROOKS: And hopefully what each of you have in your packet is The Conservancy's proposed ordinance. We also have completed the little handout that sort of lays out some of the support that we've provided to the county in regard to some of those more stringent measures. And in fact many of the sources that we've cited to support those more stringent measures come from DEP and EIFS and prior studies. So that's just a short snippet of what we -- of the comprehensive letter that we did submit to the county just at few days ago that could go to support the more stringent measures. You also should see in your packet a map. The state model ordinance, as Mac indicated, was really solidified in 2009 with some state statute language. And like he said, it's intended to be the minimum base line. It's the floor, not the ceiling in that municipalities can and should implement more strict measures where it's needed. In the state statute -- or excuse me, in the state model language itself, it does lay out particular situations where more stringent measures would be appropriate. For example, where a municipality has impairments. You can see on that map that's got the yellow and browns and reds that the county does have some verified impairments. About a third of the county is considered to be impaired, either for nutrients or where the causative pollutant is excess nutrients. So we are already seeing some problems with nutrient pollution in Collier County. So that would qualify, we believe, the county for these more stringent measures. The state model also suggests where there's possible TMDL's, or where the county or municipality has seen environmental harm or human health harms or where they want to simply protect their waterways from future; impacts, that more stringent measures could be considered. And so in order to do that, the municipality would have to meet a two -prong test under the state statute. And we believe that the county would easily be able to do this, based on what we've seen in other municipalities w ho have passed more stringent measures after the state model ordinance. The first prong is that they must show that they're not simply relying just on the fertilizer ordinance to deal with their non -point source pollution, that they do have other programs in place. So based on our review, we see that the county already does in fact have irrigation and landscape ordinance and requirements, and they've been doing extensive work with these watershed management plans, with education in terms of Florida Yards and Neighborhoods type programs, and with the water -- quality of work that they've constructed, the Freedom Park. So I think any of those things would help support that aspect of the state statute language. The second element that they must meet under the state statute is that they are using scientific and technical Page 40 of 45 1611' Decem er 76, 2010 support for these more stringent measures. And so what we saw done in Cape Coral just a few weeks ago was a report was drafted from a consultant that utilized much of the information we have already put together for the county. And the Cape ordinance was approved with no problems. Marco is doing something similar. And we provided just this week a letter to the county that shows some of the scientific and technical support that could be put on the record in order to meet that other second prong of the state statute. If you're looking at this map here, you can see it's really time for this. Not only do we have existing problems, but Collier County is one of the last municipalities in Southwest Florida to look to do a fertilizer ordinance. And we want to make sure that we do it right, that we have an ordinance that is effective and protective. And, you know, there's not really necessarily a need for me to go point by point through the comparison that Mac's already done. Although there is that component in your packet, looking at all the different municipalities. And you can see what The Conservancy proposes is more stringent than the state model on all counts. However, it's not inconsistent with what your other coastal communities have up and down the coast, and what the municipalities that are within Collier County have. So what we're looking for is something that's going to be consistent between the City of Naples and City of Marco Island. I think that's important, not only from just a commonsense perspective but for your applicators. Because you have of course people who work in both within the city limits and within the county, and so they're going to want to have something that's easy to identify between the two municipalities. And also, in an environmental way, simply having the more stringent measures we think will lend to protecting the water quality. The slow release, as Max said, is a bit more in what we are proposing, it's 50 percent, at least. That product is -- because it's already been adopted by the City of Naples, those types of products are available in the stores already. And some people might be shocked when they see it's a little bit more pricey per bag, but because you're using less product and it's lasting longer, you actually will have money savings. So it's a sort of a no- brainer to use these products that are available. And Regional Planning Council actually recommended up to 70 percent slow release. So we would be advocating for a minimum of 50 percent slow release for the nitrogen. And on the phosphores, and we agree with Mac that most soils don't need additional phosphorus, so we were looking to a zero or a minimum two percent, which is what the City of Naples has. So we can clarify on that language. But minimum or zero phosphores we think would be appropriate. And we do have a clause in the ordinance that allows for if you do a soil test and your particular lot is lacking, is deficient, that it does offer you to apply phosphores. So there is a means to, if it's necessary. But in most cases it's not going to be. And unfortunately the state model, if we were to just adopt the state model, would allow up to half a pound of phosphorus application per year. Because again it's this minimum baseline for the whole state. And what's appropriate for the whole state may not be appropriate for Southwest Florida. Just a few more things. The other is the application rate. The state model uses the urban turf rule, which allows up to seven pounds, depending on the type of grass, per year per thousand square feet. What other municipalities have been using is a four -pound cut-off. And for most grasses, that's going to be all that you need. So we were going to advocate for the four -pound mix. Of course any time you have excess, it's a potential pollution event, so we want to make sure we limit the total application rate. Another component is the blackout period. What we've done here in The Conservancy's proposal is combine the good things from the state model ordinance. The don't fertilize during hurricanes and floods and things like that or where you've got two inches of rain or more, along with the more easier to follow rule, the calendar based. You know, meteorological predictions can change in an afternoon. And really, what the state model ordinance is where you're going to get two inches of rain or more. So sometimes that's difficult to predict. So we're basing our recommendation on the calendar blackout period. And in fact, most rainfall in Southwest Florida in our area is less than two inches per rainfall. Only three to five percent of our rainfall events are reaching that two inches or more. So our most common rainfall events are the sort of summer rains that we get. So that would Page 41 of 45 1611Dece 7 er 16 2010 help to address our most common types of rains. And during the rainy season we are going to get some other sources of nutrients into our grasses from the rain, from grass clippings, other sources. And the final thing is a fertilizer free zone. You saw that Sanibel and the Regional Planning Council do have a recommendation of even more than 10 feet; they're up to 25 feet. But most ordinances have the 10 feet. So that would be something that we would want, 10 feet with a deflector shield. And that's really going to go to protect from runoff into our waterways. And on those two components, the blackout period and the fertilizer free zone have been some of the more contentious elements. And I can tell you that Sarasota adopted their fertilizer ordinance back in 2007 and they just issued their State of the Bay report where they have found that their water quality has been improved since their fertilizer ordinance has been in place, and that they have not seen drastic changes to their lawns due to lack of fertilizing during the summer or having the fertilizer free buffer zone. So there is some precedent in front of you. The guinea pigs have gone and they have not found that there's any dramatic effect to the lawn based on implementing these more stringent elements. And going to your -- as a final thing, going to your questions that you had of Mac in regards to the certification and the enforcement. Again, you have folks who have gone before you. I guess that's one benefit of waiting. And City of Naples has found that, you know, enforcement, it is difficult because you do have to see something that's -- you do have to see the infraction. But I think their experience has been overwhelmingly positive, because people will be educated by about the ordinance. They'll want to do good to protect their water quality. So it is very much having the teeth of the ordinance but then the educational components that make it effective. And in the City of Marco where they already do have a licensing component, we've heard that people will specifically request applicators who are certified and trained in protecting their water quality. So they'll actually be looking for the people who are going to be doing good and request a list of those particular applicators. And I will work with Mac on some of these components. Because what we meant to have in our ordinance is something that's very identical to City of Naples in terms of training and certification. We have in our ordinance that at least one supervisor on -site should have received that training and certification. And just like Marco Island has with their decals, they'll be able to -- it will be better for enforcement to know you can just drive by and see that there is a decal on the vehicle to know that they have gone through the process and they have gone through the training. And if you have any questions, please let me know. But our proposal will be to ask that you recommend these more stringent measures that The Conservancy has put into our ordinance proposal. We believe that the science is there to support. And we'll be happy to provide any additional information you feel might be necessary to make that happen. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any questions of The Conservancy? Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Amber, if you used less chemicals, proper amount of chemicals, doesn't that save money? MS. CROOKS: Yeah, right. That's one of the principles of getting people educated, including homeowners, that they maybe only need a certain amount to actually achieve the results that they're looking for. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And then the other thing, in putting this together, did you meet with landscapers and lawn services to see, you know, why they put more on? Or do they have any idea of what they're doing? MS. CROOKS: Well, we've heard a mixed bag of there are some applicators who are like yeah, we're already doing this. You know, so this ordinance, although it's great to have it, you know, you'd want to have it adopted, they're actually already doing many of the things so it wouldn't affect them that much. But then we've also heard some of the horror stories of people fertilizing, you know, when the hurricane's coming. So I think it's a mixed bag. I think something like this would really help go a long way to making sure that everybody is aware of these Best Management Practices. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And the shield you use on the impervious surface, describe what that is. What is that? Page 42 of 45 161 � � December 16, 2010 MS. CROOKS: Right. It's an attachment that you would put on your spreader that you're moving along to make sure that no spray of fertilizer goes beyond that. So it's great to have along that buffer zone or any impervious surface you don't want to apply fertilizer to. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MS. CROOKS: Thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mac, I think we've got enough to digest here. I did notice that you had a list of exceptions on the prior document you had on the screen, but yet the whole ordinance only applies, from what I can read, to turf, specialized turf or landscaping plants. So I'm not sure why you need exceptions. I'd rather you might want to list what it applies to instead of what it's excepted out. MR. HATCHER: You make a good point. The -- primarily the only agriculture that would be affect ed would be pasture. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Not the way this is written. MR. HATCHER: Right. Agricultural -- any agricultural operation is exempted. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, no, I mean the way -- the current way your ordinance is written, it only applies to turf, specialized turf or landscape plants, period. So nothing beyond that is applicable. At least that's how I read it. But we've got time to discuss that after we digest everything we've gotten from you and The Consen ancy. But I think the most important thing is, and I've seen this happen before, a lower board may recommend something and have an empty audience basically. And then it gets to the board, the newspaper picks it up ahead of time and says look out all you people, you're going to have new rules, and 100 of them and 1,000 of them show up at that beard meeting and the board looks at us with why didn't you do your job. So I really want to stress to you, you need to get the word out to everybody that could be impacted by this. Because it will cost businesses additional effort. And it may cost members of the public a change in their habits and money. I'm in favor of more strin -- I don't use fertilizer, I don't know anybody should. But at the same time, we've got to be absolutely fair. And I'd rather we dealt with that issue here and passed on a good resolution of the Board of County Commissioners than one that is going to be slaughtered if it goes to that level and we don't bring the stakeholders involved early. So I think that's going to be the biggest issue of this whole thing. Okay? Anybody -- Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: How close are we to bringing that to a conclusion? MR. HATCHER: Not real close. I don't really anticipate it going to the board for a final conclusion until March or April. So I believe we have time to make notification and get input from as wide a group as we can get. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well, if we were in a position, having digested the ordinance, say, from The Conservancy and we're in a position to give you direction, how difficult or how long would that be before you would be prepared to go forward? Or would you just simply adopt it or attempt to adopt it -- or we would adopt it. But would you attempt to take it as it is, or would you start looking through it to qualify it? Or do you wish to go forward with your document? You've given us choices. So I'm not sure where you're going. It's nice for us to hear this and make our points, but whatever we see as a product has to be reflective of what this board and others are interested in. So I'd like to understand where yo1re going. MR. HATCHER: Well, most of the input that I heard today was for more stringent provisions of the ordinance. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Right. MR. HATCHER: What I would propose would be to come back with the model ordinances still, a snore stringent ordinance, financial implications of both options, and of course a more thorough vetting with the industry. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: My concern for you personally would be that for you to do that wort; when we might -- and that's what I'm about to offer of the board here -- when we might suggest that no, that's not what we want, we want something more stringent than that. I'm wondering if we couldn't give you some direction. I recognize we haven't digested what The Conservancy has offered. But I'm assuming that there may be enough support for a more stringent ordinance than the Page 43 of 45 161 *ber 1,V0 model ordinance. And I'd like you to avoid having to do that than be told no, go back and do something else. So Mr. Chairman, I'm really asking for I guess support in that regard. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I mean, I just got the information from The Conservancy for the first time today. And just like we have cautioned The Conservancy in their interest to assure that they are a stakeholder involved in elements that come forward, I will not venture a guess on whether it should be less stringent or more stringent until I know all the facts involving the stakeholders out there who are in the business. And you have a lot of applicators in this county that are going to be impacted. I want to hear what they're going to say. And they may not like it or they may say okay, we can live with it. We can take the additional training, it's good for us. But I -- I mean, I'm not going to tell you from my perspective, Bob, what's good or bad -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That wasn't my question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- until I hear more from the public who are involved in it. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That wasn't my question. Maybe I didn't make myself clear. What I was attempting to ascertain is to be able to, number one, give him more guidance whether or not this body seeks to have more stringency. And then finally beyond that, when this individual should come back to us with whatever form he would have. Or if we are to look at this from The Conservancy, should we have the model ordinances from these other organizations to review as well. I mean, that's a lot of reading, a lot of qualifying. And so that's where I was attempting to go, to try to understand what the next move is. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Brad? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Quick question. Mac, is there an association, the Collier Lawn Service Association -- Collier Chapter of the American Lawn Service Association? MR. HATCHER: I'm not positive. I know that there are industry organizations that were involved in the development of the Best Management Practices with DEP. But I do not know at this point in time if there is a local chapter. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Because Mark's point of hearing from them now before it goes too far. You know, the small guys. The big guys would be perfect. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I can tell you, there's a golf course superintendents group that will have all kinds of input. And I don't want to see 50 of them with their members showing up at a Board of County Commissioners meeting contradicting what -- to any great extent saying they have a voice in front of us. I mean, I'm still at the point where I think we need a fertilizer ordinance; I'm 100 percent in favor of it. I think it needs to be as stringent as we can possibly make it, provided we are not -- we hear all the input and we have adequate representation from the industry. So, I mean, at that point I think you've got your marching orders. Get it done. And bring it back after you've got others involved. That's the way I see it. And I don't know what the rest of this board wants to do, but that's the only instruction I had. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And maybe notifying suppliers or posting at shops would get it around quickly. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You tell the golf course superintendents this is coming up, you'll have them all here. MR. HATCHER: Well, I didn't -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I wrote an article in favor of -- trying to suggest we don't need as much fertilizer, and believe me, I heard plenty about it. But I was surprised, so -- MR. HATCHER: I didn't include it specifically in the comparisons because virtually all of the ordinances basically exempt the golf courses if the golf courses are following FDEP's Best Management Practices for golf courses. They got targeted and educated first. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, like I say, the way it's read, it said all turf and then specialized turf and landscaping. So to me golf course is turf. So we've still got that to deal with. And if it needs refinement, so be it. But I don't know what any more direction that we can give at this point. MR. CASALANGUIDA: We're clear. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Everybody comfortable with that? Page 44 of 45 Icember 16, 2010 Okay, I think you're fine, Mac. Thank you. You've got an interesting road to go. We'll see how it all comes out. That's the last of the old business. * * *We don't have any new business. I just want to say one thing, and this goes to everybody. We've had a great year, and we've had good staff. 1 want to thank everybody for all they've done. And especially in the holiday season, a very Merry Christmas to everybody, including our faithful Cherie' and Kadie across the hall, the facilities management staff, the recording, everybody, they've done a great job this year. And I want to also thank the guards downstairs. Although I really think their request for a Christmas gift of a full body scanner isn't appropriate. So with that in mind, Merry Christmas to all, and I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Motion. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made and seconded. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER AHERN: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Okay, we're adjourned. Thank you all. * * * * * * * * * * * * ** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:50 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Al MARK STRA11k, Chairman These minutes approved by the board on t — 20.. "l as presented Lor as corrected Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc., by Cherie' R. Nottingham. Page 45 of 45 I✓ IvE E I B• ..�f..i. rrnww...rw Fiala Hiller Henning ,-, Coyle Coletta.. 161 1 Bg v1 November 17, 2010 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD Naples, Florida, November 17, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Contractors' Licensing Board, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Administrative Building "F," 3rd floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Vice Chair: Thomas Lykos Kyle Lantz Michael Boyd Lee Horn Terry Jerulle Richard Joslin Robert Meister Jon Walker Patrick White ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Neale, Esq., Attorney for the Board Robert Zachary, Esq., Assistant County Attorney Michael Ossorio, Contractors' Licensing Supervisor Ian Jackson, Licensing Compliance Officer Misc. Cartes: Date: 3 l Copies to: 16 I 1 B 8 '9 November 17, 2010 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes that testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. I. ROLL CALL: Chairman Lykos called the meeting to order at 9:02 AM and read the procedures to be followed to appeal a decision. Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS: Changes: • Item VI, "New Business " — (F) Orders to Pay Civil Citations was added • Item VII, "Old Business " — (A) Election of ChairNice Chair was added Mr. Jerulle moved to approve the changes to the Agenda. Second by Mr. Joslin. Carried unanimously, 8 -0. Ian Jackson, Licensing Compliance Officer, noted the information packets for Case E — Marlene Santonastaso were delivered and will be distributed to the Board. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Richard Joslin moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Second by Terry Jerulle. Carried unanimously, 8 -0. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — October 20,2010: Vice Chairman Lantz moved to approve the Minutes of the October 20, 2010 meeting as submitted. Second by Richard Joslin. Carried unanimously, 8 -0. (Jon Walker arrived at 9:05 AM) V. DISCUSSION: Michael Ossorio, Contractors' Licensing Supervisor, noted there was a discussion pertaining to review of the "Jim Walters Act" during the October 20th meeting. The Ordinance states the Contractor Licensing Supervisor will review the Complaint and the County Attorney will prosecutor the Complaint. If there is a violation of the "Jim Walters Act," a Board member (either the Chairman or Mr. Joslin) will meet with the County Attorney to review the issue. Chairman Lykos asked if each case was to be evaluated on an individual basis. Mr. Ossorio concurred and stated if a Stop -Work Order is issued in the field, either a Board Member or the Board Chairman will meet with the County Attorney to review 2 161 1 B8 November 17, 2010 the investigative report and supporting evidence. The Board Representative who meets with the County Attorney is required to recuse himself from participating in deliberations during the full Board meeting when the case is heard. Discussion ensued. One member stated he thought the Board Representative was to meet with the County Attorney's Office to review the "Jim Walters Act" in depth and then serve as the Board's subject matter expert. A Stop -Work Order may not be issued immediately because the Licensing Compliance Officer and the Contractor Licensing Supervisor will review the Ordinance and consult with the State prior to issuing the Order and this process may take two or three days from the time the violation was observed. Mr. Ossorio noted there has been only one "Jim Walters" case in fifteen years. Another member noted there are proscribed rules to be followed by the Contractor Licensing Supervisor to determine if there was a violation and questioned why it was necessary for a Board Representative to meet with the County Attorney to discuss the case. Attorney Neale suggested the County Attorney and Staff could review the case to determine if there was probable cause to bring the case forward to the Board. If the Board Representative did attend the meeting, he would not be permitted to participate in any way during the Board's hearing of the case and would become a member of the audience during that portion of the Hearing. He further suggested the Board adopt a policy to allow the County Attorney and Staff to review a case to determine if it met the criteria of the "Jim Walters Act" before involving the Board. Mr. Ossorio recommended asking the President of the CBIA ( "Collier Building Industry Association ") to participate in the "Jim Walters Act" meeting. A member asked if it would be possible to hold a Workshop for the entire Board. Attorney Neale stated because of the intense nature of the Act, it would be better to review cases on an individual basis. He stated to create a separate class of case for "Jim Walters" issues would be inappropriate. It was suggested that a copy of the pertinent legal citations (Jim Walters Act and State Ordinance) should be attached to the information packet sent to the Board for review prior to the Hearing. Mr. Ossorio agreed. Chairman Lykos noted during the October meeting, the Board agreed to review "Jim Walters Act" cases on an individual basis and the decision would stand. VI. NEW BUSINESS: (Note: In each of the cases heard under Sections VI and VII, as follows, the individuals to testify were sworn in) 3 161 1 68 November 17, 2010 (A) John S. Crawford — Contesting Citation(s) Citation: #5747 Issued: September 20, 2010 Description of Violation: "69 Engage in the business or act in the capacity of a Contractor or advertise self or business organization as available to engage in the business or act in the capacity of a Contractor without being duly registered or certified. " John Crawford met with Ian Jackson concerning a project in the City of Naples. He stated he was not aware the Contractor was not licensed in Collier County to perform the work. He was cited for providing a proposal to do work based on an email which stated: `7f your client wants to buy [the] sealer, I can have the driveway pavers cleaned and sealed for $400. " Mr. Crawford agreed his email was an act of subcontracting. He is an Aluminum Specialty Structure Contractor and noted he is permitted to subcontract pursuant to the Scope of his license. Richard Joslin stated Mr. Crawford could not subcontract unless the work was within the Scope he was licensed to do, and he had mis- interpreted the Ordinance. Mr. Crawford stated he did not think it was necessary to have a special license to pressure wash and seal pavers. He cited examples of pool contractors who advertise complete pool packages (including screened enclosures) and, most of the time, the pool contractors were not licensed aluminum contactors. He noted he operated a pressure washer only to clean the driveway pavers and seal them. Mr. Joslin gave an example: A pool contractor can build a complete pool (with a deck and a screened enclosure) and can seal the pavers surrounding a lanai that he installed, but he could not seal the front driveway. Lee Horn referred to Exhibit E -8 under "Definitions & Contractor Qualifications." Subparagraph 1.6.3.38 cited the requirements specific to Sealing and Striping Contractors. Mr. Crawford stated there was a contradiction in the information provided by the State which indicated a license was not required to install driveways, pavers, or walkways. Michael Ossorio noted the language "no license" meant it was not regulated under Florida Statutes 489. The Statute states Cities or Counties have jurisdiction to regulate Specialty Licenses. Sealing and Striping is a Specialty License and is regulated by Collier County. An Ordinance was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners requiring Contractors pass a business procedures test. It was noted Mr. Crawford had taken and passed the test. He could obtain his license by completing an application and providing his work experience. T 1611B8 + November 17, 2010 Patrick White asked Ian Jackson to explain how Cary Collier was granted authority by the property owner to act as his agent. Ian Jackson, Licensing Compliance Officer, noted Cary Collier was the business partner of the property owner in a real estate investment company. Ms. Collier contacted the County regarding construction issues at the property. Mr. White asked if Ms. Collier had an ownership interest in the property or was acting as an authorized agent of the property owner. Mr. Jackson confirmed Ms. Collier had an ownership interest. When asked about what evidence was presented to establish Ms. Collier's interest, Mr. Jackson noted he spoke with Ms. Collier but she was not under oath at the time. Chairman Lykos pointed out complaints can be, and are, made anonymously and ownership in a property is not required to file a complaint. Mr. Jackson presented the following information: • Ms. Collier contracted with George Negron, an unlicensed contractor, to perform interior remodeling work and the work on the driveway which is the subject of the Hearing, • John Crawford has (or had) a relationship with George Negron, • Mr. Crawford helped obtain a Building Permit for the installation of the driveway by acting as an agent for the owner, the owner/builder, • Ms. Collier signed a form permitting Mr. Crawford to act on her behalf to obtain the Right -of -Way Permit to install the driveway, Chairman Lykos clarified: • Ms. Collier hired an unlicensed contractor to perform work on the Aufdenberg residence, • Mr. Negron was not licensed and could not pull the Permit, • Mr. Negron arranged with Mr. Crawford to pull the Permit for him. He asked whether Ms. Collier appointed Mr. Negron or Mr. Crawford as an agent for the owner. Mr. Jackson stated Mr. Crawford was an agent for the owner, Cary Collier. Cary Collier obtained an Owner/Builder Permit. Mr. Crawford did not obtain the Permit using his credentials. He confirmed Mr. Negron could not obtain a Permit since he was not licensed, but Mr. Crawford should not have obtained the Permit under his license. Michael Ossorio stated there was a lapse between the Building Permit procedures and the Building Permit Right -of -Way procedures which has since been corrected. The Right -of -Way customer service representative did not check to verify if Ms. Collier was the owner. Florida Statutes requires an owner to appear in person when applying for an Owner/Builder Permit. The authority should not have been delegated and then Permit should not have been issued. 1611 BS November 17, 2010 On March 8, 2010, Ms. Collier submitted a letter, which she signed as "Partner," authorizing John Crawford to obtain a Right -Of -Way Permit. The address at the top of the letter listed Jerry Aufdenberg at his Missouri address. Right -of -Way Permit #10- 0122 -E was issued on March 11, 2010 under the Property Owner's name (Jerry Aufdenberg) and John Crawford was named as the Contractor. Chairman Lykos noted there appeared to be documentary evidence of Cary Collier's ownership interest in the property. Ms. Collier gave an oral statement was made to the County's Staff concerning her role, which Chairman Lykos stated was sufficient for the investigation. Michael Ossorio stated the parties were in Tallahassee undergoing a full review of the issues related to the situation. The Complaint was made because an email was sent to Ms. Collier by Mr. Crawford stating he was able to perform specialty work that was outside the Scope of his license. He stated there was no Complaint. Mr. Crawford responded to the Citation within ten days as required to contest it. The Citation was the subject of the Hearing. Patrick White pointed out the definition of an Aluminum Specialty Structure Contractor, Exhibit E -6, did not mention of sealing of pavers. Mr. Crawford contended he was trying to "make it right" but had been unable to contact Ms. Collier until August, which was six months after the driveway was installed. During the lapse of time, the driveway suffered damage for which he was not willing to be responsible. Richard Joslin explained to Mr. Crawford he has "missed the point" of the Citation which was issued because Mr. Crawford was outside the Scope of Work he was allowed to perform under his license. John Crawford replied he was under the assumption that he could do the work because he had been issued a Permit. Chairman Lykos asked Mr. Crawford if he performed the work and Mr. Crawford responded he did not. He further asked if the work had been performed by anyone and the answer was no. He requested Attorney Neale outline the Board's options regarding a Citation: "If the Enforcement or Licensing Board or designated Special Magistrate finds that a violation exists, the Enforcement /Licensing Board may order the violator to pay a civil penalty of not less than the amount set forth on the Citation but not more than $1, 000 per day for each violation. " "If the person issued the Citation or his/her designated representative shows that the Citation is invalid or that the violation has been corrected prior to appearing before the Enforcement /Licensing Board or designed Special Magistrate, the Enforcement /Licensing Board may dismiss the Citation unless the violation is irreparable or irreversible. " R 1611 68 November 17, 2010 It was noted Mr. Crawford thought he could perform the work because he was issued a Permit. Exhibit E -11 indicated the Permit was issued to the Property Owner, not to Mr. Crawford. In Exhibit E -7, under "Definitions and Contractor Qualifications," a Contractor is defined as "... the person who is qualified for and responsible for the entire project contractor for and, except for those herein exempted, the person who, for compensation, undertakes to, or submits a bid to... " The email from Mr. Crawford to Ms. Collier was a bid and it stated the compensation to be paid to seal the driveway. Mr. Crawford admitted he was trying to work as a subcontractor which he now knows was not within the Scope of his license but, at the time, assumed it was permitted because of the Permit. He stated the only other work he performed was to replace aluminum under the trusses in the back yard. Michael Ossorio stated the Board of County Commissioners had passed an Ordinance which allowed maintenance and repair work to be performed on a single - family, detached home without requiring a Permit. But Right -of -Way work does require a Permit The repair work performed by Mr. Crawford in the back yard could not be combined with the new work since they were two separate items. Chairman Lykos noted the Citation was issued for sealing the pavers, not for installing the driveway. Someone else had installed the driveway. Ian Jackson clarified the Citation was issued for submittal of a bid to seal the driveway for compensation. Chairman Lykos stated the work was never completed although Mr. Crawford had submitted a bid, which was caused the Citation to be issued. Ian Jackson pointed out Cary Collier contracted directly with George Negron who is unlicensed. There was no documentation concerning the arrangement between Mr. Negron and Mr. Crawford, and there was no mention of compensation between Negron and Crawford in the emails. John Crawford stated the original contract between Ms. Collins and George Negron did not mention sealing or any compensation for sealing which is why he sent the email outlining the price for the work. He further stated Ms. Collier fired Mr. Negron and she was attempting to have the pavers sealed for free by Mr. Crawford. A motion was made, with a supporting second, to approve upholding the Citation as issued. Motion carried, 7 — "Yes "12 — "Opposed. " Attorney Neale asked if the fine would remain at $300 as cited or if an additional penalty would be imposed by the Board. Chairman Lykos stated the penalty could not be lower than $300 but could be as high as $1,000. 7 November 17, 2010 Attorney Neale asked the Board to consider the following points: • The gravity of the violation, • Any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation, and • Any previous violations committed by the violator. The Motion was amended to uphold the initial fine of $300 and a supporting second was made. Carried unanimously, 9 — 0. (B) Viorel Toader — Qualifying 2 "d Entity Chairman Lykos stated he met Mr. Toader through the CBIA ( "Collier Building Industry Association ") but has not conducted business with him. He further stated he did not believe his relationship would affect his ability to hear the case or vote. Viorel Toader stated: • He opened a tile company in 2007 to install tile and marble • In 2010, he opened a show room in Naples and would like to offer installation services in addition to selling materials • The existing entity is Affordable Tile & Stone, Inc. • The second entity is Affordable Flooring and Kitchens, LLC Chairman Lykos reiterated Affordable Tile & Stone, Inc is licensed to install tile, marble, and flooring (carpet and vinyl). The showroom, Affordable Flooring and Kitchens, LLC, is not licensed. Ian Jackson asked Mr. Toader if he was trying to qualify the second entity with both tile and marble, and a flooring license. Mr. Toader replied affirmatively. He stated the showroom just sells kitchen materials. He is in the process of applying for a license to install cabinets, but not to fabricate them. Ian Jackson stated the County recommended approval of Mr. Toader's application to qualify the second entity with Certificates for tile and marble, and for flooring. Richard Joslin expressed concern about Mr. Toader's credit application. Mr. Toader stated he experience good times and bad times. He invested in several properties but the income generated was not enough to support them when the economy was slow and there were delinquencies. Lee Horn asked if the Board could review a personal credit report when examining a second entity application. Attorney Neale replied if a company was in business for at more than one year, the business credit report was to be reviewed. 1611 68 November 17, 2010 Viorel Toader confirmed the existing entity, Affordable Tile & Stone, Inc., had been in business since 2007 while the second entity, Affordable Flooring and Kitchens, LLC, was begun approximately seven month ago. Patrick White noted there were a number of monthly payments to the IRS from the Applicant's checking account. Mr. Toader stated the payments were for payroll taxes. He confirmed he did not have any outstanding obligations to the Internal Revenue Service. Mr. White noted there were several places in the application where "N /A" was used. He advised caution concerning completeness and accuracy when accepting applications. He clarified qualifying the second entity would authorize selling cabinets but not permit the installation of cabinets. Mr. Toader reiterated the application for the second entity was for floor covering and tile installation only. Chairman Lykos explained the installation of kitchen cabinets was currently outside the Scope of his license. Mr. Toader stated he understood, and was also in the process of applying for a license to install cabinets. Michael Ossorio stated Mr. Toader had taken the business procedures test and will provide affidavits verifying that he has worked under the direction/supervision of a cabinet millwork company for a period of 24 months before a license will be issued. The applicant is responsible to obtain the work experience and must promote his business properly. Mr. Toader outlined his experience stating he is from Romania. At the age of 14 he enrolled in trade school to learn the cabinet industry. The course ran for a period of three years. He became licensed and also learned wood carving with chisels. Vice Chairman Lantz moved to accept the application and to qualify the second entity. Second by Terry Jerulle. Carried unanimously, 9 — 0. (C) Dennis Ray Kaiser — Reguest to Waive Examination to Reinstate License Ian Jackson provided background information: • Dennis Kaiser was originally licensed as a Residential Pool Contractor • His license was issued by the County in 2001 • The license expired in 2006 • Mr. Kaiser also registered his license with the State in 2001 Michael Ossorio noted if a specialty license is registered with the State, the Contractor must re- register every two years and maintain Continuing Education credentials. He stated while the Applicant's Competency License with Collier County has lapsed, his State registration was current. Oj November 17, 2010 Dennis Kaiser presented his case: • Has been in pool construction for fourteen years, specializing in plumbing • Was originally licensed in 2001 • Prior to 2001, he worked for NASA as a plumber • He maintained his State registration and renewed his Occupational License as required, but overlooked renewing his Competency License The fee for reinstatement, renewal (back years), and current renewal is $1,010. Ian Jackson stated the County recommended approval of the Waiver. Richard Joslin moved to approve the Applicant's request to waive the requirement to take an examination. Second by Robert Meister. Carried unanimously, 9 — 0. (D) Howard B. Russell — Changing Company Name with Review of Credit Report Michael Ossorio provided background: • Howard Russell has held a County license (Certificate #12304) for several years under the business name of Dr. Seal -Coat, Inc. • Mr. Russell has applied to change the name of the business to The Asphalt Surgeon, Inc. • There are some issues with Dr. Seal -Coat, Inc. that must be addressed before a Certificate for the new Entity will be issued Howard B. ( "Ward ") Russell stated: • Under Dr. Seal -Coat, Inc., he has performed asphalt, concrete, and brick paver sealing work • He has now decided to retain Dr. Seal -Coat, Inc. as the entity for the sealing and striping portion of his business • He wishes to qualify a Second Entity, The Asphalt Surgeon, Inc., under his paving license • He has worked in Napes for approximately 18 years • Due to the downturn in the economy, his trucks and other business - related items were repossessed • He is approximately $100,000 in debt Patrick White asked if the application was to be changed from "Changing Company Name" to "Qualify a Second Entity." Mr. Ossorio clarified: Mr. Russell holds two Certificates and wishes to qualify The Asphalt Surgeon, Inc. Mr. Russell's position has not changed despite his recent request to keep his sealing/striping certificate with Dr. Seal -Coat, Inc. and place his paving certificate under The Asphalt Surgeon, Inc. 10 • •I • f • November 17, 2010 Howard Russell is the sole owner of Dr. Seal -Coat, Inc. and is financially responsible for it The application is questionable and was forwarded to the Board for review Chairman Lykos noted the Agenda specified Changing Company Name with Review of Credit Report. He stated the Board was prepared to consider the application as submitted and further stated a different application should be presented at another time if the Applicant wished to open a second business. He recommended withdrawal of the current application. Mr. Russell questioned whether or not he would be working outside of his Scope if he performed sealing work (concrete, asphalt, and brick pavers) as The Asphalt Surgeon. Ian Jackson stated if Mr. Russell submitted a bid or a contract for sealing work under The Asphalt Surgeon, it would be a violation of the Ordinance because the company is not qualified. It was noted Dr. Seal -Coat, Inc. is qualified to perform sealing work as well as paving. Chairman Lykos asked Mr. Russell if he wanted to change the business name because Dr. Seal -Coat had financial problems. Mr. Russell acknowledged he has credit card debt, but has paid all of his suppliers. Lee Horn clarified that Mr. Russell was asking if he changed the company name, would it be misleading for him to advertise his ability to perform sealing work under The Asphalt Surgeon. Mr. Ossorio replied it would not. Mr. Russell requested to proceed under the submitted application. BREAK: 10:18 AM RESUMED: 10:30 AM Michael Ossorio stated Mr. Russell decided to withdraw his application. (E) Marlene Santonastaso — Request to Waive Testing for Drywall Certificate Chairman Lykos noted the information packet was not submitted until after the Hearing had begun. It was noted the next Board meeting will be held in January, 2011. Marlene Santonastaso stated she had been advised Staff would not recommend approval at this time. She stated she has been performing drywall work in Naples for the past eighteen years and the quality of her work is not in question. She is not licensed to perform drywall and metal framing work. She requested the Board issue a probationary license allowing her to continue working before she took the test. 11 N 4 November 17, 2010 Consensus: Board Members requested additional time to completely review the application before making a decision. Marlene Santonastaso stated while she cannot remain idle for two months, she is licensed to perform stucco and plastering work. She was advised she cannot perform any drywall or metal framing work until she is licensed to perform that work. Michael Ossorio outlined the criteria to obtain a license: • Passing the test, • Work experience and references, • Satisfactory credit report. Vice Chairman Lantz noted, theoretically, the Applicant could take the test some where in the State and could be licensed by Friday. Attorney Neale reminded the Board that Staff had not make a recommendation. Patrick White moved to table review of the application until the January 19, 2011 Board meeting. Second by Jon Walker. Carried unanimously, 9 — 0. (F) Orders of the Board (Pay Civil Citations) (Note: Topic was added per amended Agenda) Vice Chairman Lantz moved to approve the signing of the Orders of the Board by the Chairman. Second by Richard Joslin. Carried unanimously, 9 — 0. VII. OLD BUSINESS: (A) Election of Chair and Vice Chair for 2011 Term (Note: Topic was added per amended Agenda) Chairman Lykos opened the floor for nominations as Vice Chairman. Terry Jerulle nominate Lee Horn. Mr. Horn accepted the nomination. As there were no other nominations, Chairman Lykos closed the floor. The Nomination was unanimously approved by the Board. The vote was 8 — "Yes " / "I" —Abstention. Mr. Horn abstained from voting. Attorney Neale suggested the Board should officially appoint the current Vice Chair as Chairman. He cautioned against automatic succession which could lead to 12 1611 B8 November 17, 2010 problems if a Vice Chairman was either not appropriate to move forward or unavailable to serve. Chairman Lykos stated Vice Chairman Kyle Lantz was in position to become Chair. Chairman Lykos opened the floor for nominations as Chairman. As there were no other nominations, Chairman Lykos closed the floor. The Nomination was unanimously approved by the Board The vote was 8 — "Yes7 "1 "— Abstention. Mr. Lantz abstained from voting. It was noted the newly - elected Chair and Vice Chair will assume responsibility on January 1, 2011. VIII. REPORTS: Michael Ossorio noted the position for a new Licensing Compliance Officer was posted internally. By January, 2011, there will be five investigators in the field. IX. NEXT MEETING DATE: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 Board of County Commissioners' Chambers, Administrative Building "F," 3rd Floor (Courthouse Complex), 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Vice Chair at 11:52 AM. COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD Lykos, Chairman Wi( The Minutes were approved by the Board/Chairman on , 2q10,, as presented )01 or as amended [_1. 13 DEC U 6 2010 ,,., 1511 89t'/1 Fiala .+; 1 Imo/ _ Henning _ Coyle ft- 3, 2010 Coletta _ MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMIT TEE November 3, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3:00 PM in REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room #610, Collier County Growth Management Division/Planning & Regulation, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: CHAIRMAN: William Varian Vice Chair: David Dunnavant Ray Allain James Boughton Clay Brooker Laura Spurgeon DeJohn Dalas Disney Marco Espinar (Excused) Blair Foley Regan Henry George Hermanson David Hurst Reed Jarvi Robert Mulhere Mario Valle ALSO PRESENT: Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator, GMD — Planning & Regulation Judy Puig, Operations Analyst — Staff Liaison James French, Director -- Operations & Regulatory Management Jay A.hmad, P.E., Director — Transportation Engineering Tom Wides, Director -- Operations Support, Public Utilities Amy Patterson, Impact Fee and Economic Development Manager Robert Wiley, Principal Project Mgr., Watershed Studyg'jc�WEMA Nathan Beals, Project Manager -• Public Utilities i Date: Item *.L�j l Cordes to: 161199 tI, November 3, 2010 I. Call to Order- Chairman Varian called the meeting to order at 3:00 PM and read the procedures to be followed during the meeting. IL Approval of Agenda: Chanize: • Blair Foley requested to add the topic, LDC Amendments Subcommittee, under Item VI, Old Business," as "A." Robert Mulhere moved to approve the Agenda as amended Second by Mario Valle Carried unanimously, 13 -0. III. Approval of Minutes — October 6, 2010 Meeting: Change: • On Page 4, the first sentence was revised as follows: "Mr. Ahmad stated the at -grade improvements to the intersection at 41— 951 will begin ...." Dalas Disney moved to approve the Minutes as amended Second by James Boughton. Carried unanimously, 13 -0. IV. Public Speakers: (None) V. Growth Management Division — Staff Announcements/Updates: A. Public Utilities Division Update: Nathan Beals, Project Manager • Discussion Group meeting was cancelled in October • Utilities Standards Committee meeting will be held on November 16a' • Public Utilities/RPZ Subcommittee will meet on: • Monday, 11/15,3:00 PM and • Monday, 12/06, 3:00 PM Q: Has the Utilities Department provided all necessary information to Fire Plan/Review? A: Yes. Q: Did you meet with the Fire Code Officials concerning the 50 psi Proposal and what was the outcome? A: The data is under review and the topic will be included on the agenda for the Subcommittee meeting. B. Fire Review Update: Bob Salvaggio — Fire Code Office • The Monthly Report was submitted. • A total of 625 reviews were conducted in September. 1611 69 M November 3, 2010 C. Transportation Planning Division Update: Jay Ahmad, P.E., Director - Transportation Engineering • Public Meeting: I -751Everglades Boulevard Interchange will be held on November 4th at the Palmetto Elementary School (10th Street SE) • "Cumulative Impact Study" for the Interchange will be conducted by the State prior to conducting the PD &E Study • The new process, which has not been implemented previously, may delay design of the Interchange • Goal: emphasize the importance of the project for the residents of Collier County D. Planning and Regulation Update: James French, Director — Operations and Regulatory Management Q. Concerning the website ( "Permit- Tracking'), are you updating the page? A. Examining the digital submission process through email, we will post the comments to a webpage so the user will be able to access the page through the County's website. It will require additional maintenance by the County. The page should be online by December. Mr. French stated several Plan Reviewers voluntarily left Gary Harrison's area. Current "bottle- necks" are being reviewed to determine how to elevate the problem in Building Permits/Review. He will report on the situation within the next two months. (David Hurst arrived at 3:10 PM.) Q. Is there any current information on the web portal for Planning and Engineering reviews? A. A meeting has been scheduled for November 12th with Jeff Bender, CEO of Harris, the company that purchased "CityView" which is not up and running due to several issues. The County has paid for the server and for licensing. He will update the Committee at the next DSAC meeting. Q. What is the status of Building Permit Tracking on the webpage? A. Report all problems directly to Jamie French. He stated the problem is on the IT side. Q. Regarding "comments, " can the comments of the individual reviewers be sent as they are completed? A. The issue is re- submittal. You cannot resubmit until all comments are made. It was noted having the comments would allow revisions to be made while waiting for the final review. Mr. French will update the Committee at the next DSAC meeting. 1611 69 '4 November 3, 2010 VI. Old Business: (Revised per amendment to Agenda) A. LDC Amendments Subcommittee — Blair Foley He outlined the following concerns: • Current redevelopment activity (existing and abandoned buildings) may not be "in tune" with LDC amendments • Time frames re: Extensions of Development Orders — need a strategy regarding continuing the extensions — clear instructions • Language changes allow for flexibility in the Code ( "reasonableness ") • Suggested review of Codes for Landscaping, Parking, ADA, Architectural, Fire o Fire is requiring to see "everything" ­ and charges a review fee Bob Mulhere stated representatives of CBIA ( "Collier Building Industry Association ") were invited by the County Manager to review the Land Development Code and several Subcommittees were created. One of the Subcommittees specifically reviewed Redevelopment and Process. He will obtain a copy of CBIA's report, which proposes new LDC Amendments, for distribution to the Members (via the Staff Liaison). George Hermanson will contact CBIA to request a speaker for the next DSAC meeting. Chairman Varian suggested adding the topic to DSAC's December agenda. Regarding the ADA Code, it was noted the County cannot pass legislation that "waters down" the Federal regulations. A review and comparison of the Federal Code to the local Code was suggested. B. Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance — Robert Wiley, Land Development Services • The Planning Commission reviewed the draft of the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance (October 21 ") • PC had an issue with the notation inserted by DSAC: [ "Flood proofing to just the Base Flood Elevation will result in a higher flood insurance premium rate for the structure because the flood insurance policy requires rating a structure at one foot below the flood proofing elevation. "] • The PC would like to remove the notation and require flood proofing for a non- residential structure to be at one foot above the Base Flood Elevation. • The PC requested DSAC provide the cost implications to help make a final determination prior to the PC's next meeting on November 18`x'. There was a lengthy discussion of several issues including variables, gravity slope, size of the structure, effect on structural integrity, retail buildings, the installation of a panel system, the cost increment to flood proof from four feet to five feet, and the lack of a common scenario. It was noted legislation cannot protect everybody from every possible variation. It was also noted since there was no simple answer to determining the cost analysis, DSAC's language served as a warning to review FEMA's documents and regulations prior to making a decision. 161189 A November 3, 2010 Nick Casalanguida suggested DSAC provide sample cost analysis for new construction and a remodel with a disclaimer that the figures can vary due to building size and other variables, and to note that costs for insurance are prohibitive and not quantifiable. Mr. Wiley will provide information concerning flood insurance premium rates. Dalas Disney volunteered to provide a detailed drawing and requested help with pricing. Chairman Varian suggested informing the Planning Commission that each situation should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis. He volunteered to assist Mr. Disney. (The documents will be sent to the Staff Liaison who will forward as appropriate.) VI. New Business: A. Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Studies — Tom Wides, Director — Operations Support, Public Utilities • Will present the proposed Fee adjustments to the Board of County Commissioners at the second Board meeting in January 2011 • Impact Fees fund construction of capital projects • AFPI — funds payment of interest on the construction loans He outlined the Impact Fees for Water/Wastewater: • Current - $7,070 (per ERC -- "Equivalent Residential Connection ") • Proposed - $6,535 • Decrease — 7.6°x'0 AFPI ( "Allowance for Funds Prudently Invested "): • Current - $1,693 • Proposed-$1,511 • Decrease —10.7% Combined Fees: • Current - $8,763 • Proposed - $8,046 • Decrease — 8.2% There are projects slated in the urban area for the next five years. Dalas Disney stated he would abstain from voting on any motions due to a conflict of interest. Projected collection of Impact Fees: $47.68M Growth Related Projects + Debt Service: $90.52M Shortfall: ($42.83M) T 41 �i November 3, 2010 Mr. Wides stated the new projects concern required upgrades to existing facilities as well as added capacity. Example: conversion to a Reverse Osmosis system. He will return to the next DSAC meeting with a specific list of projects, i.e., line items from the Capital Improvement Program (page 4). Q. Why does Collier County have (with the exception of the City of Marco Island) the highest water costs? (Page 34) Bonita Springs and Lee County are significantly lower. A. Our most recent capacity additions have been R.O. (reverse osmosis). The user rates for Collier County are approximately in the middle of the pack. It was noted Marco Island has not updated its Impact Fee Study since 2005. Tom Wides asked the Committee to direct questions to Judy Puig. He will return to DSAC with answers along with better definitions for "on -going maintenance," and "improvements," and comparisons to other communities. The rate consultant will also attend the December meeting to answer the Committee's questions. B. Update: Library /Government Buildings, and Law Enforcement Impact Fees — Amy Patterson, Impact Fee and Economic Development Manager • Subcommittee Report for Library: (Mario Valle) There were no real issues and capacity is sufficient. The range of decrease is between 42 - 65% depending on the land use category. Ms. Patterson explained why certain buildings/parcels that were not owned by the Board of County Commissioners and the different values for land in each category. There are no plans to build new libraries in the next ten years. The goal is payment of the debt. She noted lower construction costs and land costs were the reasons for the decrease. Mario Valle moved to accept the Impact Fees Study for Library Buildings as presented Second by George Hermanson. Carried unanimously, 14 -0. • Subcommittee Report for Government Buildings: The average decrease to residential is 25% and to commercial is 32 %. A question was asked concerning the reductions and why the amounts were not the same as in the Library Study. Amy Patterson noted the different distribution in land and building costs, and the style of libraries constructed were simpler. For Government, there is a mix of commercial and residential parcels. Heritage Bay (Immokalee/951) is the next parcel to be built. The figure for population increases was questioned and it was noted Comprehensive Planning provided the percentage (projection calculations as mandated by the DCA). There will be an adjustment reflecting the new Census numbers (2010) in the next Update Study (3 years). 161189 November 3, 2010 Mario Valle moved to accept the Impact Fees Study for Government Buildings as presented. Second by Robert Mulhere. Carried unanimously, 14-0. • Subcommittee Report for Law Enforcement: Law Enforcement Impact Fees will be increased in all of the residential categories and a majority of the commercial categories. Ms. Patterson noted the primary difference in the Fees between Law Enforcement and Libraries/Government Buildings was due to equipment costs (capital equipment) and the cost of an additional building ( "Special Operations "). There was an accounting for new inventory purchased between 2005, after the last Study was adopted, and 2006 of approximately $43M. There is a 26% to a mid -sized single - family home, or $92.00. She noted the cost for the Special Ops building was not passed on to the community because it was paid by the Sheriffs Department from a different funding source. There was also an increase in equipment costs for the EMS Study — equipment costs overall have not decreased. It was suggested to exclude the land values for all buildings except the substations. The number of computers in the Sheriffs Office and support staff was also questioned as well as the cost ($4,100) for laptop. (David Hurst left at 5: 00 PM). The Committee asked Ms. Patterson to return with clarifications and will follow -up on the two questions concerning Road Impact Fees from Reed Jarvi. Mr. Dunnavant withdrew his vote on Government Building Impact Fees He stated he was opposed to the decrease as not sufficient. VIII. Committee Member Comments: Chairman Varian noted that Marco Espinar has been working out of state and has been excused for several meetings. The By -Laws permit six excused or unexcused absences per member, per year. Judy Puig stated he missed four (May, September, October and November) and may miss December. Next Meeting Dates: December 1, 2010 — 3:00 PM January 5, 2011— 3:00 PM February 5, 2011— 3:00 PM March 2, 2011— 3:00 PM 1611 89 M November 3, 2010 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chairman at 5:11 PM. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE William Varian, Chairman The Minutes were proved by the Board/Committee on 2 l as presented �, or as amended FEB U 3 2011i BY: ....................... Fiala 161 Hiller Henning Coyle Coletta 1 B 9 A v'l January 5, 2011 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE January 5, 2011 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3:00 PM in REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room #610, Collier County Growth Management Division/Planning & Regulation, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: CHAIRMAN: William Varian Vice Chair: David Dunnavant Ray Allain James Boughton Clay Brooker Laura Spurgeon DeJohn Dalas Disney Marco Espinar Blair Foley Reagan Henry George Hermanson David Hurst Reed Jarvi Robert Mulhere (Excused) Mario Valle ALSO PRESENT: Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator, Planning & Regulation Judy Puig, Operations Analyst -- Staff Liaison James French, Director — Operations & Regulatory Management Jay Ahmad, P.E., Director — Transportation Engineering Tom Wides, Director — Operations Support, Public Utilities Nathan Beals, Project Manager — Public Utilities Pam Libby, Manager of Operations, Water/WastewatMSC Correa: Date: Item #: C'—)ies to 1611 99 q January 5, 2011 I. Call to Order: Chairman William Varian called the meeting to order at 3:03 PM and read the procedures to be observed during the meeting. II. Approval of Agenda: George Hermanson moved to approve the Agenda as submitted Second by Clay Brooker. Carried unanimously, 12 — 0. III. Approval of Minutes — December 1, 2010 Meeting: Dalas Disney moved to approve the Minutes for the December 1, 2010 meeting as submitted Second by James Boughton. Carried unanimously, 12 — 0. IV. Public Speakers: (Will be heard when Item is discussed) V. Growth Management Division — Staff Announcements/Updates: A. Public Utilities Division Update: Nathan Beals, Project Manager, Public Utilities • Public Utilities/RPZ Subcommittee will meet on Friday, January 7th at 1:00 PM • Discussion Group/Utilities Standards did not meet in January — the next meeting is scheduled for February 15th B. Fire Review Update: Ed Riley — Fire Code Official, Fire Code Office • The Monthly Activity Report for November 2010 was submitted • 672 reviews were conducted C. Transportation Planning Division Update: Jay Ahmad, P.E., Director, Transportation Engineering • A Public Information Meeting has been scheduled for January 27th from 5:00 to 7:00 PM at the Golden Gate Fire Station o Topic: Bridge Projects (new bridge on 23rd) D. Planning and Regulation Update: James French, Director, Operations and Regulatory Management • Master Card and Discover credit cards are now being accepted for single -trade permits or over - the - counter permits • Payments will be made through "MagicWriter" on behalf of 5t/3 rd Bank * $110 — residential a $100 --fire or commercial • Goal: to submit a full set of plans within six months Q. Regarding submittals from Design Professionals, what is the format? Will they be required to buy software? A. The software will accept PDF submittals. There will be no cost to the customer. The Design Professionals will have a unique user ID for an account to be set up with the County. 1611 gg January 5, 2011 (David Dunnavant arrived at 3:20 PM.) Re: CityView • The Portal became operational at the end of December • Phase III — for Building Permits and Contractor's Licensing — March/April A question was asked regarding Permit Cards for remodeling projects. The concern is over the number of inspections listed on the card. Six are listed, but may not be required for each project. Each inspection is a cost to the contractors. Can the system be revised? Mr. French will review the process with Staff and will report back to DSAC at the next meeting. Re: Building Manager search • Interviewing two or three good candidates Mr. French stated the Land Development side is under review with a goal of streamlining the number of plan sets to be submitted and for insubstantial changes to be handled at the front counter. (Ray A11ain arrived at 3:35 PM.) VI. Old Business: A. Water -Sewer Impact Fees — Tom Wides. Director, Operations Support, and Robert Ori, Public Resources Management Group, Inc. - Consultant Proposed Impact Fees: • Water — $ 3,290 • Wastewater -- $3,245 Emergency Generator Rehah (Line 8): • $2.3M (project cost) with a credit back of $1.1M o $483,242 - -- allocated to Impact Fees • The system is being upgraded to enhance performance. Design changes have been made to allow two generators to run, with two reserved as back up, as opposed to running four at the same time. • Sand filters were added as a new component to improve use of the water membranes. Mr. Wides stated the water membranes are capitalized items and have a life expectancy of five to eight years. There is a credit of $806,519 for the original installed cost. Security upgrades (Line 21): • Pam Libby stated the cost is to provide security at the remote stations and at the well field • The EPA has upgraded regulations for the source of the water to be supplied 161 1 97 January 5, 2011 Water Lightning Protection (Line 23): • For the well field and the remote stations • Pam Libby stated both the EPA and Homeland Security have "ramped up" their regulations. Projected Costs — $23,847,906 (for line items) Credits to Users — $12,011,279 Adjusted Balance -- $11,836,627 Existing Customers (59 %) — $7,043,167 Impact Fee Allocations — $4,793,460 There is a total of $105M for Capital Improvement Projects. Q. Will the revised projected growth levels tap out the current capacity in ten years? A. (Tom Wides) It could be between 10 to 20 years. Q. Some projects have development rights but have not been built. Is this based on what has been built or permitted? A. (Tom Wides) It is based on estimated population growth (by the University of Florida). The AUIR ( "Annual Update and Inventory Report ") goes out to 2039 and shows the production levels, capacity, and targets. In 2027, a water plant may be built to service the northeast. Q. Are the security increases funded mandates from the Federal government? A. (Pam Libby) On the water side, a vulnerability assessment was completed with a list of projects to be completed with 10 to 20 years. The vulnerability assessment was accepted by the Federal government. (Tom Wides) The level of security upgrades required by the Federal government for portable water are more stringent than are required for waste water. The Federal government is not paying for these upgrades. An extensive discussion ensued concerning which expenses were specifically growth - related, expansion of service, excess capacity, debt service ($67 +M), allocation of payments for debt service to existing customers /new users, calculation of fees, and anticipated growth. It was suggested that, due to the level of debt service and reduced growth, only those projects that are absolutely necessary should be completed. By maintaining excessive costs, growth is discouraged. Tom Wides stated the proposed reduction to Impact Fees is 7.6 %. Reagan Henry moved to accept the Water and Wastewater Impact Fees as presented and to forward the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Second by Blair Foley. 1611 89 January 5, 2011 James Boughton stated the maintenance items were too high and recommended a bigger reduction in Impact Fees offset by an increase in user fees. Blair Foley stated the split appeared to be reasonable and a reduction has been presented. David Dunnavant stated there was a concern the reduction was not significant enough. George Hermanson stated the numbers were pretty much in line and that water and sewer services were totally essential. Dalas Disney recused himself from voting due to conflict of interest. The Motion carried, 10 — "Yes "13 — "Opposed " /1— " Absention. " Reed Jarvi, James Boughton and Ray Allain were opposed Dalas Disney abstained VI. New Business: A. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman for 2011 Dalas Disney nominated William Varian to serve as DSAC Chairman for the 2011 term. Second by Mario Valle. Motion carried, "13 — Yes," with one abstention. Mr. Varian abstained James Boughton nominated David Dunnavant to serve as DSAC lice Chairman for the 2011 term. Second by Clay Brooker. Motion carried, "13 — Yes," with one abstention. Mr. Dunnavant abstained (Ray Allain left at 4:50 PM.) VIII. Committee Member Comments: Regarding comments made by Mike Rosen concerning LDC Amendments, Nick Casalanguida suggested that any suggestions from the members should be forwarded to Judy Puig within the next two weeks. One area of concern mentioned was Landscaping. Nick Casalanguida will compile an excel spreadsheet for review by the Committee Next Meeting Dates: February 5, 2011— 3:00 PM March 2, 2011— 3:00 PM April 6, 2011— 3:00 PM May 4, 2011— 3:00 PM There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chairman at 4:55 PM. 1611 89 ; January 5, 2011 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE William Varian, Chairman The Minutes were pproved by the Board/Committee on ? !1) I , as presented , or as amended FEB Il 2 201 Fiala Hiller Henning Coyle Coletta 1&4i-j128 10 1 MIffTTES" OF"THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, January 5, 2011 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in a REGULAR SESSION at Administrative Building "F ", 3rd Floor, Collier County Government Complex Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Dr. Judith Hushon VICE CHAIRMAN: Andrew Dickman Michael Sorrell David Bishof Gina Downs ALSO PRESENT: Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney Stephen Lenberger, Sr. Environmental Specialist Mac Hatcher, Sr. Environmental Specialist Carolina Valera, Principal Planner ; Misr. Cones: 08a D3 l C^rpies to: �6 1 B10 an 5-Z O11 I. Call to Order Chairman Hushon called the meeting to order at 9:02AM. II. Roll Call Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. Gina Downs was welcomed as a new member of the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). III. Approval of Agenda Mr. Sorrell moved to approve the Agenda subject to the following addition: • Item VIII.0 - Fertilizer Ordinance Presentation - Conservancy of Southwest Florida • Item VIII. C to be heard as item VIII.D Second by Mr. Dickman. Carried unanimously 5-0. IV. Approval of the October December 1, 2010 meeting minutes Mr. Bishof moved to approve the minutes of the December 1, 2010 meeting subject to the following change: • Page 1 (Headsheet) - from "Roy" Smith to "Ray" Smith Second by Mr. Dickman. Carried unanimously 5-0. V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences Chairman Hushon will not be present for the February meeting. VI. Land Use Petitions None VII. New Business None VIII. Old Business A. Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment - Adoption Staff presented the document " Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP), Growth Management Plan (GMP) Amendments, Petition CP- 2008 -5, Environmental Advisory Commission (Council), " dated January 5, 2011. The purpose of the item is to provide a recommendation to the BCC on the adoption of the Plan. Robert Mulhere, Mulhere and Assoc. presented the IAMP noting the following: • On January 6, 2010, the IAMP was reviewed by the EAC and the Council recommended the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) transmit the proposed Plan (with conditions) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for comment. • The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) also reviewed the IAMP and recommended the BCC transmit it (with conditions) to the DCA for comment. r *%-Th' BCC approved the IAMP for transmittal (with conditions) to the DCA on June 23, 2010. W, ;G slit. 2 lb J 1 B10 January 5, 2011 • The DCA reviewed the document and provided an Objection, Recommendation and Comments (ORC) Report to the County. • Upon conversations with representatives of the DCA, County Staff and Consultants addressed the concerns outlined by the DCA. He provided an overview of the EAC Staff Report titled "Growth Management Division — Hearing Date January S, 2011 — Re: Petition CP- 2008 -5, Immokalee Area Master Plan Growth Management Plan Amendment (Adoption Hearing) — Coordinator Carolina Valera. " He noted the Report included the conditions recommended by the EAC, CCPC and BCC (as applicable to the EAC) in the BCC's original transmittal of the Plan to the DCA. Consultant/Council /Staff discussion occurred on the following issues: 1. Policy 5.1.2: Lake Trafford Development — the feasibility on establishing geographic parameters for the implementation of the "Best Management Practices" (BMP) required for minimizing negative impacts on the lakes water quality. The EAC determined the Policy should identify the Lake Trafford Drainage Basin as the geographic area intended for implementation of the BMP cited in the Policy. 2. The previous recommendation of the EAC to "Allow any lands (meeting certain criteria) within the Lake Trafford Camp Keais Strand System (LTCKSS) to qualify for density and density blending (including properties which are contiguous to Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand, which straddle the Immokalee Urban Area and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA)). " The CCPC recommended the provision not be included as it was not supported by a sufficient data analysis to assess the impact shifting the density could have on the RLSA program. A data analysis was subsequently prepared and the BCC opted to include the provision in the IAMP. Sneaker Tim Durham, Wilson Miller Stantec, Inc. addressed the EAC noting the data analysis determined only 1 property owner (Williams Farm) would be affected by the provision. It would not have a major impact on the RLSA program (732 acres of developable land were identified to qualify for the provision). 3. The merits of the Staff recommendation of a 60 percent native vegetation requirement for lands in the LTCKSS. Sneakers Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida addressed the Council noting they support the density blending provision proposed by the BCC. They are concerned with the Staff recommendation for the proposed native preservation standards for the LTCKSS. The proposed standards reference the requirements of January 5, 2011 Policy 6.1.2.b of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. Policy 6.1.2.b outlines standards in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District for Receiving lands, Neutral Lands, Sending Lands and NRPA Sending lands. Staff recommends utilizing the neutral lands standards (60 percent). The area is comprised environmentally sensitive lands. Until the necessary environmental analysis is completed on the area, the Conservancy recommends establishing a higher threshold standard of 80 or 90 percent. Marvin Courtright, Collier County Resident noted when the Airport property was transferred to Collier County in 1948, there were two conditions: 1) Maintain aviation and; 2) Make it available to aviation enthusiasts. He expressed concern the proposed Plan and ongoing proposed re -zones of the Immokalee Airport property threaten the on -going operations of the Airport. Any rezoning and industrial development should occur outside the confines of the Airport property. Carolina Valera noted there are no proposals in the IAMP for specific zoning changes of the Airport property. Robert Mulhere recommended the concerns be directed toward the Airport's Planned Unit Development application. In addition, Mr. Courtright contacts Chris Curry, the Executive Director of Collier County Airports, or the County Attorney's office. Break -10: 31 am Reconvened -10: 45am 4. The cones of influence for the water wells in the area and the impact any existing or proposed development may have on water quality. The EAC wants to ensure there are necessary regulations in place to protect the water quality of the wells. Mr. Mulhere noted there are existing regulations in place to protect these areas and the EAC should contact representatives from the Immokalee Sewer and Water District for a detailed explanation on the regulations. Carolina Valera noted the proposed IAMP will replace the entire goals, objectives and policies of the existing IAMP. If the proposed IAMP is approved, it will be sent to the DCA for a determination the proposed IAMP is in compliance with state law. The Future Land Use Map and CCME Sections of the Growth Management Plan will be amended following the adoption of the Plan. Staff is opposed to the density blending requirements proposed as the current data analysis for its impact on the RLSA is insufficient. 5. Section 4.7 (page 41) —paragraph 2/3 — concern the listed species identified were "limited" in species; and paragraph 2 identifies cats have been "recorded" on the "Western Boundary" and it should state the "Eastern Boundary." 0 161 1 610 January 5, 2011 The Council recommended the following language changes to Section 4.7. • Paragraph 3, line 1 — from "Other listed species that have been observed within the Immokalee Urban Area are the bald eagle..." to "Other listed species that have been observed within the Immokalee Urban Area including but not limited to, are the bald eagle..." • Paragraph 2, line 3 - from "...the majority along the western boundary." to "...the majority along the eastern boundary." Tim Durham noted he is working with County Staff to provide all necessary data required for further analysis on the density blending policy. Chairman Hushon moved to recommend the BCC adopt the L4MP subject to the following: I. Policy 5.1.2: Lake Trafford Development — inclusion of language at the end of the policy "The Lake Trafford Drainage Basin shall be the geographic area intended for implementation of these BMP" (or similar language). 2. To affirm the BCC decision for inclusion of language that would allow density and intensity blending for properties contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand and which straddle the Immokalee Urban Area and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA). 3. To support the Staff recommendation of a 60 percent neutral lands native preservation requirement for the CCME, (as discussed herein), with the understanding that given the ecological and/or environmental value of the lands affected, the amount of preservation required will be further evaluated and may be increased pending the results of said evaluation. Second by Mr. Dickman. Carried unanimously 5-0. B. Watershed Management Plan Update Mac Hatcher, Sr. Environmental Specialist provided an update on the status of the proposed Watershed Management Plan noting Staff is tentatively anticipating review by the EAC at their March meeting. He outlined the functional assessment completed by Consultants to determine if any additional habitat is warranted for further development restrictions. Speaker Amber Crooks, Conservancy of Southwest Florida addressed the Council noting the Conservancy has provided input to the Plan, which Staff has incorporated into it. She recommended the term "hydrologically" be amended to "ecologically" in the functional assessments. C. Fertilizer Ordinance Presentation — Conservancy of Southwest Florida Amber Crooks, Conservancy of Southwest Florida presented a Slideshow titled "An Effective and Protective Fertilizer Ordinance for Collier County." The following was highlighted: 5 161 1 B 10 January 5, 2011 • The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) requires jurisdictions identified as having "impaired waters" to adopt, at a minimum, the FDEP Model Fertilizer Ordinance. • Collier County has impaired waters and will be required to adopt the State Model Ordinance, or may choose to adopt an Ordinance "more stringent." • The Conservancy recommends adopting an Ordinance with more stringent standards than the "Model Ordinance and has developed a draft. • The draft ordinance will be submitted to the Council for their review. • The Ordinance will apply to fertilizer applications only, not pesticides or weed inhibitors. • The Draft Ordinance recommends the following: • Requiring phosphorous levels of fertilizers at 0 percent unless a test indicates phosphorous is required. • Utilization of Nitrogen fertilizer components with 50 percent or more of "slow release" forms of Nitrogen. • Requiring "Blackout Periods" for the fertilizer applications (June through September). • Establishing appropriate buffer zones from waterways and impervious surfaces to prevent fertilizer components from compromising water quality. • Establishing public education programs which stress proper methods for fertilizer applications (signage at local retailers, brochures, etc.). The Council recommended Staff review the City of Naples Ordinance to ensure any proposed Ordinance is similar as there are businesses providing these types of services in both jurisdictions. D. Update members on projects Staff noted the Davis Preserve PUD application was withdrawn by the Petitioner and Staff was directed to prepare a GMP Amendment. The project may be re- submitted. Chairman Hushon noted the Marselee Development re -zone application was approved by the EAC with conditions. She expressed concern the conditions as reflected in the EAC minutes were not accurately outlined in the Staff Report to the Collier County Planning Commission and wants to ensure future Staff Reports accurately reflect their conditions. IX. Subcommittee Reports None X. Council Member Comments The Council requested Staff to review the feasibility of providing LIDAR maps for proposed projects heard by the EAC. 0 161 i . January 2 5 O 011 XI. Staff Comments Stephen Lenberger noted there is still an EAC vacancy for an "Alternate Member." He will email the required qualifications for the member to existing Council members. Susan Mason, (formerly Sr. Environmental Specialist) has resigned her position from the County and is now employed by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. XII. Public Comments None There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 12:43 PM. COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Chairman, A,, 0 rte, ),`C � --"' h-A�D These Minutes were approved by the Board/Chairman on Z / as presented X _, or as amended 7 00 3 7T3 TAY'. .., ., ... ,r......�. FO � ; S;d I. Call to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda Fiala _ 1 Hilier 1 Henning Coyle Coletta ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE NI.S.T.U. ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 HORSESHOE DRIVE SOUTH NAPLES, FL 34104 January 12, 2011 Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes — December 8, 2010 V. Transportation Services Report A. Budget Report — Gloria Herrera B. Gordon River Extension Maintenance C. Project Manager Report — Darryl Richard, Chris Tillman / Malcolm Pirnie VI. Landscape Architect Report - Windham Studio VII. Old Business A. Election of Officers VIII. New Business A. Lighting Quail Forest Blvd. IX. Public Comments X. Adjournment Next meeting is February 9, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 mim Corti: C^ pies to: 1611811 FOREST ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE Ni.S.T.t . LAKES ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 HORSESHOE DRIVE SOUTH NAPLES, FL 34104 January 12, 2011 Minutes I. Call to order Meeting was called to order at 10:12 a.m. by George Fogg. No quorum was established. II. Attendance Members: Harold Bergdoll, William Seabury (Absent), George Fogg, Robert Jones (Absent), Dick Barry (Excused) County: Darryl Richard — Project Manager, Gloria Herrera — Budget Analyst Other: Chris Tilman— Malcolm Pirnie, Scott Windham - Windham Studio, Darlene Lafferty- Juristaff The meeting continued for discussion purposes. George Fogg questioned the purpose for Budget Line Item 17 - Indirect Cost Reimbursement $13,600.00 (P.O. was issued to Collier County.) Staff will determine the purpose of the Budget Item in question and advise the Committee. George Fogg inquired if sufficient monies are available to complete all ongoing Projects. Darryl Richard responded with the following Budget information: • Reserves Available $2,448,600.00 • Available Improvements Capital $1,327,324.00 • FY10 Audit will be conducted in February to confirm the Carry Forward amount George Fogg questioned if monies would be available to complete the Gordon River Project. Darryl Richard perceived monies will be available for the Gordon River Project based on the following (all figures were estimated): o Projected $2,700,000.00 would be remaining after completion of current Projects o Gordon River Project cost estimate $970,000.00 X. 161 1 611 1 • Malcolm Pirnie is drafting a letter (for Mark Isackson) on the Benefit of the Gordon River Project to the Forest Lakes Community • Reiterated the February Audit is required to determine the actual Carry Forward monies Chris Tillman stated additional information is needed by Mark Isackson. Discussion continued on the Gordon River Project, available monies, and future Maintenance cost for current Project activity. The following was concluded: • FY10 Audit maybe completed prior to the February meeting • Staff will requested Mark Isackson attend the February meeting • Windham Studios will provide the projected Maintenance cost needs at the February meeting (based on completed Projects) Discussion took place on the Bidding status for the Sidewalk Project. Darryl Richard reported the Bidding is delayed due the Sidewalk Project is under review by the County Attorney's office to address Liability and Easement concerns of Turtle Lakes HOA. - Staff will inform the Committee of the County Attorney's opinion After discussion it was concluded that the Sidewalk Project Phase I will begin at Single Family Residence as the ROW is presently established. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 10:48 a.m. by the Vice Chairman Next meeting is February 9, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. Growth Management Division - Construction Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 N r (n N W v) � N gz s tL Jc L O LL O 0 O Un O O O (D (D 0 0 0 0 0 O O 00 (O 'O O O (D m O O O r N CO 00 m O O co m O O CO @ O o N M O m 0 V (D O o M O Q) N I- -4 a, N W O (D O r o N M m r 40 Cl) N N to cD O N (R — N C C I C (D C m r r In r Cl) n M V V(o o o 0) N co co LO V N O Q V3 V) 613 63 V) V) 63 V) V) V) V) Vi Vi V3 V) Yj Vj V) V) V) 613 V3 V) V) V) V> O O O (n O O O V O O O O 00 O (n (n V O O O O O 00 O O O O N 0 0 0 0 0 N r (O V O N cn C O co (D (D O O ' N N V N (n O co ' 00 m N N V a E. u1 r 0000 raD O m mm N 0 0 N 0 0 0 m M Q C N mCD r NN 0)- y N M 00N m V V MO O(n(D N p '(p C', m '- (n .- O O 00 m N 7 V a0 M V E � M N co LL W V) V3 VY V) V) V) Vi Vi d) V3 63 V? V> V) Vl V) W, Vi W V) M W M M M W N ?- Z9 (n h a m O > m J c M O co co Q m w N N >0 0 0 3 m `n (D (n �'� > o as N N NM 0 LL LL UL -0 C) y Ea E a E o o m °-' m° a� a� o a = rna a� =° c rn (/) UJ = C Y C N O_ L 'w- C @> In N@ N E O7 = II O) O) .0.0.0 r J C@ C) L N M O• O7 (A f6 ` .N � ` .N U C) C O > Y U C + O N J« O U"0 L> J o (0 0 Y O O w U'c Y N U c O N@> > > >> a Q E J 3 U M o c w u .S r '°� 3 N 0 0 0 O O; m 'm m e 0o m X 'm 0 5 a o o n o a� o m 2 2 2 0) J o —' 0 7 w : o w w IL 5 w(n as a aaa0 00> -(4 LL L) V) 2 U U U U U U U r U U U CO m V OD [,- (D m N V M r r n N cD m N M m N N_ V m r V (n M In M N W co oo O M m N co cM m V m r m r r Co Co M Cl) N CO M U U co M U N N (n O V M (n U O V (n (n V N N N_ N N N_ N 2 co N N N o M oo O N_ N_ r N N m r N O O m O �_ _ �_ �_ O 0 0 0 0 0 00 ` 0 p O p a 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O co 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O O N In (!9 N to In (D O N p O O O O m N O O O O � � �V 'TIT0�vV r TNtIqI� v v v V v v v v v v cn LO ro a @ @ E D N L O O (D N m y@ co N C C D o rn U 3. 0 0 0 0 0 0 J O N V Cl) (n @@ O -0 c N .N N C) C) N N Z EL m U U-0 0 7 O M(n (Dr (D m N ti E E E E E E> (? r r @@ 3 m C7 U c @ @NUN c `a°_ c -xsa a'aaaaQw �� °o E E E O O N O ro 0 o c 0 w o E E E E E E c c @ @@ m E E 'O "O Y N c w0 N— pp N .- U@@ L L L U U U U U U 'm E E' J N N N @ N N SSx�CL 2222ZO >(ncn��� Q UUIiILFL r M o rn 0 m w o o 0 0 o i� 0 o o 0 o 0 0 r � (p Cm O V O V e} 0 0 0 0 (D N O O O O O ' ' 0 0 0 o (M r OI O N O O O O V D 0 0 0 O to M N O m O m (n V 0 0 0 N (n Ln N O O O O O Ln O O 00 D� Ln r C M m Oi C 0 (D O V N O O (n C Cl! N O N r- (D N M co N N V oo M (n N (n L> O CD M V 67 V) V) V) M N L M W i 3 � M a V) 63 V) V) 9 V> V) V) V) 9 V) V3 V) V3 Vi 691 V) V) V) 6969 VJ 63 V) V) V) V)' V> V) LO 63 cA O O (D N m Ln O N V Cl) (n o0 O M(n (Dr (D m N V r r M o M o I ki V 04 O V> 613� V> V> V> V> 63 cA V) Ln Ln O O V O V V O O O O N O M m rj r M W r O O co O N V V N m N M m (0 r r r N m Cl LO L> O CD M V 11. B 11 V) Vi V) V) V) VJ V) V) V) 63 V/ Vi Vi M V3 V3 V3 V) 63 V) V) 63 V) 63 6969 V3 V) Vi Vi V) V> V w of — w p O O O m O m W 0 0 0 0 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O (n V v 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O V O V V O O O O N 0 0 0 0 0 O O O N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 (O 0 0 0 0 0 60 O co M M O O 0 0 0 0 0 O ' 0 0 ' O m O m W O O O O N 00000 O O O N to (D 00 O O O O O O— 0 0� 0 000NM (n M(n ON V O MO Ln W NN rOr (D (D aD O CO oD O N (n V Ln O Ln r N M M (n N O M N N N cn N -- -7 N-6 co M N N N (O MV � to N N N M (O cc V V (n N N N N N 63 V) V) &3114-1 1613, Vi V) V) V3 V) Vi Vi V) V) V3 V) V3 613 V) V3 V) 63 V3 63 V) 63 6914016% 69 VI V) V3r V) VT V) V) d) cq O qqO�Z m ccn Q w 0 of X �- aUXZw m amQ Qg Z w Zcr OU -00 F- Z wJ?a ~OOO z� Ww�a ww z z gzw02 }z Q�FO 2z0000�� >Ow w0o Ux z�' F p� wl= a(nW¢x (n(nzv w oof -UwQ � WadZ w¢ ;�F w�(7zz� x¢WZV�- zz0w �= }002;Z p W U U W W W O F' H LL LL _ l.L Q wQz in LU W W ��Ow W W CO 0 WU0 wQU' Ur 0� �OZ 200 OW F-F-W w 0 HO�wZ �� } }o y w'U W� W ���QY�ZZQ� 2�'Q QIL F NN ww%�� Q 2QU�W ZZ���Z a >��w�U ZOF -z<w f-wM < ALL— Zz U' 0 w � � w w >��¢ Q w CC O (D M: F- O - m a w (x7 � w F- w F- a m CL =¢� oc o o= g w w Z) w W > ~ W U U- R F-F U0zH F- wcnw?Odw?cn��a�O ILOO?F U F F mco it Ix O (D m C (6 ' C N J 0 a) v > �7 c C J N @ a� rn E 0a CL E �' ' O O) C C rL W Ocn 2 M r O (D LO V m Ln Ln (D r O E O co . m m M N N (p O J O m N n H � r CL 0 CL N N (0 X N O J m co F o E >0 m U c N Y C) 0 ° ch z E c@ CL > m O m C7 X a o o LL j�QFUQ °morn co V> Vs m It F- w (D 0 7 m J H O 0 (D 0 o � r N M u rj > V Cl LO L> O N N O (D O O O O V M N @ @ @~ @ N O m (D r N O M M (n O @ @ N Q 0 r cD 0 @ '0 .V T@ E N O r 0 (D O O O w- LL d ' d U M h O r V O (D _ O 0 r N M p r 0 :p d N O o V N N } } } } LL LL I.L LL Q N m V O x000 M M_ M N 1� iV O1 O o O M " M co V a) cOD CD M O } N T M N d U C LL ON R M N N f6 i } COD N co C co LL C M V) Vi V) V) V) VJ V) V) V) 63 V/ Vi Vi M V3 V3 V3 V) 63 V) V) 63 V) 63 6969 V3 V) Vi Vi V) V> V w of — w p O O O m O m W 0 0 0 0 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O (n V v 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O V O V V O O O O N 0 0 0 0 0 O O O N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 (O 0 0 0 0 0 60 O co M M O O 0 0 0 0 0 O ' 0 0 ' O m O m W O O O O N 00000 O O O N to (D 00 O O O O O O— 0 0� 0 000NM (n M(n ON V O MO Ln W NN rOr (D (D aD O CO oD O N (n V Ln O Ln r N M M (n N O M N N N cn N -- -7 N-6 co M N N N (O MV � to N N N M (O cc V V (n N N N N N 63 V) V) &3114-1 1613, Vi V) V) V3 V) Vi Vi V) V) V3 V) V3 613 V) V3 V) 63 V3 63 V) 63 6914016% 69 VI V) V3r V) VT V) V) d) cq O qqO�Z m ccn Q w 0 of X �- aUXZw m amQ Qg Z w Zcr OU -00 F- Z wJ?a ~OOO z� Ww�a ww z z gzw02 }z Q�FO 2z0000�� >Ow w0o Ux z�' F p� wl= a(nW¢x (n(nzv w oof -UwQ � WadZ w¢ ;�F w�(7zz� x¢WZV�- zz0w �= }002;Z p W U U W W W O F' H LL LL _ l.L Q wQz in LU W W ��Ow W W CO 0 WU0 wQU' Ur 0� �OZ 200 OW F-F-W w 0 HO�wZ �� } }o y w'U W� W ���QY�ZZQ� 2�'Q QIL F NN ww%�� Q 2QU�W ZZ���Z a >��w�U ZOF -z<w f-wM < ALL— Zz U' 0 w � � w w >��¢ Q w CC O (D M: F- O - m a w (x7 � w F- w F- a m CL =¢� oc o o= g w w Z) w W > ~ W U U- R F-F U0zH F- wcnw?Odw?cn��a�O ILOO?F U F F mco it Ix O (D m C (6 ' C N J 0 a) v > �7 c C J N @ a� rn E 0a CL E �' ' O O) C C rL W Ocn 2 M r O (D LO V m Ln Ln (D r O E O co . m m M N N (p O J O m N n H � r CL 0 CL N N (0 X N O J m co F o E >0 m U c N Y C) 0 ° ch z E c@ CL > m O m C7 X a o o LL j�QFUQ °morn co V> Vs m It F- w (D 0 7 m J H O MORRY111 on 115 JAN .9 1 2011 3Y.- 1 h1al 1 12 Hiller Henning Cnyla G"OLDEN GATE W.S.T.U. ADVISORY C S e .k /'rls'FY 2885 Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Jan u, ar--.i -€ AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes - December 14, 2010 V. Transportation Operations Report A. Budget B. Project Manager Report - Darryl Richard VI. Transportation Maintenance Report - Hannula VII. Landscape Architects Report - JRL VIII. Landscape Architects Report - McGee & Associates A. Hunter & Coronado IX. Old Business A. Safe Routes to School Project B. Master Plan C. Water Symposium X. New Business A. Interview Landscape Architects B. Meeting Schedule XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment lie eyx r ting is scheduled for Fe at 4;00 err, At Gi-,flden, Gall; C -nrnunity (,enter I ry 8, 2011, Maples, F Milo. Dab: D ( 1 ftnIp] Copies to: Fiala ,� e,►� Henning Coyle Coletta RECEIVED NOV 17 2010 1611 812' GOLDEN Gil E . M.,S.T.U. ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Se- tekli er 14, 2010 MINUTES I. Call to order The meeting was called to order at 4:10 p.m. by Richard Sims, Chairman. A quorum was established. II. Attendance Members: Peggy Harris, Richard Sims, Pat Spencer, Michael McElroy, Barbara Segura (Excused) County: Darryl Richard — MSTU Project Manager, Michelle Arnold - ATM Director, Pamela Lulich — Landscape Operations Manager, Gloria Herrera, Management Budget Analyst Others: Michael McGee — McGee & Associates, Mike Anderson - Hannula, Richard Tindell — JRL Design, Sue Flynn — Juristaff III. Approval of Agenda Add: X. A. Safe Routes to School Projects for Golden Gate City Richard Sims moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Second by Pat Spencer. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. IV. Approval of Minutes — August 10, 2010 Richard Sims moved to approve the August 10, 2010 as submitted. Second by Pat Spencer. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. V. Transportation Operations Report A. Budget Gloria Herrera distributed and reviewed the Golden Gate Beauti iiccat U MSTU Fund 153 Report dated September 14, 2010. (See attache: on t 1 Copies to: 161,1 1B12 Current Ad Valorem Tax — Received $383,541.85 • Total Revenues — Received $396,459.93 • Operating Expense Available - $43,697.42 • Purchase Orders to be Paid - $94,625.50 • Total Budget Available - $1,404,137.87 She asked the Advisory Committee if they would like to see any additional details added or removed from the Fund 153 Budget Report. Discussion was made on changes and additions to the Fund 153 Budget Report and it was decided to replace the Bid/W.O. #s column with a project description. Gloria Herrera asked if the Committee preferred "Closed Purchased Orders" were shown on the report. She suggested adding a column "Closed Purchase Orders" and have a running total dollar amount. It was noted the Committee prefers consistency and any revisions stay in effect long term. B. Project Manager Report Darryl Richard distributed and reviewed the Golden Gate MSTU Project Status Report dated August 10, 2010. (See attached) o (G -33) Replacement or Demolition of Old Signs for Golden Gate Community Staff stated the Golden Gate entry signs on CR 951 are becoming a hazard to the public due to deterioration of the posts which hold the signs. Signs look worn and discolored and are not a positive aesthetic improvement to the Community. The Staff recommended the Committee take action to demolish and replace with an upgraded sign. It was noted the County is no longer permitting signs on medians and replacing later would not be an option. Discussion was made on the replacing and/or demolishing entry signs, permitting and the costs of replacement. The Committee decided to continue discussion and make a decision at the October meeting. o (G -32) Water Symposium Collaboration — Median #21 Concept drawings are pending from Water Symposium. o (G -31) Hunter & Coronado Design — Curbing, Landscape and Irrigation The ROW Permit has been issued. Revised Drawings have been received with minor changes on striping. The Project will go out for 2 1611 B12 bid next week for a twenty -one day period with tentative construction beginning in late November. o (G -25) Golden Gate Master Plan — Revision The Staff reported the Master Plan had one modification and it was to eliminate Santa Barbara from future project goals. Per the Executive Summary "On May 27, 1997 the Board of County Commissioners considered Agenda Item API which recommended the Commissioners approve the Golden Gate Community Beautification Master Plan accept annual maintenance costs for Golden Gate Parkway and enter into a funding partnership for the beautification of CR 951 and Santa Barbara within the boundaries of the MSTU. " Richard Sims stated eliminating Santa Barbara as a road on the Beautification Agenda was not the intention of the MSTU. He mentioned the possibility of expanding the MSTU boundaries. Pamela Lulich stated the Master Plan can be updated without going through the LGP Cycle. The Master Plan can be updated with directions from the Committee. Discussion was ensued on updating the Master Plan and it was decided the Committee will address the issue at the October meeting. VI. Transportation Maintenance Report — Hannula — Mike Anderson None. VII. Landscape Architects Report — JRL Richard Tindell distributed and reviewed the Landscape Architect's Field Report. (See attached) He reported the following: • Due to the excessive rains, the crown -of -thorn on Tropicana are becoming weaker and dying. • The maintenance crew has been working on weeding the beach sunflowers south of Golden Gate on Collier Boulevard. • The dead pine tree was removed from the Golden Gate median near 43rd Terrace. • The vehicle damaged oak tree just north of Golden Gate on CR 951 continues to lean and needs to be removed and replaced. It was noted contractors are currently trimming plants, trees and clear site lines to meet Road and Bridge direction and FDOT requirements. Pam Lulich reported the County has been working on Irrigation Comparison data. She will provide comparison data to the Committee and JRL. 161',1 B 12 VIII. Landscape Architects Report — McGee & Associates A. Hunter & Coronado — Discussed previously V. B. IX. Old Business A. Member Terms Darryl Richard distributed a memorandum from the Board of County Commissioners for the 2 vacancies on the Advisory Committee and applications submitted by Richard Sims and Barbara Segura. (See attached) Pat Spencer moved to approve the applications and reappoint Richard Sims and Barbara Segura and submit recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for final approval. Second by Peggy Harris. Motion carried 4 -0. B. Water Symposium - None. X. New Business A. Safe Routes to School Project for Golden Gate City Pat Spencer suggested the Committee select a project to submit a request to Pathway Advisory Committee for $100,000 in Grant Funds. The Project must be in Golden Gate City. They have funds available for middle school's safe crossways, sidewalks and to connect sidewalks. Funds can also be used toward education for children. Many suggestions were made and many questions were asked. Pat Spencer offered to research the Committee's questions and work with the Staff to select a project and complete the submission to Pathway Advisory Committee. It was noted "Safe Routes to School Project for Golden Gate City" deadline for submission is the end of September 2010. Richard Sims moved to quickly submit a proposal for the "Safe Routes to School Project (for Golden Gate City)." Second by Mike McElroy. Motion carried 4 -0. XI. Public Comments — None. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned at 5:30 P.M. Golden Gate MST A isory Committee Richard Sims, Chair L, These minutes approved by the Committee /Board on as presented �7( or amended 1611+ B12 /b .- /' — /0 The next meeting is scheduled for October 12, 2010 4:00 PM at Golden Gate Community Center - Naples, FL 5 H Z O Q o LL M r P Q L W Z = m U- W CL H m Q � c� Z W 0 J O 0 161 O ON CO O MMOO0000NMOOOLO00O1 O OMN CO Mr O L0000 OO U) ao(O LO NOOOI N O V' M 0 0 0 M O 0 M N N M M N M 1 a0 0 to I� LO N V• r QO O O 0 M O (9 O V• O M M N Ln 1 r 0 aD O N r M �' O N (: In I- � O) N r W O M I nj r r M Ln V' to r' N M r N Ln M (V V• 1 t6 00 � 3 V Q 63 to EfT Efl EFT Efl Efl Efl Efl fA Efl 6q (fl EfT EA 6q Efi Efl V> 64 EFT Efl Efi EH 6q 1 00 O N Il- N O O OD Ln 0 O V' (9 00 O O O V• M I-- O LO , O . N 6 OD . . . N , CD (V . (V I M N C V' Ln I- LO Ln O O M V• V• (O I- n 00 00 V• � (O N (D O •� r I- Ln r M 00 r O r P E N LL EFi EA 61T EFT EFT Efl Qf l Efl Efl EA EA Efl Vfl ER Efl Efl EFT 6FT Efl 61) EFT ffT Efl (FT EFT E 9 i` C) O_ (O OO N_O MMMM Nr I` or 400 Ln D) Imo• O O O 0 W LO LO LO LO O O M LO I� O M LO M M M Q V' 00 O O N O M V' co I- (O O O O N �Ln ZLn M LO M Ln L?) )LO to 0 LO Ln LO M M Ln L? Ln Ln V' M O co 00 (O 0) O) 0) 0) O O1 Ln Q S CO 00 IT 8 1 m 0 r 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 r O O 0 0 0 0 O 1 O N N (n (n O C >, O O (n rn ° °) c a`ni v Z Z> v v aa)) d E - '�'� u) Z°n '3 mU) QQinininQQQ .N cY 3n a) o .� m� �w� mm's 0. o 2�� O O Y Y .N N '� N C O N fn N N N N to N to .N C C d c c a) a) m o Q m 3 o c c 0 m U O a a `o `o m a) a) O (n m m au ca as m a co cn LL LL LL W J C W �U E J J U) En fn J J J LL��J V• o N (9 O N O N r- (0 (0 V' Ln (D N CO O O O 00 Il- V•(0 LO V• m'V•(O M(9 ONMN_ V'I- NOO fl- r- CO M r- 0 LO O V• N O (O N (D O LO o (9 # CO U CO r V' V' (D a r r V' V' 00 O r r LO N 0 0 0 V• LO M_ N_ 0 o�00000�0000��000000000000 0 00000 0000 000000000000 Ln LO Ln Ln Ln LO LO LO Ln Ln LO in LO 0 LO LO In Ln Ln LO Ln Ln V• V•v'IT It 'IT vItvv V V vv V V•V•V-vV•V•v t w U U U a O O C O O O O a) a) c Z v m m w U) m a) . W W 0 0 m L c C i 1 CD N N O O a C U Q Q Q Q H U) X L U U 2) w E C cd ob od U CK ` m .o a m ca m c c c c N� `� ~ L)) aa) aa) a) o m o s 'O 'o Y in in m U o `O `o o o CJ. m (ma m m o I w w '� � m � � v o rn rn o Q ULLwLLLLLL LL 2222 ��- )�Y����a- (nUJ(n Efl EA 64 Efl LO (D 1- co to co V' I- 00 d N LO co L V O LO N w Ln M O LO 7 C U C M x W Efl EF? ER EA d C d E Q ER ER Efl Efl fT 6q EA Efl to d E w .9 E O U Efl Efl EH E , Eii 1 EFT 1 EF, 61T Ef, Efl E Ln (9 r- O� ti O O 00 r- n 0 0 O O O r O N O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1- 0000 O� C3 LO 00 0 C w 0 LO LOOT Il- r- 0000 0 O V'0 0 O N O M In O 1 1 O w O m O o O) 1 r LO O (D I M 0) O O O O O LO CD LO O Ln N M V• O I- Oil- P O N r M 0 V' N 0 0 00 0 0 0 O Q r M LO N (D (9 O V• 1\ V' w r M LO r O V' O 00 O LO IT N O (d (6 ONN M c O (MO)N(M Nv VMr O Ln M N O) O O Q n N v r P Efl EA 64 Efl LO (D 1- co to co V' I- 00 d N LO co L V O LO N w Ln M O LO 7 C U C M x W Efl EF? ER EA d C d E Q ER ER Efl Efl fT 6q EA Efl to d E w .9 E O U Efl Efl EH E , Eii 1 EFT 1 EF, 61T Ef, Efl E 64 (H Efl (fl (flI EAI EFT V).69> EH 1 °o u E E X Q1 � p N p > 7 D LL p 7 O O p O o p j > N N d � a o N } N G LL p C C T LL LL O O O LL LL O ol ro N M N m aD � N nLOi. m o m adi W c'ORMIM -� -P 6% 16q Efl Efl ER EiT Efl EA EfT 6s EFT E9 ER Efl Efl 64 Efl 6q 6q 140 M 0 0 0 0 o O O co (0 O O LO O M 07 LO I w O LO r O M O M O N O O O I� M O r O O O OD 00 CO w 0 r- 0 0 (D Ln o M Ln M O N M m d�NN V'�O 00 ON 1- O 1- 00 O (O N N (O LD r r r M N r- M n 61 O r le M P Imp Efl NINI0I0 CN M CO IP 1-1, Ln � co I�I"'Pi C41 co I` IIH4IERIEFT Efl EFT (fl 6s 6s 6f> EfT 6.) (A EFT Efl ER EfT ER Efi EH 6c>jVWI61TIEnIEF>I6lTI6cT O O O O O r- LOn O , 0 0 , O O 00 ( O� O- 0 C d O O 0 �O Z,� co O OMOC m V V N Zo 64 (H Efl (fl (flI EAI EFT V).69> EH 1 °o u E E X Q1 � p N p > 7 D LL p 7 O O p O o p j > N N d � a o N } N G LL p C C T LL LL O O O LL LL O ol ro N M N m aD � N nLOi. m o m adi W c'ORMIM -� -P 6% 16q Efl Efl ER EiT Efl EA EfT 6s EFT E9 ER Efl Efl 64 Efl 6q 6q 140 M 0 0 0 0 o O O co (0 O O LO O M 07 LO I w O LO r O M O M O N O O O I� M O r O O O OD 00 CO w 0 r- 0 0 (D Ln o M Ln M O N M m d�NN V'�O 00 ON 1- O 1- 00 O (O N N (O LD r r r M N r- M n 61 O r le M P Imp Efl NINI0I0 CN M CO IP 1-1, Ln � co I�I"'Pi C41 co I` IIH4IERIEFT Efl EFT (fl 6s 6s 6f> EfT 6.) (A EFT Efl ER EfT ER Efi EH 6c>jVWI61TIEnIEF>I6lTI6cT H EfT O J W u Z xxI LLJ UXZw m w LU LL h Z 2 J Q H Z CIO 22 LLJ WwzzO�00��w0 Iwo– w ww3mzmw 3 LL LL Q OJ 0_ Z~ U) 2 of w !Y Q wow OOW > >22(n� (WL(WLWLL�LWL Q Q 2� of w Z Z w Z 2W L�>Hw wwQQWw U0LL??w I- HUUZI- P (fl ba EH EfT (fT EH Efl Efl EFT EFT 61T EfT Efl Efl V4 EFT Vf Efll EiT 1 Efl 160. I EFT I Efl I E9 H O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C tn000000000000000001n 00 00 OG . N O O O LO O O O O O O O O O O O O O n P O O O C 0 0 0 0 OO O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO 0 0 n O 0 0 0 0 C mo 'IT _oLnLn00000000Lnlr�oo� rn Ian (0 C, W Ln LO Ln P r r (M r Ln N O N r V• O L a N M C N N � r � N V -e c oL� E9 E9 Ef? E9 (fl 6q 6cT 6f1 Efl EFT Efl EfT EH Efl Efl 6q E9 EH EA I Efl H I EHI EH I EfT LU J (n W U) d W m Q J Q J U 0 � D J Z �z� Q� ¢Qm 0LU NU)w OU aL) f= Co W W� U Z� W w Z Z w U} Z Q P (~n O ww U U) �O - -g z (,I -(nZ�2 (�>- 2QZ W W U�w Z� = ZZ02' W LU of W ��oQO W UU W QaO��aZ wO Ow HHw O W W W W ��I�i�QY2�ZZ�¢ W SWQ OQ (nwwwwwwmJ -J Z HU' (7FmZ2(nw2EJZ2Z W USof SW �a QZ000 (nw 0ww?g0mw?0nD g�a -j WOLWL0020E— mmF- T- W F- M �NtO nOD Q1OPNM�KT (OnOOOPN M� Ot0 na001 OP N P P P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M 'Q V' V• 00 V.V• - oM °v r, r- c00D 'T v 1`. i LO i i co N I- r- LM (O CPO V' I I* OO r 00 r V• N N M M N N Ln M N O) V' O O r M n N N H EfT O J W u Z xxI LLJ UXZw m w LU LL h Z 2 J Q H Z CIO 22 LLJ WwzzO�00��w0 Iwo– w ww3mzmw 3 LL LL Q OJ 0_ Z~ U) 2 of w !Y Q wow OOW > >22(n� (WL(WLWLL�LWL Q Q 2� of w Z Z w Z 2W L�>Hw wwQQWw U0LL??w I- HUUZI- P (fl ba EH EfT (fT EH Efl Efl EFT EFT 61T EfT Efl Efl V4 EFT Vf Efll EiT 1 Efl 160. I EFT I Efl I E9 H O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C tn000000000000000001n 00 00 OG . N O O O LO O O O O O O O O O O O O O n P O O O C 0 0 0 0 OO O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO 0 0 n O 0 0 0 0 C mo 'IT _oLnLn00000000Lnlr�oo� rn Ian (0 C, W Ln LO Ln P r r (M r Ln N O N r V• O L a N M C N N � r � N V -e c oL� E9 E9 Ef? E9 (fl 6q 6cT 6f1 Efl EFT Efl EfT EH Efl Efl 6q E9 EH EA I Efl H I EHI EH I EfT LU J (n W U) d W m Q J Q J U 0 � D J Z �z� Q� ¢Qm 0LU NU)w OU aL) f= Co W W� U Z� W w Z Z w U} Z Q P (~n O ww U U) �O - -g z (,I -(nZ�2 (�>- 2QZ W W U�w Z� = ZZ02' W LU of W ��oQO W UU W QaO��aZ wO Ow HHw O W W W W ��I�i�QY2�ZZ�¢ W SWQ OQ (nwwwwwwmJ -J Z HU' (7FmZ2(nw2EJZ2Z W USof SW �a QZ000 (nw 0ww?g0mw?0nD g�a -j WOLWL0020E— mmF- T- W F- M �NtO nOD Q1OPNM�KT (OnOOOPN M� Ot0 na001 OP N P P P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M 'Q V' V• September 14, 2010 161,1 B12 Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manger, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Golden Gate MSTU Project Status (G -33): ACTIVE — Replacement or demolition of old Signs for Golden Gate Community 09- 14 -10: Staff observations is that the signs are becoming a `hazard to the public' due to deterioration of the post which hold the signs and the signs 'look worn /discolored' and are not a positive aesthetic improvement to Golden Gate Community. Recommendation is to demolition and replace with upgraded material (similar to the new sign at GG Pkwy and Santa Barbara) (G -32): ACTIVE — Water Symposium Collaboration — Median #21 09- 14 -10: Per BCC direction Water Symposium is to 'report to the Board of County Commissioners' (pending) (G -31): ACTIVE — Hunter & Coronado Design; Curbing, Landscape, and Irrigation Project Name: (2009 -003P) Golden Gate Beautification MSTU — Landscape, Irrigation, Curbing Final Design. ( Coronado Parkway & Hunter Blvd.) 09- 14 -10: ROW Permit is issued project bidding /coordination with Purchasing Dept. for bid. (G -25) ACTIVE —Golden Gate Master Plan — revision; (PO 4500100242; Work Order: TLO -MA- 3614- 07 -04; Original Contract Time -Line: NTP 12/8/2006,to Final Completion 12/30/2007; Original PO Amount: $4,800) 05- 11 -10: Final Submittal under review by staff. 09- 14-10: Staff request confirmation of Committee's recommendation regarding "Santa Barbara" (G -26) ONGOING— Maintenance Contract 08- 10 -10: Hannula Landscape is under contract. (G -29) ONGOING— Maintenance Consulting Contract 08- 10 -10: JRL Design is under contract. 1611 B 1C D LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLANNING DESIGN 405 5m AVENUE SOUTH SUITE NAPLES, FLORIDA 239 - 261 -4007 0(Gt1C�C��cJC� �1pC�Gt ��C�C��9� ��C�OC pC�[,�OG'� COPY TO: ® OWNER ❑ ARCHITECT ❑ ENGINEER ❑ CONSULTANT ® _MSTU Committee_ PROJECT: Golden Gate MSTU - PO# 4500118406 REPORT NUMBER: CONTRACTOR: Hannula Landscaping —Mike Anderson 992 -2210 JRL COMM No: 9018 Date: - 8/10, 8/12, Weather: Cloudy & L Showers Estimate % Complete: N/A 8/26,9/2,9/9 Time: 11:30-1:30 Temp Range: 96 Schedule Conformance: As scheduled PRESENT: Aug 10: Jim Stephens & Richard Tindell Aug 12: Pam Lulich, Darryl Richard, Jim Stephens & Richard Tindell Aug 26: Pam Lulich, Darryl Richard, Andy Estrada (installation for Hannula) & Richard Tindell Sept 2 & September 9: Richard Tindell, landscape architect WORK IN PROGRESS: Contractor present during most visits OBSERVATIONS: Site is looking good, Some trash observed mostly on Golden Gate and Collier Blvd. Routine maintenance work has been performed. Grass only medians seem neglected. Site lines need work. Weeds still a problem REVIEWS: County and FDOT Standards. Maintenance agreement, previous suggestions, designs and work orders. REPORT: Reviewed last report and status of work orders and direction from County with Jim. Was notified that Mike Anderson will be taking over for Jim. There are several places in many of the medians along Collier, Golden Gate and Tropicana were weeds continue to be a problem and need to be addressed now. Chemical (especially in paver areas) and manual solutions (especially under trees) will work in most instances. This has been an ongoing problem normally blamed on rainy weather however no sign of tracer dye has been noted. (Repeating from last 2 reports as un- resolved) The beach sunflower on Collier is very weedy and difficult to keep looking nice and full - replacing it with Emerald Isle ficus or Ilex nana would help correct both problems. At the August 10 pre MSTU site review we agreed to try Beach Sunflower on more time with approval of the Board. The Crown -of -thorn beds on Tropicana should be hand weeded and 161 it Q ;2 U.- LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLANNING DESIGN 405 5t^ AVENUE SOUTH SUITE NAPLES, FLORIDA 239 - 261 -4007 additional mulch applied, replacement plants are needed, the same is true for some of the liriope beds on Golden Gate. The allamanda in the median on Green needs filling in. Additional plantings under the sable and crape myrtle plantings on Golden Gate has been installed. A dead pine tree in the Golden Gate median near 43 was noted. Dead palmetto, ilex and juniper were observed on Collier and should be replaced. Most of the small tree along Sunshine have been staked as requested. I observed and reported one downed and it was replanted by my next drive by 2 days later. All planting areas continue to need to be trimmed to meet County and FDOT standards, especially within site triangles. Bougainvilla sprouts and low hanging tree branches require immediate attention. The required clear view zone is between 24" and 72 ", FDOT also requires 14'6" clear over traffic areas and 10' clear over sidewalks. There has been no word on sprinkler head replacement near electrical equipment since the August 11 suggestions email from Roger Dick, County Project Manager - Irrigation. Vehicle damaged oak in the median on Collier just north of Golden Gate is still leaning, extensive bark damage observed and should be scheduled for removal and replacement as soon as practicable. ACTION REQUIRED: Review with county setback requirements for mountable curb as along Golden Gate. Meet with landscape contractor. Review schedules and contractors reports. Review outstanding work orders, designs and proposals previously requested or issued to Hannula . Request more direction from County and MSTU Board. Reported by: Richard Tindell, asla, registered landscape architect LA767 1611 912 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 27, 2010 TO: Darryl Richard FROM: Ian Mitchell, Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners RE: Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee As you know, we currently have 2 vacancies on the above - referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit an application for consideration. I have attached the applications received for your review as follows: Mr. Richard E. Sims 5391 19' Place SW Naples, Florida 34116 Ms. Barbara E. Segura 4632 15" Avenue SW Naples, Florida 34116 Please let me know, in writing, the recommendation for appointment of the advisory committee within the 41 day time -frame, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration. Please include in your return memo the attendance records, for the last 2 years, of the applicants recommended for reappointment. Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 252 -8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 0 Attachments 1611 1 B12 Mitchelllan WnTtsegura515oyyahoo.com : Saturday, August 21, 2010 3:52 PM To: Mitchelllan Subject: New On -line Advisory Board Application Submitted Advisory Board Application Form Collier County Government 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (239 )252 -8606 Application was received on: 8/21/2010 3:51:55 PM. Name: Oarbara E Segur4 Home Phone: 39 -821 -3601 Home Address: 4632 15th Ave S City: ale Zip Code: 411 Phone Numbers Fax: Business: 39- 348 -8863 — e- MailAddress: ra515(ci�vahoo_coid Board / Committee Applied for: JGolden Gate MSTQ Category: V4ot indica Work Place: aco's Landscaping 8t Lawn Maintenance, In How long have you lived in Collier County: ore than 15 Have you ever been convicted of any offense against the law? of Indicate Do you or your employer do business with the County? Not Indicat NOTE: All advisory board members must update their profile and notify the Board of County Commissioners in the event that their relationship changes relating to memberships of organizations that may benefit them in the outcome of advisory board recommendations or they enter into contracts with the County. Would you and/or any organizations with whom you are affiliated bene%t from decisions or 161 1 9 1.2 recommendations made by this advisory board? of Indicate Are you a registered voter in Collier County? Do you currently hold public office? Do you currently or ever served on a Collier County Board or Committee? ffe� Oolden Gate MSTU Please list your community activities: ctive member of the Golden Gate MSTU Work for the Democratic part of Collier Count Education: Bachelor of Scienc Experience: _ Landscape Contractor for over ten j7eja 0 • 2 1611 B12 McMillan From: rick @johnsonsairconditioning.com Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 11:09 AM To: Subject: Mitchelllan New On -line Advisory Board Application Submitted Advisory Board Application Form Collier County Government 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (239)252 -8606 Application was received on: 8/26/201011:08:53 AM. Name: Wchard E Sim Home Phone: 39-455 -706 Home Address: 5391 19th Place S City: ale Zip Code: 411 Phone Numbers Fax: 39 -597 -898 Business: 39 -597 -4675 e- Mail Address: ickc�r' ohnsonsaiecc >>>tliti��e�iir�..�_�r� 0— - Board / Committee Applied for: olden Gate Beautification MSTU Advisory Committed Category: Not indicate Work Place: [Johnson's Air Conditioning How long have you lived in Colder County: ore than 15 Have you ever been convicted of any offense against the law? Not Indicat Do you or your employer do business with the County? at Indicate NOTE: All advisory board members must update their profile and notify the Board of County Commissioners in the event that their relationship changes relating to memberships of organizations that may benefit them in the outcome of advisory board recommendations or they enter into contracts with the County. lewould you and/or any organizations with whom you are affiliated benefit from decisions or 1611 B12 recommendations made by this advisory board? Not Indicat 4e you a registered voter in Collier County? ©e Do you currently hold public office? Do you currently or ever served on a Collier County Board or Committee? YE Oolden Gate Beautification MSTU Advisory Committe Please list our community activities: [President - Golden Gate Civic Associatio Education: Please refer to previous applications for exact informatio Experience: *Please refer to previous applicatiow, for exact informatio 0 U d r O N M N cn 2 ea C E 0 C d O O 000000000047 C 000 'o O (O 0 0 0 0 1 E [SRO V C (r- IQ IQ 0 LO LO rivm0MO) O H3 M EA fA d3 M M fA fR fA ER E9 b9 C o 0 0 L 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O O O (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O U M O f") O (O G O O N O cl L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c0 00 O (O (O CO co o0 00 (O (O C O N N co V to N (O LO to co 0 m N � N 7 C m E C m E C m E C m E c m cl E U U U U U � a a a a a 00 0 o CD 0 -E Q Y a Y a Y Q Y Y_ Q CO Y m Y m Y m Y m m y C E O O O 'O O "a O .y O :O N C N C ..,, C N C ... N C E y m jA m y m y m m y O •X L .X L .X L •X L L 'X (n O N N O N O N O (/J 0) CL O O — m m m m m a E m m m m m U c c C C C C c O O a N N N m N m O O O LLJ W O M O M O Ul N O m M N N O (OUJ(n O O Z , Z ,w m m W 0 O ZZ�� 0 O O O O O O L Y C C c O O C c C C C c O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m ;;m m m m m m m 3 3 3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y@ m 3 3 C,3 3 3 3 m O 3 3 3 3 3 m m m L) 0 m m m m m m N L CL C L U C U C L L L L L L X O dl IM IM u1 W m 0 U 0 U (�1 m N m N m N m MC,, N Vl m >> >> m@Mmma) mmmmm U (D(D O -a O -o D U U U 0 0 m m m m m -o -a Cl. F v a o o F- F- F- F- o O N LNn0 U` UU(°O(°n(°n(LoUU m as m mam-a-a-o-0 m m > > >> mm umm m m mmrrc m c m c F- C C m c a� C `O C `m C = o 0 0 U ' y U) U) U)cn(gS1:Z:T- O L +L+ L L w 7 y L L N 0_ 0 0 cc O 0= m O N Z(nZZ(ALiJ�Z(nlL� -0 -a 'D ED CO m o 0 O O O > j j U U "a U -0 m C C m m m m m m == O O d C o C 0 C oc 0 0 �UUQQF 0 0 >> y -H O d UUU22���L,31 N (ten N I M 1 17 1 (O I co I (� I co I m O Lo Ile r r 61? 1611 812 0 o m a m m z a� m 1 wmlw �M B12 ¢ GREEN CANAL J 3 1 CORONADO 0 (U) \T/ i O O r- 0 ■ VJ k; ^ .r O O r l Gam/ 0 W J 0 m m La _z Z N IIZ) i611 9 1 "1 GOLDEN GATE M.S.T.U. ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 Horseshoe Drive Naples, Fl. 34104 MINUTES Call to order The meeting was called to order at 4:12 p.m. by Richard Sims, Chairman. A quorum was established. II. Attendance Members: Richard Sims, Pat Spencer, Barbara Segura, Michael McElroy (Excused), Peggy Harris County: Darryl Richard — MSTU Project Manager, Pamela Lulich — Landscape Operations Manager, Rhonda Cummings — Purchasing Others: Michael McGee — McGee & Associates, Damon Himmel - Hannula, Richard Tindell — JRL Design, Dennis Vasey — Water Symposium, Michael Ramsey — Water Symposium, Lisa Koehler — Big Cypress Basin, Sue Flynn — Juristaff Public: Karen Bishop All documentation was submitted to Staffprior to meeting and was provided to the Advisory Committee and other attendees with an overhead projection screen to help provide apaperless environment via MSTU's request. III. Approval of Agenda Richard Sims moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by Pat Spencer. Motion carried 4 -0. IV. Approval of Minutes —October 12, 2010 Richard Sims moved to approve the October 12, 2010 as submitted. Second by Peggy Harris. Motion carried 4 -0. V. Transportation Operations Report 1611 612 A. Budget Darryl Richard provided the Golden Gate Beautification MSTU Fund 153 Report dated December 14, 2010 and reviewed the following: (See attached) • Ad Valorem Tax — Collected - $193,966.54 • Operating Expense Encumbered - $138,613.79 • Operating Expense Available - $144,482.51 • Total Budget - $1,850,908.06 • Total Budget Encumbered - $157,535.54 • Purchase Orders Paid - $31,490.01 B. Project Manager Report Darryl Richard provided the Golden Gate MSTU Project Status Report and reviewed the following: (See attached) o (G -33) Replacement or Demolition of Old Siians for Golden Gate Community The FDOT have planned to move on forward the CR 951 Project coordinates with the County in 2013 - 2014. Plans have some dramatic changes that will affect medians and signage. Richard Tindell reported the Golden Gate sign at the North end on CR 951 was broken in two pieces. Discussion ensued on the Golden Gate entry signs and it was determined both signs were not repairable. Pat Spencer moved to direct the Maintenance Contractor to remove the North Golden Gate sign. Second by Barbara Segura. Motion carried 4 -0. Richard Sims moved to direct the Maintenance Contractor to remove the South Golden Gate sign. Second by Peggy Harris. Motion carried 4 -0. For the Record - the Golden Gate signs fell apart and can not be repaired. The Committee stated they want to replace the Golden Gate signs in both locations if there is room to install after FDOT CR 951 Project has been completed. Staff volunteered to email a link on FDOT CR 951 Plan to the Committee to download and review. o G -31) Hunter & Coronado Design — Curbing, Landscape and Irrigation Staff reported the receipt of bids from Hannula Landscaping and Bonness Inc. for curbing and landscaping for Phase I and 11. (See attached) 2 1611 B12 Low bids were submitted as follows: - Phase I Curbing — Bonness $764,985.16 - Phase II Landscaping — Hannula $315,959.86 Staff recommended the Committee award bids separately. It was noted the "Alternate" bid item was for additional palm trees at median tips not shown on the approved plan. For the record — The correct total dollar bid amount for the Hunter and Coronado Phase I and Phase II Project is $1,055,865.02. The Committee refused the "Alternate" bid. Barbara Segura moved to award contract for (Phase II) Landscaping to Hannula in the amount of $290,879.86 for the Hunter and Coronado Project. Second by Richard Sims. Motion carried 4 -0. Barbara Segura moved to award contract for (Phase I) Curbing to Bonness in the amount of $764,985.16 for the Hunter and Coronado Project. Second by Richard Sims. Motion carried 4 -0. VI. Transportation Maintenance Report — Hannula Damon Himmel reported working on the following: • Trimming medians and roadway site - lines. • Removal of the dead limbs weakens by the winds. • Trimming fronds that had been pushed down. • Some sable palms on Tropicana need to be trimmed. • A dead tree from median on Golden Gate Parkway. • Spray applications during the last 2 -weeks for bugs, pests and some fungus. Pat Spencer reported standing water on the southwest corner by Wachovia Bank. Plants are dead in the swale located on North side of Golden Gate Parkway. Barbara Segura moved to direct Hannula to fix the standing water problem. Second by Richard Sims. Motion carried 3 -0. Peggy Harris abstained. Peggy Harris reported unsightly medians due to debris not removed prior to mowing. Damon Himmel stated he will address the issue with the crew. VII. Landscape Architects Report — JRL Richard Tindell gave a slide presentation and reviewed spreadsheets and charts for County Irrigation Fiscal Year 2010 Water Usage as follows: (See attached) 161 1 912 Estimated Irrigation Needed Irrigation Provided with Sprinkler System Difference Between Estimated Irrigation Needed and Irrigation Provided He stated the documentation gathered and rain measurements provided by Naples Airport were used to create Charts. The Chart indicated watering during the months of June, July and August was not necessary. He stated the metering system in Golden Gate is not calibrated. Discussion was made on efficiency of pumps and meters out of calibration and the need to have the County research current pump calibration and calibrate pumps where necessary. Staff agreed to research. He stated there was opportunity to save water by eliminating grass and using specie specific zones through monitoring and irrigation adjustments. Richard Sims requested copies of print -outs of roadways by month, County charts of water usage prepared by Pam Lulich, historical data on Hunter and Coronado for comparison with the Water Symposium information. Staff will email data to the Committee and others involved. Richard Tindell reported the Coronado Asphalt Pathway Project is moving up on the list. There is a meeting scheduled on Thursday, December 16th with Alison Bradford to review of the actual application. A tentative pre- meeting after the holidays will be held prior to submitting the actual application. Staff asked the Committee direction on the GG MSTU selection of a Landscape Architect. Richard Tindell gave a brief background on himself and described his working relationship with the MSTU. He asked the Committee to consider JRL for the Landscape Architect contract. The Committee formed a consensus to consider JRL and McGee & Associates at the January 11, 2011 meeting. VIII. Landscape Architects Report — McGee & Associates A. Hunter & Coronado — None. IX. Old Business A. Safe Routes to School Project — Discussed in VII. B. Water Symposium Mike Ramsey provided the Golden Gate Parkway Concept Demonstration Plantings Concept Drawing. (See attached) The scheme has a parallel bed of low flowering yellow shrubs and 2- parallel beds of 2- different types of grass in front of the "Welcome to Golden Gate" existing sign. 1611'B12 He reported the Concept Drawing as follows: ➢ Water conservation ➢ Minimal water usage — will require water during the grow -in period. ➢ Need some irrigation during the very dry weather. ➢ Least amount of maintenance and costs. ➢ Mulch based design. ➢ Has a design life of 18 years. Discussion was made on options for the ground area in front of the A, B and C on the Concept Drawings. Some Committee Members suggested to the Concept have more color because it is the gateway to Golden Gate. Mike McGee stated the location selected was not the best location for the Water Symposium Concept plan. He suggested the Committee install the plan on the median to the West of the median selected. Staff suggested the Committee proceed with proposal and request quotes from annual contractors and irrigation components as needed. Barbara Segura suggested the Committee rethink the placement and the Concept Design. Barbara Segura asked if the Committee would consider changing the monthly meeting day from Tuesday to Wednesday due to a conflict in her schedule. Richard Sims suggested the Committee bring suggestions and schedule conflicts to the January meeting. X. New Business — None. XI. Public Comments — None. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned at 6:05 P.M. Go Gate Advisory Committee %��A ;r__I Richard Sims, Chairman 5 These minutes approved by the Committee /Board on /-//-// as presented or amended The next meeting is scheduled for January 11, 2011 4:00 PM at Golden Gate Community Center - Naples, FL 1611 B12 It COMMITTEE 2885 Horseshoe Drive Naples, Fl. 34104 Dec ernb 2010 SUMMARY OF MINUTES AND MOTIONS III. Approval of Agenda Richard Sims moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by Pat Spencer. Motion carried 4 -0. IV. Approval of Minutes — October 12, 2010 Richard Sims moved to approve the October 12, 2010 as submitted. Second by Peggy Harris. Motion carried 4 -0. V. Transportation Operations Report B. Project Manager Report (G -33) Replacement or Demolition of Old Signs for Golden Gate Community Discussion ensued on the Golden Gate entry signs and it was determined both signs were not repairable. Pat Spencer moved to direct the Maintenance Contractor to remove the North Golden Gate sign. Second by Barbara Segura. Motion carried 4 -0. Richard Sims moved to direct the Maintenance Contractor to remove the South Golden Gate sign. Second by Peggy Harris. Motion carried 4 -0. G -31) Hunter & Coronado Design — Curbing, Landscape and Irrigation Staff reported the receipt of bids from Hannula Landscaping and Bonness Inc. for curbing. 1 f 1611 812 Barbara Segura moved to award contract for (Phase II) Landscaping to Hannula in the amount of $290,879.86 for the Hunter and Coronado Project. Second by Richard Sims. Motion carried 4 -0. Barbara Segura moved to award contract for (Phase I) Curbing to Bonness in the amount of $764,985.16 for the Hunter and Coronado Project. Second by Richard Sims. Motion carried 4 -0. VI. Transportation Maintenance Report — Hannula Pat Spencer reported standing water on the southwest corner by Wachovia Bank. Plants are dead in the swale located on North side of Golden Gate Parkway. Barbara Segura moved to direct Hannula to fix the standing water problem. Second by Richard Sims. Motion carried 3 -0. Peggy Harris abstained. K z 0 z LL uj Z W C, I 0 CD to V3 N w 6% VS ca VY to 'A fo VS V# w #t3 VS > S N IV 0 m cn 0 U) m v " it w OD N 0 to N N m m 0 -1, CP co N 1611 0 0 Z c E to C C ac (.D E E m a 0 m �o 0 z (n LL U- 0006p- 00 POO - C> 090 000 0 0 0 W) M -0 gob g8 0 Doors m o .30 , C) n, S S 0 m ol -i 6 to Vi VS V% 69 VR VS W9, V> 69 6% &iIwlfio + Vi V3 to U? to EH to V 6, VS 69, tp co us n tuba X 63 61l VS VS VS 64 1V ",,o VS V3 t5 w t4 #A to to to it W, t% w O 00. 0 0 0 008 0 0 C6 ,-0 . 0 Iq C; ( co ,4 40 VS eft 6% M ,60,0* VS V9 VS co 00 1�101 00 0 , co co W oo 0 fc� La CIA CD ,Q N LQ m V 69 to WS 6e YT V to VS to V to V -4 611, f4 on 0 V io �-, w In fA 'A 43 f9 Vi to e3 V m b 'a 0> V, C, CN rNY r3 �4 V4 to V VS VS V V fl,S e% V 64 6-i VS tO V f WS -0 Z LU CL! :D co -0,WOD < z z W. WLOL Z, <. < ai o U, -Z Z of W 0 — �5 5 0 w Z W 7ww -,.,,zz U LU _ Z :)Oo< w Z– W Q� < 2 * , I >'* , 0–nm M>-Otn qS X?>�:Wogo-o— < �- �- U� � WM<ZtwQ- m-o z WCCWC OWJwT,aoM5uw — 0 0) 1 0 W , <00W mu)wo;: 5 w W W LL U. < 0 Z � < W 5 co . >- e- U. z Z zu)>- cn_XLUmmg wllw� Lu w uj M w w < < w o CL 59E9w8- 0 m z w iW- �W- 0 0 z I ZW ZW Z– 5 8 00 L-U Z– 0 m o ww '0 o –N "V Msw r- wmv t9v!;:v �! 0 N "m " N NNN""NN" � nN LLI z CL 0 o z L) LLI o I () F- z r Z <r-(n0 PSM wozo - z – z z 0 cc LLI IS- ;: co L) 0 o o x P P U"(O LU WL W> z z Lu Lu 1611 B12 Golden Gate MSTU Project Status (G -33): ACTIVE — Replacement or demolition of old Signs for Golden Gate Community 10- 12 -10: Review of estimated cost — based on previous sign cost: 1) SignCraft: $4,653.00 (for sign) 2) Hannula: $4,888.50 (for site prep and grading; includes sod) 3) Electrical refurbishment: $1,200.00 (replace /refurbish existing fixture) Total budget figure for sign `similar' to West Entry sign is: $10,741.50 (estimated) 12- 14 -10: Pending committee recommendation. (G -32): ACTIVE — Water Symposium Collaboration — Median #21 09- 14 -10: Per BCC direction Water Symposium is to `report to the Board of County Commissioners' (pending) 12- 14 -10: Water Symposium is to report concept plan. (G -31): ACTIVE — Hunter & Coronado Design; Curbing, Landscape, and Irrigation 12- 14 -10: BID RESULTS: BONNESS INC.: $764,985.16 (Phase I Curbing) HANNULA LANDSCAPE: $315,959.86 (BASE + ALTERNATE — PHASE II Landscape) (G -25) ACTIVE — Golden Gate Master Plan — revision; (PO 4500100242; Work Order: TLO -MA- 3614- 07 -04; Original Contract Time -Line: NTP 12/8/2006 to Final Completion 12/30/2007; Original PO Amount: $4,800) 12- 14 -10: Staff coordinating with McGee on revisions. I Rf 121 co o 40 rl-� 9 1,: cc 0 2 Ul) Ul) R N co + uj z m C) N 69 69. 0. CL C ui Do CN w -j IA iD N co Iq to CL LU z q co N 01 0 z C R V) o r— CIO 6*11 69 W 40 coo Co co 0 q U-) z N z C-4 M C*4 bg 40 40 121 E 2 R + 0. CL C qq w -j IA iD to CL 0. 0 c C R 0 cl. co I .- 121 1611 L B 12 \ \ _ ! §. E &!! ■ k Q � }) �■ ■a § ©\ ■I �■�Q� cc E �::W, coo Nrtl \ ��� \ � \ Q:! 2 ®f » /{ � ) f�\ }Z §C\ j)$ ! / ! a / � § \ � > \)_? � $ ( ] U k / \ \ ( } L B 12 \ \ _ ! §. E &!! ■ k Q � }) �■ ■a § ©\ ■I �■�Q� cc E �::W, coo Nrtl \ ��� \ � \ Q:! 2 ®f » /{ � ) f�\ }Z §C\ j)$ 1 COLLIER COUNTY DIVISON OF PUBIGC SERVIPE13 Parks and Recreation Department 15000 Livingston Road Naples, Florida 34109 — Phone (239) 252 -4000 — Fax (239) 514 -8657 Website: colliergov.net GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA October 4, 2010 I. Call to Order 11. Attendance - Establish a Quorum III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes - August 30, 2010 V. Public Comments VI. Old Business A. Recreation Highlights - Vickie Wilson B. Projection Equipment - Peggy Harris M VIII IX. New Business A. Monthly Budget - Annie Alvarez Member Comments Adjournment The next meeting will be on November 1 at 6:00 PM Collier County Golden Gate Community Center 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Conference Room "D" Naples, Florida Misc. Cones- Date: t3 n I I I tem #: z B Copies to: Fula �� RECEIVED 16 I - � �' NOV 17 2010 Henning October 4, 2010 Coyle _. —.__ -- uoard of County Commissioners Coletta MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD Naples, Florida, October 4, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 6:00 PM in a REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room "C" of the Golden Gate Community Center, 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE CHAIR: Jim Klug Bill Arthur Darrin Brooks Peggy Harris (Absent) Kaydee Tuff ALSO PRESENT: Annie Alvarez, Regional Manager/Re IMes: Vickie Wilson, Community Center Supervisor Date: item 1 C�74-!.s i0: 16 d 4, 843 I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:05 PM by Chairman James Klug III. II. Attendance — Establish a Quorum A quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda Darrin Brooks moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by Bill Arthur. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. IV. Approval of August 30, 2010 Meeting Minutes Bill Arthur moved to approve the August 30, 2010 Minutes as submitted Second by Darrin Brooks. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. V. Public Comments — None. Kaydee Tuff arrived at 6:09 PM VI. Old Business A. Recreation Highlights Vickie Wilson reported the following: o The BMX Summer Series Qualifier was held on August 28 -29 attracted 130 Bike Riders and approximately 200 visitors. o Naples Football League and Parks & Recreation held a Football Palazzo Fund Raiser on October 2. The event attracted over 300 visitors. Proceeds were split 65% - 35 %. o VPK Program has 18 registrations. o The Community Center Receptionist will be leaving this position the end of January. The position will require a replacement. B. Projection Equipment Staff reported projection equipment was purchased. Equipment is available to the MSTUs and Civic Center for meetings. Staff reported placing an order for Mobile Bulletin Boards for some of the Parks. The Boards will be delivered in the next 6 weeks. Mobile Bulletin Boards are used at workshops and while brainstorming. Once notations are marked on the Mobile Bulletin Board the exact information is sent directly onto a laptop or computer. VII. New Business A. Monthly Budget Annie Alvarez distributed and reviewed the Monthly 130 Fund Report. (See attached) She reported the new fiscal year stated October 1 st. She stated the 2 161 ' ItobB,13 Finance Department changed the report to reflect monies that are committed. The monies committed on Frame Work Purchase Orders are encumbered for the whole year and invoices are billed directly to Finance. The Staff reported Capital Outlay reflects a rollover from the previous years' budget for Lighting Poles to cover Field Light Project. It was noted due to delay in delivery of poles for the Field Light Project, a new completion date has been scheduled for November 15th. The Staff stated no events had been scheduled for Halloween due to Halloween Events scheduled at Max Hasse and East Naples Parks. Discussion was made on future Halloween Events at the Community Center. Many suggestions were made and it was decided to hold events after the field lights are installed. Current construction on field would be a safety issue. VIII. Member Comments James Klug expressed frustration with the "Government Process in General" due to duration of time the Field Light Project was taking. He stated the Advisory Board approved the Budget which included the Field Light Project in September 2009. He stated 15 months was too long to install 20 lights and suggested the County review this process. Bill Arthur asked if the Staff would request quotes for the installation of a 6 foot high fence from parking lot of the Tax Collector Office to Lucerne. He also inquired if the Center has any plastic 4 foot fences in storage. Staff responded they no longer have them. The Staff stated they now have 25 -4 foot barricades available. Community Center will require additional barricades for the Frontier Days Event. Staff stated they would request quotes for fence and also look into fencing for Frontier Days. It was noted the Nutrient Services for Senior Program has been serving 50 meals a day through the summer months and approximately 30 of those participants stay for the Bingo sessions. Program is very successful. Plus Bone Builder and Thai Chi classes are offered. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was moved and seconded to adjourn. The meeting adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:35 PM. COLLIER COUNTY GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD 91 161 1 B 13 " October 4, 2010 These Minutes were approved by the Committee /Board on ll ` - 0 , as presented 9< or as amended C) r1 C) Ln N O O O O \ •• O O r1M r1 r1 F: a) a) a) 11 0 - ri m .r1 r-♦ QHU f•i O P4 a) P4 q 3 O r-I r-I ro r1 '>y N �ri A N O U) ri U W fA .O >i O 4-) N q •rl � N U R P O a) U r-I r-I r-I N O O U 4) U 4 O v b1 v Q I i H U �I 7 H AI �I U2 U H z U O U W H C7 z W Q a O C7 O 00 1) 4-) a-1 m Ix ro W +-) H 0 zH w1 U -Q U) OHH +JzH (1) (dUz m U D C b X 12 000 k HUUW r-1 W W'0 (dHH F- 0 9 r4 ro •ri0U +) a) u,zz �j •r1 W W I~ +IQ2 a) (daa > BOO a) U)0(.DM' M O O (y. a-) r1 r-i I a0o[—X O MLnD N ri r1 U) -k -k 0 a) F! (d a) +) O y0[ q aa)) a H 10 U U) aUit�iC��rt� rI a) O ;j O )-I 0 WPNWGNUC7W 0161 cP v' N N m M r1 r1 M Mr-O(DMM LnNMN M MM Ol �' [-riCF) c-i l� 61 CO 161 1 R 13 c) Ln N C; 9 NN 1 kloN r1O c-I r10000000000000I i M O O NO'� 0 LO 00000000000000000000000000000 O LO Ln 0000000000000 Lo Ln �, O Ln r1 V'061Ln OOOO Ln 00000000000000000000000 U. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0101000000000000061 r- (n 0[ -I NN 61[� 0000 L- N O O O O O O O O O O O O N O 00000000 W c1'� OOOOOOOOOOOOOaLO VM ODO[-OOM1O0610 6100000000000001000000000 H N,-i MCDMM -r1 rIM NNl -�,O-iLn Ln l00'IT r- v NOOO lO C00 0 III c -I Go OD r-i N 0161-zzvN-41'l -r- 0-) Lf)N 61 101-0' -i M C(N r-i r- CD k9 N -1 -1 -1 tT I'D NMMLf) mMririNHrl r1 r1 C\] CC) •V000 M NM61 OJ r-i 0) V r1 N Z �-4'M Ln(n 6l U') (N M W Q a O C7 H z U O U W H C7 z W Q a O C7 O 00 1) 4-) a-1 m Ix ro W +-) H 0 zH w1 U -Q U) OHH +JzH (1) (dUz m U D C b X 12 000 k HUUW r-1 W W'0 (dHH F- 0 9 r4 ro •ri0U +) a) u,zz �j •r1 W W I~ +IQ2 a) (daa > BOO a) U)0(.DM' M O O (y. a-) r1 r-i I a0o[—X O MLnD N ri r1 U) -k -k 0 a) F! (d a) +) O y0[ q aa)) a H 10 U U) aUit�iC��rt� rI a) O ;j O )-I 0 WPNWGNUC7W 0161 cP v' N N m M r1 r1 M Mr-O(DMM Ln C) ��Ln Olnm v c) Ln N C; 9 NN OLn kloN r1O 1-1N O Nr1 ON MM6l N `-i I O Ln 9 0 0 O O O O O O N N N O O O O O mM M N OJ 000 N N N O O O O O OO O N lO 1fl I I I I I I I I I I I I 0000000000000000000 o 0000000 00000000000000000000000 N Cl O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ln Ln 00000000000 OO M 0 r 0 O N�(M 0000 00000000000000000000000 H-100o 0000000000 -1000 0 [- 010100610 00000000000000000000000 IO IOMMMLn I- O.- i000NOLn 611 -610 Ln (N NM Mr-r -I ';T0)N N[-- w -i Ln LnW (D C[-OO N Ln[ -OCW00 0 000707 r1N J'0)01 'zzl'N'zTr- I-OIb r1 r1 H [-OOO r1 LC) IONS 4r-'dT OlO N Un OD l0 a) l6 (N T) Ln Ln H H r1 r1 N r1 r1 r1 r1 N co N r1 61 w (N M 0) r- r1 m lO r1 N 1010 Ln LnM HLnN r--1 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO o 0000000 00000000000000000000000 0 o0o000000000000000 0 0000000 00000000000000000000000 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C; r� O O N 017 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 O [-OlO lO 0610 00000000000000000000000 00 07 (n MM Lf)F -(D-1O OONOLn- 11-010 Lf) NNMMr-r -I -t M CNN[ -lO-i LO Ln 100 a'[- N N OO Ln I-- O a' IO OD CD LnLn(,�Cr- iN,'6101�;(,�;r-I-�r-V CC -1,-i r1 I-OOr1 N Ln aDlO61lONLnLn n mM_ `-iNHr1 r1 r1 NCC) LnHm lO NM61 (N L() Ln Ln Ln M O U-) N d' H �J Hwl KEG" W W U)HW UWx H4 OHUW A WU) ��Z ZQO w owo0UZw zWZWz0 �aH P4 a 1 xa 000x0 %w0Mw wMWxl +H w Oa 0z U U PaZ >U) Ol4OH �7 OUHU)U)�Oa a4POUHWP4WOaH up 04 H �� OWHZ0 H U) Z r=iWZZZ U H QZ ZMP wl,O CHW�H(7�,(7��H7D x Hy UH O yHE)l" O MWHHZU)U�U�4aUGHOWa�a OW(.) 'Q,OWUH'T E HH HwHUW �� :v U) 0 (0r[;QHE-A4 W) -4H �H ctSU r -0i H��WWxxHPi I `Z,�04W � U0Fl xGPIX W �p4H HU+ HWwwH U) I-7 P4P4 -,j Ln PSHP4 p4HH ;cf =7H�UHG;(Y,t!) � p;�pa Hx04 w WA U O[ =7 aP,UUH HHE10 >-:D F4WP4WHHL-� W 0RaQUHMHWxE1W 0aWHUWWPW as 11 WHwpp;;�xUwP4X UWZH�cD ax U)UE-4 P�rl4HX r4 2qZUU)a Hr1aWw H'Z4WOH UP AWHW�Pa HZO W P4WH�wwOWWWWHOaWHHGvHZHOWH�OWWOa�H(�PIZP4Q NFzr Q UP+r.�(YW HNH - QM wUooGY.U)GY,xma -1 HHOHHOF4 N�;HZUPNWH': F4HNM C7 r, U) u) a 2 (d C7 FTa00000m[nc00 < 00000000r-i000 ,�rro- iorn[nw00000000000000 W'�>Om['-010000�T WZ �0000000Ln! n1000FOOr- Irit-01101000r-i00tf)OOOONOOr-I O 'J �- iNNN�1'01610161 i/)O 10['�r1r-l�-ir- Hr- iriririNF: NNNN0161010 1Nmd�[�0101rimd'1010r -[N� -i HOzCi�.r- IL-[-L L [- I- L- I- zU) NNMI-- NmmM�l'L ���c" �d' 'r�r�r0 )rn00ori,- i,- [mmmd'd'LntnlO r- IW��- ic'i'C�f'�'�t'V'�HrP Wf� ..rlrir•irlr -INN 4NNNNi, ; mmmmmmmmd 'd'�'d'd'd'd'd'�NC'V'V'V'V' •�I - >Iz'm mmmmmmmm PaW LO Ln LO In L) L)Ln R.: 101010101 WW0 ,01010101010101010101010101010 q�wz >Cw o (d Ln C4 W „ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C. C. C. C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. . C. C. . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OOL- OOOOONL-- IOL)OO ONOMNO'41N lOLn O U1 Ln VV00N (D LO (D (D U-) U-) Ln O cr lO 61M 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ln HCO d'N�O Ln LnNN U1� MOO OO'-i M61LnM �-I� -I L�NM�rIIOO�NNrI rIN 00 rl rl rl L9 lO O O O O N N O Ln Ln O -A c i O 00 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O N . C. . . . . . . C. C. . . . . . . C. C. . . . C. . . . C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U1 O Ln O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0-10 rl O OLl OOOOO NL, ri O Lnm ONOMNOa'NIO Ln O Ln Ln ,zr O O N O Ln O O Ln Ln Ln O<y'L9 m m 00000 Ln rlWa'Nl0 U1 lONN Ln rl MOO CO rI MOILnM r-1' -I LnNM�t'. -i 100�NNr -I . -iNMOM r-I rl rl M r-i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Co O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OOL-000OONL -ri O Ln oo O N O m N Oar N �,O Ln O Ln Ln a' O O N O Ln O O Ln Ln Ln O V'1061 M 00 Ln rIOO d'N IO Ln LnNN Ln rl MMMrI M61LnM '-i' -I LnNM�rIIOO �'N N`-I �-iN 00 rl rl rl L9 110 Hw w UHHWHOWHP4 HF14FgrICD HWzW WF4H9 HT) 0 z W j>-+�a xz z wL7 U) wq as ww �z]wHx zaH �PWU H cna W U�O� zz 0 HN ry Ui P4UP4 HH p�U F-�H� p�H, zi P1 ZwaHmo Poo Z2H�7P4wzHwWpxw( 00ZZ�NWz La0HOHHZ04 zH PZ HY,H z HU L14Za HE-1U) H Wz HHZOx FCC PGRiH 2O �H QzWHHx U)HHHCDH ZE1 ZWHP4UHP4P4xx0 wUP4 (Y,HHHU] 4HazUUW Www> x4wz wC7QWH�H00HHU�gHhIU�HOUWUUz �HW fYx HP4xHZa W W W UHxH U xNNZZOOP40P4 i7QzzxwwHO Hx IP4() Mul N p ry4NN4CL QOW Nu00UXXUUR�f NR: x OWNNMQHODH4 O Or- IMtD r- MMOOOON000000M00000000000000000riNO )0000,1OH H H H lD a O 0 Hmmmmmmmd'd'rN -4LOM m .- H000101.- IN® 101c- i'-HNmvLtlr-mmg1016101HNmmtiHLn w (.0 w w w w w w w .Dwtowwr-m m 0101(1Hr-i H HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNcf ' l'It'1PHmm 'IT V'V -V -;I 'I C ICv Iq T 11tl v-1 Cv Vv ¢P d' �v �v �*Iq M LO LO LO LO LO LO LO M m M Ln Ln Ln m M LOO M LO LO LO � w W V) WwWwlDL 9lDww wk owl0lDWWwWlDwwCOWlD wwl0WwL9wwl0wwl0wl0lDwlD19q; L-L- U 16I 1 B 13 1611 613 COLLIER COUNTY DIVISON OF PUBLIC SERVICES Parks and Recreation Department 15000 Livingston Road — Naples, Florida 34109 — Phone (239) 252 -4000 — Fax (239) 514 -8657 Website: colliergov.net GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA January 4, 2011 I. Call to Order II. Attendance — Establish a Quorum III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes — December 6, 2010 V. Public Comments VI. Old Business A. Recreation Highlights — Vickie Wilson B. 6' Fence from Tax Collector to Lucerne C. Flag Pole Lighting D. Meeting Schedule E. Tropical Fest VII. New Business A. Monthly Budget — Annie Alvarez VIII. Member Comments IX. Adjournment The next meeting will be on February 7, 2011 at 6:00 PM Collier County Golden Gate Community Center 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Conference Room "C" Naples, Florida P It 1611 813 December 6, 2010 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD Naples, Florida, December 6, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 6:00 PM in a REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room "C" of the Golden Gate Community Center, 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Jim Klug VICE CHAIR: Bill Arthur Darrin Brooks (Excused) Peggy Harris Kaydee Tuff ALSO PRESENT: Annie Alvarez, Regional Manager/Region III Vickie Wilson, Community Center Supervisor 1 161 1 1;3 December 6, 10 I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:07 PM by Chairman James Klug III. II. Attendance — Establish a Quorum A quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda Bill Arthur moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by James Klug III. Motion carried 4 -0. IV. Approval of November 1, 2010 Meeting Minutes Bill Arthur moved to approve the November 1, 2010 Minutes as submitted. Second by Peggy Harris. Motion carried 4 -0. V. Public Comments — None. VI. Old Business A. Recreation Highlights Vickie Wilson stated she would be giving the Advisory Board a tour on recent projects after the meeting. B. 6' Fence from Tax Collector to Lucerne Staff reported receiving a quote for a black vinyl chain link fence from the Carter Fence Company in the amount of $4,995 to be installed on Parks and Recreation property. (See attached) Staff had not received all the quotes requested. James Klug III asked what position Parks and Recreation would take on the installation of the 6' fence on Park property. Staff recommended the fence quotes be presented to Barry Williams for his review and approval. Staff reported receiving a quote to install a 175 watt metal Halide fixture for the flag pole in the amount of $2,570. (See attached) It was suggested Staff research the County' lighting codes and report back to the Advisory Board prior to making any decision. The Advisory Board asked the possibility of installing a fixture on the building to direct light on the flag for a fraction of the cost. VII. New Business A. Monthly Budget James Klug requested a status report on the Contingency Fund balances ending September 30 and beginning October 1, 2010. Annie Alvarez responded she would provide at the next meeting. 2 1611 B13 December 6, 2010 The Monthly Budget report — Continued after VIII. B. Walk of Trees Kaydee Tuff reported the Annual Christmas Tree Walk as follows: ➢ Theme - "Holly Jolly Christmas" ➢ Event scheduled - December 8 — 15 ➢ Sponsors can designate to whom or where they would like their donation to go. ➢ Event information has been provided to News Press, Naples Daily News and posted to websites with calendars. ➢ "Breakfast with Santa" Event - December 11 VIII. Member Comments Bill Arthur asked the number of monthly meetings the GGCC Advisory Board was required to hold. Staff will research and report at the next meeting. VII. New Business - Continued A. Monthly Budget Annie Alvarez distributed and reviewed the Monthly 130 Fund Report. (See attached) She reported the following: • GGCC October revenues were $7,000 more than anticipated. • Purchasing Department utilizing "Framework Purchase Order" system on operating expense items. • Operating expenses allocated at the beginning of the budget year are based on previous year expenses. Annie Alvarez recommended the Center hold a Tropical Fest and schedule in the 1St quarter of the 2011. The Tropical Fest held earlier this year was successful and she would like to make it a bigger event. Staff will review scheduling options and make recommendations at the next meeting. James Klug suggested holding a 3 -day Blue Grass Festival in February, 2012. He stated the festival is in the idea stages. Lions Club has a contact with experience in Blue Grass Festivals dealing with bands for the event. Dry camping would need to be available for 40 motor homes. GGCC would not be contributing any funds. Discussion was made on the Blue Grass Festival feasibility, permitting and optional parking facilities for motor homes. The Advisory Board was receptive to the possibility of holding the event. 3 161 1 B 13 December 6, 2010 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was moved and seconded to adjourn. The meeting adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:40 PM. COLLIER COUNTY GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY 17EX 1 a' LLB Z-,z" James Klug III, Chairman These Minutes were approved by the Committee /Board on 1 i , as presented V or as amended M PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO: vtq4p BILLING NAME CARTER FENCE rn Y'B TI;MATE 9'1 DATE t PHONE # ".= W NUMBER STREET APT# ■ w, INC. FAX# CITY STATE ZIP 3490 Shearwater St. Suite. E CELL# JOB NAME _ Naples, Florida 34117 (239) 353 -4102 PERMIT# LOCATION Fax (239) 352 -1687 t HEIGHT e LINEAL FEET "- WALK GATES DRIVE THRU GATES OTHER CHAIN LINK ... .� f� F G£ TOP RAIL LINE POSTS . ` 17, TERMINAL POSTS t TENSION WIRE TIES POST SPACING t CEMENT GATE FRAMES MATERIALS ORDERED / DATE SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: LOCATE # �r REQUIREMENTS PRIORTO SCHEDULING ... (1) CUSTOMER SIGNATURE (2) 50% DEPOSIT $ SALES REPRESENTATIVE m i �5 WOOD STYLE POSTS RAILS PICKETS NAILS STAPLES CEMENT POST SPACING OTHER DATE TERMS AND CONDITIONS: CARTER FENCE CO. INC. WARRANTS THE FENCE AGAINST DEFECTS IN MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF COMPLETED INSTALLATION. IF ANY DEFECT EXISTS AND IS REPORTED TO CARTER FENCE CO. INC. WITHIN ONE YEAR, CARTER FENCE WILL REPAIR OR REPLACE AT ITS OPTION ANY DEFECT WITHOUT CHARGE DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS. BUYER AUTHORIZES WORK TO COMMENCE AND AGREES TO PAY PRICE DESCRIBED. PAYMENT IS DUE UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. IF PAYMENT IS DELINQUENT AFTER 10 DAYS, A 1.5% MONTHLY CHARGE WILL BE BILLED ON THE BALANCE DUE. ALL COSTS INCURRED TO COLLECT A DELINQUENT ACCOUNT WILL BE ADDED TO THE BALANCE DUE AND ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER. CUSTOMER. HEREBY ASSUMES FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR LOCATING FENCE LINES AND ALL UNDERGROUND CABLES, LINES AND PIPES. CARTER FENCE CO. INC. IS NOT RESPONSIBLE OR DAMAGES TO UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOT IDENTIFIED BY OWNER. A/C ELECTRIC SERVICE OF SW FLORIDA, INC. 6017 Pine Ridge Road #244 Naples, Florida 34119 .,, �-mergenev , ELECTRICAL SERVICES "Semper FF "ONCE YOUR ELECTRICIAN, AL WA YS YOUR ELECTTRIAN" Proposal November 3, 2010 Board of County Commissioners C/O Vicki Wilson 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, F134112 A/C Electric Service of SW FL Inc. Proposes the Following: Job Address: Golden Gate Community Park Description of Work Install 175 Watt Metal Halide fixture for FlagPole Total Number of Hours Electrician 8 x $55.00 = $ 440.00 Total Number of Hours Apprentice 8 x $ 45.00 = $ 360.00 Material Cost $ 265.00 Jack and Bore $ 792.00 Number of Days or Hours to Complete 8 Hours Administration: 239 -597 -2634 Service: 239 - 597 -1789 Fax: 239 -597 -8406 1611 B13' Total for Proposed Work Shall Not Exceed $ 2,570.00 CD ri 00 � O OriO \ •• O N COM r-i ri 4-i d) m d) 11 •r1 Id •rl rl AHU N 0 a m a b r-I H N •� A 0W GI 9y 0 .41 � 0 •rl :3 LI 0 Id 0004 mU .ri Hro 00 U 1) 0 99 0 4J 43 d) 01 O o� �I J H OI HI B al U2 U H z U O U W E- 0 z W Q a O U CDiM M mNNN ap I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MMMMLI"M.OIO.11 oV od ��r -I.-I Ln OtOOLnONOC'nN� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ql d'�!'ODO O N N Ln N 0O, -: lr-i ri Ln r-i OOOI d>lfl riONriO0110 V�rIr 101OM cc) Ln O 001-10 N d' r-I OD OD NN r-i r-i a' co r- (N riNNN • ri [� I- OD oD M r-1 1-1 r-1 N lO fd MMMMN LnolLnr�I-NM00. ONMr rI N Ori Ln Ln Ln I� 1n Oh ri L9 Ln O rI M N Ln M ri r-i 61 o-4 1 ro oLnrnocX00000000000,- IO(D Lo -Iawr- m C) If) moo0 OONNOLn Ifl r-I O I- N O O Ln O Ln 0000000x - 100(`') O O m N OD ON V'000 . . . . . . . . . . C. . C. . . . . . . . . . . C. . . . . . . . C. . . . . . Ln M OOO OD 614 c6 CN 0000 OC L dl N 000001'7000 NOM 0l N ON � Ln 00 (3)CDM -Nri Ln m[-(1) NN061Nr -IN 00000 -V 00( -(-O IO OD OD C) NI -ONO drri l -(N O) m NOIN O) Ln OD M016101I- M. -ILn Ln CO -v w -v r-1[ -tOo 6lLn -v N r- r-110 m M dr M 00 1-1 Cl) V' N I- C' Ln Ln ri .-1 r-1 lO Ln 'IV W Vr Ln Lf) (N M W Ul r-i ri I- (N N O U W H U z w 0 a 0 U 0 00 4J 43 V ri 4x ro w -P H O Z OPP UA 4.)zH N OUP s~ •r1�� N bXZ Q 000 x H U U W r-I WW-0 UP P N •r1 C 7 C7 1,) N mzz �j A l W a +10 M N Idaa > +1 O O N wUUQ� M r-I O ow H I r -iOOr- x (D MLn=) N -4 r-1 Cl) -% -K W $4 p H Uft `yi 0 w a r-4 b ) m L1 0 0 it t~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wp,ONNLr-) 'IV NOOVr Lf) 0l0aW I (DWMMOOLr)M W0.00 1 00061 00 CDW U-) 0') IV 10Nr-IVw000CD lO NNODOO�OMOLnmr- <D w 00M OOL- I -O If) M -i NI-O LnOLno 00 ON MOl Ot- r -(1)ko - (D 1-10 00 co 0161 r-Ir -I 0l N 1� Ln I� r-i N 01 N 61 Ln 0l 61N0 I�LI)0110 00 CD* CD 0[� 100[-OOr -I Ln C; C MMOOMr -I 61[ -00610 MMNM d'r- INI - r-A d+ 'IV WVAC Mr-x-10 00 OM I-N (Y)m -i Ilzrr-1 M 01M0 00 co II)Ln101061 "D r- rCD, -iNM O)Ln x-1.0110 lO 61 M[- r-IN r-i MM MM lOM OO H Ln Cl O N ri ri d' �' O ri N t� N C N r-i O dl M 10 Ln ri dr r-i U in Ln M M M r-i N Ol I- M N O ri - r-1 ri IH O U W H U z w 0 a 0 U 0 00 4J 43 V ri 4x ro w -P H O Z OPP UA 4.)zH N OUP s~ •r1�� N bXZ Q 000 x H U U W r-I WW-0 UP P N •r1 C 7 C7 1,) N mzz �j A l W a +10 M N Idaa > +1 O O N wUUQ� M r-I O ow H I r -iOOr- x (D MLn=) N -4 r-1 Cl) -% -K W $4 p H Uft `yi 0 w a r-4 b ) m L1 0 0 it t~ 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I�OOOOO C,1 :) o0O O0000 O o000000 oOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . bl rlr -4000 000000000 Or -10[ -O O NCOM0000 1000000000000000000000 MMOOO 000000000 OM000 O I- 010100610 r-i 00000000000000000000 0 Lf) MMM Ulr-CO r- 1 000(N 0 L)OO I -OIO Ln NN6101[ -r-1 MOWN[ -w ri Ln Ln 10 (D V'I - OD N co Ln r- C) dw 10 W Ln Ln OD O r-1 N �v 0161 I'v N Vr I` I- I- M 00 1-1 r-i r--i r- 00 O r-i If) r-L N r-I I- dr O w N Ln 0010 0110 N Lf) LS H r-1 r-1 r-i N r-I -A r-i -I N co M H m lO N M Ol OD r-I M d l0 H aW t0 Ln Lf) M r--1 Ln N d+ q r-i a) I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I O000O OOOOOOOOO 00000 O 0000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0[� O O N 00 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 000000000 00000 O L- 010100010 000000000000000000000 MM Ln 0 ri000N0 Ln -ir- M 0 Ln NNOI OII -ri NVMN NI -lO ri Ln Ln100 CI -OD N OD Ln r- (D -,W 10 OO ri N NP Ol 610 N Vr r- I- C Co ri ri ri I- OD O r-i Ln L1) N ri I- IM 0 10 N Ln 0010 0110 N Ln 'A N ri r-I r-i ri N 00 Ln r-i dl w N M Ol I- -1 0) -V L9 ri LOM OLn(N Ir r-1 �WW40404pw WHaa w W U)HW Uwx H4 OHUW A wm 43z z (nmouz UzR z �H C4 I as aU xU) U2 1-1 �aa�iH 004 �w o 1% w z za�o aka UoO ON 0 H N wwx>i U)�a40 >-+�az�UW OMOPH oUH�nv2 oa aHC7UHU�LL' oaH i7H aH H>O UOWHOU>iHHp O �U)zHHUl rA r�F -IEA a0 WWU 7OO H U HEi HWHUwM-1W xU)X..r �, zMUM � aUUHOW a 0P H��OW r� HP4 U)1-aH'D HMU ra H� WxxH(.YL I z(>~aWa X0c4 Hxw(r W ���C wr H U) ax�aN+ H to 04HLYr�fYHH [s�'fwHryUH aU? /f�a•�a Hxa wW W O I- UUH HHWHO >,7MTF4 HWHH W l H[QHW.YHW OaWHUU�WHU)� a4 J24] UWWNZ UWPZEHz8 a- gZpOLUOE -l-1 N La4x w xUu� 4 Haacnw Hz4u) OCJ 7SaAr' LYit/ �, Fi�iHGaHHO�U]( Y�WUOUWUIWxxa3W�HHOH�o�a���cwiHaw�3�aH U) a z wow0000mmm0000 <000000000r- 10001 -iVrl-or -1o0 m"00000000000OO �O-zrMI- 010000- :1mNOW 0000000 0 L.()L. w a0HOOr- 11-- 1[l0110w00H00m0000N0 r -I d'NNNCr6101616 mmmU]O. -[ IOC-r- ir- Ir- I.- irir -IrirlHNgNNNN01010101Nm.0,r- m 01.-IMd'10wH Wr- it -i[- I- I- I- C`I-I-I-I-r-4WZMNNNMd MH04MMMNTr-MI 'd V *"I NN0)ON000 -4H -- IMMMv1;TU) 7 CPC'dr'cPdl40-z Rl11 w CDwO0.rr- ir-- Ir-- Ir- irir- iNNNNNNNWMMMMMMMM drd'qVVrd'V T -:1V-:1 dr WMMMMM CV) MMMMMMMR WU) U) MLnLnLnUlLnL) Ln Lt) Lf) LOD4WIDtOIOIOIO101O1O1O101OIOWWtDtDWWW a X 0 O w -x r1 r-i ri r-♦ lO dl 10 r-1 M N h 10 d> C 199 0l 00 co co m N r-I Ln tD � N N N 10 V' (Y ri d'ri ri 00 co OD N N Ln 'A H H H ri 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I�OOOOO C,1 :) o0O O0000 O o000000 oOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . bl rlr -4000 000000000 Or -10[ -O O NCOM0000 1000000000000000000000 MMOOO 000000000 OM000 O I- 010100610 r-i 00000000000000000000 0 Lf) MMM Ulr-CO r- 1 000(N 0 L)OO I -OIO Ln NN6101[ -r-1 MOWN[ -w ri Ln Ln 10 (D V'I - OD N co Ln r- C) dw 10 W Ln Ln OD O r-1 N �v 0161 I'v N Vr I` I- I- M 00 1-1 r-i r--i r- 00 O r-i If) r-L N r-I I- dr O w N Ln 0010 0110 N Lf) LS H r-1 r-1 r-i N r-I -A r-i -I N co M H m lO N M Ol OD r-I M d l0 H aW t0 Ln Lf) M r--1 Ln N d+ q r-i a) I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I O000O OOOOOOOOO 00000 O 0000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0[� O O N 00 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 000000000 00000 O L- 010100010 000000000000000000000 MM Ln 0 ri000N0 Ln -ir- M 0 Ln NNOI OII -ri NVMN NI -lO ri Ln Ln100 CI -OD N OD Ln r- (D -,W 10 OO ri N NP Ol 610 N Vr r- I- C Co ri ri ri I- OD O r-i Ln L1) N ri I- IM 0 10 N Ln 0010 0110 N Ln 'A N ri r-I r-i ri N 00 Ln r-i dl w N M Ol I- -1 0) -V L9 ri LOM OLn(N Ir r-1 �WW40404pw WHaa w W U)HW Uwx H4 OHUW A wm 43z z (nmouz UzR z �H C4 I as aU xU) U2 1-1 �aa�iH 004 �w o 1% w z za�o aka UoO ON 0 H N wwx>i U)�a40 >-+�az�UW OMOPH oUH�nv2 oa aHC7UHU�LL' oaH i7H aH H>O UOWHOU>iHHp O �U)zHHUl rA r�F -IEA a0 WWU 7OO H U HEi HWHUwM-1W xU)X..r �, zMUM � aUUHOW a 0P H��OW r� HP4 U)1-aH'D HMU ra H� WxxH(.YL I z(>~aWa X0c4 Hxw(r W ���C wr H U) ax�aN+ H to 04HLYr�fYHH [s�'fwHryUH aU? /f�a•�a Hxa wW W O I- UUH HHWHO >,7MTF4 HWHH W l H[QHW.YHW OaWHUU�WHU)� a4 J24] UWWNZ UWPZEHz8 a- gZpOLUOE -l-1 N La4x w xUu� 4 Haacnw Hz4u) OCJ 7SaAr' LYit/ �, Fi�iHGaHHO�U]( Y�WUOUWUIWxxa3W�HHOH�o�a���cwiHaw�3�aH U) a z wow0000mmm0000 <000000000r- 10001 -iVrl-or -1o0 m"00000000000OO �O-zrMI- 010000- :1mNOW 0000000 0 L.()L. w a0HOOr- 11-- 1[l0110w00H00m0000N0 r -I d'NNNCr6101616 mmmU]O. -[ IOC-r- ir- Ir- I.- irir -IrirlHNgNNNN01010101Nm.0,r- m 01.-IMd'10wH Wr- it -i[- I- I- I- C`I-I-I-I-r-4WZMNNNMd MH04MMMNTr-MI 'd V *"I NN0)ON000 -4H -- IMMMv1;TU) 7 CPC'dr'cPdl40-z Rl11 w CDwO0.rr- ir-- Ir-- Ir- irir- iNNNNNNNWMMMMMMMM drd'qVVrd'V T -:1V-:1 dr WMMMMM CV) MMMMMMMR WU) U) MLnLnLnUlLnL) Ln Lt) Lf) LOD4WIDtOIOIOIO101O1O1O101OIOWWtDtDWWW a X 0 O w -x N O tn01o0mO O 100101 M Mrn Ol OOI� 1-10 M O Oa'0 (3) B M000 'a' 101-i M d+ ri 1-10 m m 1 to O 1 ONOI 00 O O O M O Or-iO i 13 O O c) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 O O O O O M O M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0110 V' MCD O O O O M O 00000000000000 OON0000000000r -IO O r-1 NOOOOl00000 . . . . . . . . . M O O . O . to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 001- 100000[ O1 N 0000000 CC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O � O OOO OOOtf) 01000010 . 10000M00000 O . L O O (l. 0 0[-00000000. -I Olin 0000000 NOOOOOOOOONO O -100[- 10000 k-0M 0000 O O di tl) 1 OOOOIOOtto000to OtnNOONO O1 N 00101 M to O O m N O 0010 to 0 ri to in (D LO l-i O)M 00 0 10 -qv 1 to m in MtnHO�'N ri MtnNN tom MOO Ntn riN r-I r-I V'NNV'riM NNN. -1 ra riNOO ri 1i M N r-i r-i 1010 N O 0110 Ol M I O O O Oa'0 (3) O M000 Ol CD r-- 1 ONOI 00 O O O M O Or-iO ri O 10 0 0 1 001 O 0110 V' MCD N N O . . O . M O O . O . to 4 C:,) 'r. o . N o O . O . L O O (l. 0 to to to O O O di tl) 1 Ol M Ol M C' 1 Ol 0 10 -qv 1 to m 1-1 1-4 O ri 1i M 1-1 O m ri ri N O 0110 Ol M ri 1-4 O O O O O r-1 O O O ri O 00(M O O O O O O O O O O N O O M N O O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O 61 O O to 1 O O r-I 6l O O O 1 O O to O 10 to O to to 1 m O (D O U) (D r1 1 1-4 Vw O O O Ln 1 1 to In tf) to O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oto Oto 000000000000000 0000 000000000000000000. -IO 000000 r-4 01-1 0000/00000 (N r- -i O to MONO MNOV�NW to Oto Lo -v O O N Otn O O -za, to tn0 d^ W MMOOO Mto to 1-10 VAN 10 to lONN to .-I MOO ri MOItnM 1-11 -1 tnNM�1-- 1 10 0 61N N.--1 riNMOM N ri ri ri M 101 ri O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 000010OOOON1 r-I O to MONO M Od'N lO to CO to tn� 00 N O to O O Lo to to O VV 1001 M 00 to o oriOCNlo �n nNN to ri MOO ri MO1 oM I i tnN; ly .- IOO-z;N(,ri riN00 N 1-i 1-I r1 1010 p0HU) W 0PH04HOi'/]�"H(Y W Hf=iaH0 HWZW MF4Hi%H.D0N Z U] � x z W1-4N X Ga as WW ZWHxMZNP PMUN H w z Un0UH H EiH� 0E-IEn W WW�UU W4HU7HP4 �w� z HO H 0g z 0�D H UPi H LL�xto a U)PP44 U] H 'zN P; W WF-IHZ HOUQ C7 H t/]pUGaGa r�pq gU1WHW,�a >- I00w0i-a HPiOR woo+�Za�MZUHM w44400�wr� � a, P40 0 � �0 HzzaHMZ PSG z0W PSWZHHW ; t700zz WW O OHHzPi zH �z P$HH Ei z HU P'i2+WP+ H U2�H Wz HHzOM FC (Y(YH O H WQQZWHHx co HHHU' HU Pi E1 WHZUHaaxxO WUP4 WHHHUI Hl% > -OH aaaHazUUW WWNXHgWz OHHP;xHzaW NW UCvHxH X44NZZOOP�O% QQZZWWWHO HxI-gN0 Zp;7LLH W jp aa f=+�Hp4 �7P:HwoHHaawow 'O�H Haa�CO 'SHE- ZH Pi PaMW4 wFH �000UXZUUaww x Z OWN MnPODHa 0 000 - ttn(0[- mm000mN00000000m00000000000000000 ,- 4 Nm0000 0,--I 0HmHr- lrlr -lr-HNmczp.1,mHr-lHr-H[-0HmmO)riH - 1mHmcpririmHNrid '01O1D)O)r-Hril0 00 N. i' imMmmmmMd�V�V�V' tn[ �Ot01.- I.- IOOOO161r- INO)01r- I.- 1.- INm�Nt.f)L O)01010)0)O)r- INmmHriln lo101fllololot Dlo101D(01010101010�010[�OD010) 0101 0).- il- iri,--INNNNNNNNNNNNNNCd���PHmM a U )MMlnlnlnlnlnlnmlnlnmMLOl MMrL,lolo 101010101010101010 lO to lO lO lO IO IO lO lO CO IO lO to 1010 CO t010101010101O 1010101010101010101010 10101010 �[�t� 1,1 COLLIER COUNTY DIVISON OF P BLGIC SERVqp V' 2011 Parks and Recreation Department Livingston Road — Naples, Florida 34109 -- Phone (239) 252 -4000 — Fax (239) 514 -8657 Website: colliergov.net Hiller HY:........ Henning _� GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTERCaletta - ADVISORY BOARD - AGENDA February 7, 2011 I. Call to Order II. Attendance — Establish a Quorum III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes — January 4, 2011 V. Public Comments VI. Old Business A. Recreation Highlights — Vickie Wilson B. Field Lighting Update C. 6' Fence from Tax Collector to Lucerne D. Tropical Fest E. Security Cameras VII. New Business A. Monthly Budget — Annie Alvarez VIII. Member Comments IX. Adjournment The next meeting will be on March 7, 2011 at 6:00 PM Collier County Golden Gate Community Center 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Conference Room "C" Naples, Florida Misc. auras: Date: r t t Item #: Copies to: kL 1� 4 RECE p �;; . 4"nf-pi n 9 'rf ,�,� --, ._ .� Coyle NOV 0 8 2010 ._ Coletta 'y c AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY HISTORIC /ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION BOARD WILL MEET AT 9:15 AM, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 AT THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, CONFERENCE ROOM 610, LOCATED AT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE, NAPLES FLORIDA. NOTE: ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE HAPB WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD. THESE MATERIALS WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. I. ROLL CALL /ATTENDANCE II. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 15, 2010 (No meeting in October) V. OLD BUSINESS: A. A presentation on the 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan by the Collier MPO. B. Historic Brochure Review VI. NEW BUSINESS: A. Bula Mission Demolition VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS VIII. BOARD MEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS IX. ADJOURNMENT Misc. Comas: Imo: 03 Item tit Conies to: 161,1 B14 a C.,o e-r �ou-nty November 4, 2010 Michael Zimny Certified Local Government (CLG) Coordinator Bureau of Historic Preservation R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0250 RE: Collier County Preservation Board Meeting Dear Mr. Zimny: Please be advised that a public meeting for the Collier County Historic and Archaeological Preservation Board has been scheduled for Wednesday, November 17, 2010 and will begin at 9:15 a.m. at the Collier County Growth Management Division, Conference Room 610, located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples Florida I have attached the agenda and the minutes from the September 15, 2010 meeting for your reference. If you have any questions concerning this meeting, please do not hesitate to call me. My phone number is 239 - 252 -2463 or you can e-mail me at: Raybel lows PcolIieraov.net. Sincerely, Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Department of Land Development Services (Historic Preservation Coordinator) cc: Preservation Board Members (7) Ron Jamro, Collier County Museum Director William D. Lorenz Jr, P.E., Land Development Services Director Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney Ian Mitchell, Executive Manager to the BCC 161 1 B September 15, 2010 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY HISTORIC /ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION BOARD Naples, Florida, September 15, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Historic /Archaeological Preservation Board, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:15 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room #610, Collier County Growth Management Division — Planning and Regulation Building, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: CHAIRMAN: William Dempsey Vice Chair: Sharon Kenny (Excused) Pam Brown (Excused) Patricia Huff Elizabeth Perdichizzi Richard Taylor Craig Woodward ALSO PRESENT: Ray Bellows, Planning Manager — Zoning Services Glenda Smith, Operations Analyst 1611 SepemIA5, 2010 I. Call to Order: Chairman William Dempsey called the meeting to order at 9:18 AM. II. Roll Call: The Roll was called and a quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda: Betsy Perdichizzi moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by Craig Woodward. Carried unanimously, 5 -0. IV. Approval of Minutes — July 21, 2010: Ray Bellows noted: • the April 21, 2010 Meeting Minutes were not signed by the Chairman, although they were approved as amended by the Committee at the May 19th meeting. • the Minutes for the January 21, 2009 meeting had not been signed by Chairman Betsy Perdichizzi. Corrections to Jul v 21" Minutes: • On Page 6, under "VII. (C) — Historic Brochure: Status Report," the reference to Indian Hill was removed and it will not be included in the Brochure. • On Page 5, under "VII. (B) — Update: Cultural Arts Village at Bayshore," the Motion was to approve the Request for the Waiver, not the PUD. • On Page 3, in the last sentence of the last paragraph, the word "publicly " was misspelled. Craig Woodward moved to approve the Minutes of the July 21" meeting as amended. Second by Patti Huff. Carried unanimously, 5 -0. V. Land Development Services Report - Ray Bellows, Planning Manager, Zoning Svcs. • No new information to report VI. Old Business A. Review: History Brochure — Patti Huff (Copies of the latest version of the Brochure were distributed to the Members.) Page No. I Revision (s) Cover I Remove photograph of Ca t. Horr's house — substitute Old Marco Inn 4 Under "Naples Pier:" • Capitalize name: The Naples Company (2nd sentence) • Both pictures will remain as situated on the page 5 Under "Mercantile Building:" • Last sentence: Substitute "a" for the name of the restaurant (Campiello) • The sentence will read: "... [comma] now operates as a restaurant." 161 1 RO14 Se tember 1 September , Page No. Revision (s) 6 Under "Naples Depot:" • First sentence: Remove the comma between "impenetrable" and "frontier" • Last sentence: Change "Air" to "Coast" (Railway) Under "Collier County Museum:" • Second sentence: Add an "a" before "recreated," and remove the "a" after "recreated" • Second sentence: Add a comma after the word "fort" 7 Under "Rosemary Cemetery:" • Insert correct address: 1000 Pine Ridge Road (verified with Collier County Addressing Dept.) 8 Under "Old Marco Inn:" • To caption, add: "[dash] - Marco Hotel • Third sentence: Remove the apostrophe from Colliers • Sixth sentence will read: "Collier sold the hotel to a New York syndicate that had the financial backing of George E. Ruppert, part owner of the NY Yankees, and others." • Seventh sentence: Change "Herman" Blomeier to "Wilhelm" • Eighth sentence: Remove phrase "with Marcy and Pat Kruchtener as resident managers" and surrounding commas • The last sentence will end at "Manchester, New Hampshire." 9 Under "Captain Collier House:" • Last sentence will read: "The Collier House was moved in 1957 to its present location on Bald Eagle Drive and has been operating as a restaurant since it opened in 1995." Under "Marco Island Historical Museum:" • First sentence: Add "History" between "Rose" and "Auditorium" • Third sentence: Add the phrase "of the shell mound" following the word "top" • Craig Woodward will provide a different photograph 10 Under "Otter Mound:" • Last sentence will read: "Otter Mound, which is the north half of Block 15, was purchased by Conservation Collier and has been opened as a Count ark." 11 Under "Old Marco Lodge:" • First sentence: Add "Old" between "The" and "Marco Lodge" • First sentence: Remove second "Old" and add "located" before "in" 16 I 1 B 14 September 15, 2010 Page No. Revision (s) 11 Under "Mar -Good Park:" (Cont'd.) • Fourth sentence: Remove "in the basement" after "cistern" Under "Old Railroad Depot:" • Last sentence will read: "The movie, Wind Across the Everglades, was filmed in this location." 12 Under "Old Collier County Courthouse:" • "Courthouse" is one word • Add "the" between "became" and "Everglades City Hall." • Last sentence: Remove the slash after 2005 and add a period Under "Everglades Community Church:" • First sentence will read: "In 1888, before there was a building, George W. Gatewood was the first visiting pastor." • Continue text chronologically. 16 Under "Fakahatchee Island Cemetery:" • To title: Add "The" before "Fakahatchee" • First sentence: Remove extra space between "Fakahatchee" and "Island" and add a period after "families" Under "Chokoloskee Church:" • To title: Add a space between " #27" and "Chokoloskee" Under'W's Island Store:" • Last sentence: After "designation" change "of' to "as" 17 Under "Ted Smallwood's Store:" • Replace photograph Under "Chokoloskee Cemeteries:" • To title: Add "The" following " #30" 18 Under "Episcopalian Cemetery:" • To title: Add "The" following " #32" Under "Brown Cemetery:" • To title: Add "The" following " #35" • Add "Family" before "Cemetery" 19 Under "Pepper Ranch:" • Second sentence: Remove "s" from "acre" and add "which" after "property" and change "surrounding" to "surrounded" • Insert address under title 1611614 September 15, 2010 Page No. Revision s 19 Under "Black Cemetery:" (Cont'd.) • To title: Add "The" before "Black" Under "Sunniland Oil Field:" • Last sentence: The sentence will end after "1965." 20 Under "Tamiami Trail Way Stations:" • Third sentence: (Following "intervals ") change "across" to "along" and add "provide" before "primitive" • Add "still" between "are" and "visible" ( "The following sites ... ") • Change order of Stations: (a) Royal Palm Hammock (b) Weaver's Station (c) Monroe Station 21 Under "Joanie's Blue Crab Cafe:" • Last sentence: Change "is said to be" to "was" Other revisions: • Reposition all offset photographs — ask for assistance from Katie Varano from Paradise Advertising (via Jack Wert) • Check whether or not Captain Collier House is a "designated historic site." • Check date of hurricane — 1926 -- ?? • Are all cemeteries of the pioneer era? If not, do not include. • Insert text for all applicable cemeteries. • On Page 10 (title), add "F." to Captain John Horr's name • Remove parentheses when listing address • Tin City and Naples City Dock were not included because no information was provided. • On Cover, add "See" before "Map" New Brochure deadline: September 27th • All suggested revisions and photographs will be forwarded to Ray Bellows • Mr. Bellows will forward information to all members, including Pam Brown VII. New Business A. New Member Selection Ray Bellows noted: • Elizabeth Perdichizzi and Craig Woodward submitted applications for re- appointment to the Preservation Board • An application was submitted by David Eastlick, Jr. and his qualifications were reviewed by the Members 5 1611814 September 15, 2010 • Staff will send a letter to Mr. Eastlick explaining there were no current vacancies but his application will be kept on file for future reference Richard Taylor moved to accept Craig Woodward's application for re- appointment to the Historic /Archaeological Preservation Board and to forward the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Second by William Dempsey. Motion carried, 4- "Yes " /1— Abstention. Mr. Woodward abstained. Richard Taylor moved to accept Elizabeth Perdichizzi's application for re- appointment to the Historic /Archaeological Preservation Board and to forward the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Second by Patricia Huff. Motion carried, 4- "Yes 71 —Abstention. Ms. Perdichizzi abstained. VIII. Public Comments (None) IX. Board Member Comments /Announcements: • Pam Brown was absent from the May and July meetings. She has changed positions and may resign. She applied under the "Real Estate" category. • Interviews are being conducted to fill Ashley Caserta's position. • Museum of the Everglades o "Sea Food Festival " — first weekend in February, 2011 • Marco Island • Rose History Auditorium will be leased to the Historical Society for $1.00 /yr. • Agreement was reached between the City and County regarding the Museum • Several Traveling Exhibits are planned • "Re- enactors" workshops are scheduled monthly at Rose History Auditorium — history coming alive through re- enactment l OOt" Anniversary of The Killing of Mr. Watson — play will be presented at the Smallwood Store and at County Museum and an exhibit will be displayed at the Museum Ray Bellows asked the Members to review the new directory for accuracy at the conclusion of the meeting.. Next Meeting Date: (To be determined — Ray Bellows will advise the Board via email of possible October date) • Chairman Dempsey is not available on October 20th • Patricia Huff is not available on October 27th 0 16 I 1 g 14 September 15, 2010 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chairman at 10:42 AM. Historic /Archaeological Preservation Board William Dempsey, Chairman \ Z' The Minutes were,pproved by the Board/Committee on as presented '/ _ , or as amended 0303IIT3jp�� JAN 2G 2011 N� Fiala 16 14✓ Hiller November 17, 2010 Henning .. Coyle Coletta gq; ........ MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY HISTORIC /ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION BOARD Naples, Florida, November 17, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Historic /Archaeological Preservation Board, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:15 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room #610, Collier County Growth Management Division — Planning and Regulation Building, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: CHAIRMAN: William Dempsey Vice Chair: Sharon Kenny Pam Brown (Absent) Patricia Huff (Excused) Elizabeth Perdichizzi Richard Taylor Craig Woodward (Excused) ALSO PRESENT: Ray Bellows, Planning Manager — Zoning Services Glenda Smith, Budget Analyst Misc. Comes: Item 0: ccnies to: 161 1 B14 November 17, 2010 I. Call to Order: Chairman William Dempsey called the meeting to order at 9:18 AM. II. Roll Call: The Roll was called and a quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda: Vice Chair Sharon Kenny moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by Elizabeth Perdichizzi. Carried unanimously, 4 -0. IV. Approval of Minutes — September 15, 2010: (Note: A meeting was not held in October.) Elizabeth Perdichizzi moved to approve the Minutes of the September 15th meeting as submitted. Second by Vice Chair Sharon Kenny. Carried unanimously, 4 -0. V. Old Business A. 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan —Draft of Cost Feasibility Plan presented by The Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization ( "MPO ") MPO Representatives: Sue Faulkner — Principal Planner Tamika Seaton — Planning Technician (Note: Copies of a PowerPoint Presentation were distributed to the Members.) Background: • The MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan ( "LRTP ") was approved in 2006 and amended in 2007 • The Plan is updated every five years • The 2035 LRTP Update must be adopted by January 12, 2011 Topics: • Regional approach • Consistency of needs in Lee and Collier Counties • Regional Travel Demand Model used to forecast future travel needs • Project Process • Project Schedule • Components of LRTP • Goals & Objectives (approved on October 16, 2009) • Model and Data Development • Needs (highway and transit) • Cost Feasibility Plan • Smaller Components (Congestion Managements Systems, Freight, Alterative Modes — Pedestrian/Bicycle) • Regional Travel Demand Model o Tool to provide information used to analyze future needs to 2035 for Lee and Collier Counties • Population Statistics 16 I 1 B 14 j November 17, 2010 • Cost Feasibility Plan • Selects projects from Needs List for future funding • Revenues and Costs - in process of finalization • Revenue Sources o Federal and State o County — Impact Fees, Gas Tax, Developer contributions, Grants, Ad Valorem taxes The Members questioned the Representations concerning how the MPO was funded, how funds were distributed, and the Immokalee by -pass project. A copy of the September 2009 edition of the LRTP "Update" (newsletter) was also distributed to the members. It was noted comments from the public may be submitted through the MPO's website: www.mpo- swfl.org. B. Review: History Brochure (Note: Copies of the most recent draft of the Brochure were distributed to the Members.) Sharon Kenny questioned why Tin City and the City Dock were not included while Keewaydin Club was included. Chairman Dempsey stated he had conflicting information concerning the status of the buildings comprising the Keewaydin Club. Consensus: The buildings are no longer standing. The reference should be removed from the Brochure (Item #4) and Tin City and the City Dock will be added. Sharon Kenny volunteered to provide a paragraph concerning Tin City and the City Docks. The appropriateness of the Collier County logo on the back of the Brochure was questioned, i.e., was it correct. Ray Bellows will consult Assistant County Attorney Steve Williams concerning the County's regulations and update the Members at the next meeting. Members were requested to review the Brochure and provide their comments/ suggestions to Ray Bellows who will forward them to Patti Huff. Richard Taylor provided a four -page handout entitled, "An Island History," from the Conservancy of Southwest Florida as an "fyi ". The author was not documented. VI. New Business A. Bula Mission Selection Ray Bellows noted Code Enforcement cited the Mission for structural problems. He stated he spoke with Gary Harrison, Building Official concerning the property. 161 1 B 14 November 17, 2010 Since it is an historic site, Code Enforcement will work with the property owner to address the issues to ensure the safety of the structure. VII. Public Comments (None) VIII. Board Member Comments /Announcements (1) Historic Preservation Policy for Marco Island — Elizabeth Perdichizzi • She appeared before the City of Marco Island City Council concerning a request to build a mausoleum in the cemetery. The cemetery has not been designated as an historic site by either the County of the City of Marco Island. • A Comprehensive Plan stated a decision concerning historic designations was supposed to have been approved by 2005. • The City Council directed members to schedule a meeting with the Historic/ Archeological Preservation Board to discuss creating an Inter -Local Agreement. • The Council requested to review the Inter -Local Agreement prior to its presentation to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. • Ray Bellows confirmed a meeting has been scheduled with members of the Marco Island City County, Assistant County Attorney Steve Williams, and himself and take place in the near future. (2) Old Naples Maps — Vice Chair Sharon Kenny • Copies of the maps produced by the City of Naples were distributed to the Members. • She noted the "Tin City" area is now referred to as "The Historic Waterfront District." • "Crayton Cove" (City dock area) should also be included in the Brochure. • Additional copies of the maps are available at City Hall (free). (3) Membership Status of Pam Brown — Chairman William Dempsey • Ms. Brown will be offered an opportunity to resign due to her lack of attendance. • Suggestion: Recruit a resident from Immokalee to fill the vacant seat • Ray Bellows spoke with Ms. Brown prior to the September meeting. She indicated her new employment would not permit her to attend meetings and stated she would probably resign. • Ms. Brown's term expires on October 1, 2011. • Ray Bellows will consult a member of Staff who works with the Immokalee CRA for recommendations. Elizabeth Perdichizzi moved to approve requesting that Staff contact Pamela Brown concerning her membership status /resignation. Second by Vice Chair Sharon Kenny. Carried unanimously, 4 -0. 16 1 NlembeO7,141 Next Meeting Date: January 19, 2011 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chairman at 10:09 AM. Historic /Archaeological Preservation Board William Dempsey, Chairman The Minutes were approved by the Board /Committee on as presented ✓ , or as amended CRA Governine Board Commissioner Toni Henning Commissioner Donna Fiala Commissioner Jamcs N. Colcua Commissioner Fred W. Coyle Commissioner Georgia Hiller CRA Advisory Board & Statc Enterprise Zone Aeencv Board Michael Facundo Chairman Ana Salazar Carrie Williams Edward "Ski" Olesky Jeffrey Randall Eva Deyo Floyd Crews Kitchell Snow Melissa Martinez lames wall Julio Estremera Robert Halman (Ex Officio) CRA Staff Penny Phillippi Executive Director Bradley Muckel Project Manager Christie Betancourt Administrative Assistant Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency IMMOKALEE CRA i The Place to Call Home 1 MEMORANDUM DATE: December 3, 2010 TO: Sam Tucker, Executive Aide, BCC 1611815 FROM: Christie Betancourt, Administrative Assistant Inunokalee Community Redevelopment Alir ney 1� RE: Agendas, Minutes, and Signed Approval Attached are the Agendas, Minutes, and Signed Approval from November for your conveyance. Thank you. Immokalee Community Re4evelopment Agency 310 Alachua Street, lmmokalee, Ft. 34142 239.252.2313 — 239.252.6725 (FAX) 16 I 1 B 15 � Collier County Communily Redevelopment Agency IMMOKALEE CRA i The Place to Call Home! Certification of Minutes Approval Form Prepared by: Approved by: Fenny Phillippi, Executive Director Michael "Mike" Facundo, Chairman Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency These Minutes for the October 20, 2010, CRA Advisory Board/EZDA Meeting were approved by the CRA Advisory Board/EZDA on November 18, 2010 as presented. * The next joint Advisory Board /EZDA /IMPVC meeting will be held December 15, 2010 at 8:30A.M. at the Career and Service Center located at 750 South 5th Street in Immokalee. ** There is no scheduled IMPVC meeting at this time. Further meetings will be held at 5:30 P.M. at the Career and Service Center located at 750 South 5th Street in Immokalee and will be appropriately noticed and announced in advance of such meetings. All meetings will be publicly noticed in the W. Harmon Turner Building (Building F), posted at the Immokalee Public Library and provided to the County Public Information Department for distribution. Please call Christie Betancourt, Administrative Assistant, at 239 - 252 -2313 for additional information. In accordance with the American with Disabilities Act, persons needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact Christie Betancourt, Administrative Assistant, at least 48 hours before the meeting. The public should be advised that members of the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee and the CRA Advisory Board are also members of the other Boards and Committees, including, but not limited to: EZDA, Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board, Immokalee Fire Commission, and the Collier County Housing Authority; etc. In this regard, matters coming before the IMPVC and the Advisory Board may come before one or more of the referenced Board and Committees from time to time. Coiner County Community Redevelopment Agency. D 91 0119 % 161 1 B IMMOKALEE CRA Fr 0 6 1010 Fiala Enclosure lb i The Place to Call Home! 4 i i I ,w Henning, T MINUTES BY; ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, State Enterprise Zone Development Agency Coyle Coletta October 20, 2010 A. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Dick Rice at 10:30 A.M. B. Roll Call and Announcement of a Quorum. EZDA Members Present: Floyd Crews, Ana Salazar, Richard Rice, Kitchell Snow, Eva Deyo, Julio Estremera, Chief Tom Davis, Ski Olesky, Jeffery Randall, Carrie Williams and Melissa Martinez. EZDA Members Absent /Excused: Robert Halman, Mike Facundo and James Wall. Action: A quorum was announced as being present. Others Present: Daniel Rosario, Steve Hart, Drew Lee, Barb Cachoine, Dottie Cook, Michael Taylor and Lewis Telcy. Staff: Penny Phillippi, Rosemary Dillon, and Christie Betancourt. C. Adoption of A eg_nda. Action: Ms. Deyo made a motion to adopt the Agenda, Mr. Olesky seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. D. Communications. E. Consent Agenda. a. Approval of the Minutes. i. Regular Meeting September 15, 2010 Action: Mr. Randall moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Mr. Rice seconded and the Consent Agenda was approved by unanimous vote. F. Old Business. G. New Business. H. Citizen Comments. I. Next Meeting November 18, 2010 at 8:30 A.M. J. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 A.M. Misc. Corres: Date: b3 K 1 Item * � Z l Copies to: V . I303IId3 O DEC o s 2010 CRA Governine Board Commissioner Donna Fiala Chair Commissioner Tom Henning Commissioner James N. Coletta Commissioner Fred W. Coyle Commissioner Frank Halas CRA Advisory Board Michael Facundo Chairman Edward "Ski" Olesky Jeffrey Randall Robert Halman Ex- officio Julio Estremera Kitchell Snow Floyd Crews Ana Salazar James Wall Eva Deyo Carrie Williams Melissa Martinez CRA staff Penny Phillippi Executive Director 239.252.2310 Bradley Muckel Project Manager 239.252.5549 Christie Betancourt Administrative Assistant 239.252.2313 Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency IMMOKALEE CRA, i The Place to Call Horr e ! 116111l7llYR11VTMff } of the Community Redevelopment Azency Advisory Committee and the Enterprise Zone Development Agency A ends Fiala ``� 4' 1 ter Henning�� Coyle Coletta November 18, 2010 - 8:00 A.M. - 1:00 P.M. Southwest Florida Works (Career and Service Center of Collier County - Immokalee) 750 South 5t` Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 A. Call to Order. B. Roll Call and Announcement of a Quorum. C. Introductions D. Announcements. E. Adoption of A eg nda. F. Communications. a. Public Notices G. Consent Agenda. a. Approval of Minutes. i. CRA Advisory Board Meeting October 20, 2010 (Enclosure 1 a) ii. EZDA Meeting October 20, 2010 (Enclosure lb) b. Fagade Grant Program Monthly Activity Report, October (Enclosure 2) c. EZDA Monthly Report (Enclosure 3) d. Approval of Consultant Monthly Reports and Invoices i. RWA, Inc. 1. October Monthly Activity Report (Enclosure 4a) 2. October Invoice (Enclosure 4b) ii. Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM) 1. October Activity Report and Invoice (Enclosure 5) H. Old Business. 1. New Business. a. Immokalee Open Air Market b. 2011 CRA Operational Plan Workshop- RWA Consulting J. Citizen Comments. K. Next Meeting Date. Regular Meeting December 15, 2010 at 8:30 A.M. L. Adjournment. * The next Advisory Board/EZDA Board meeting will be held December 15, 2010, at 8:30 A.M. at Southwest Florida Works (Career and Service Center) located at 750 South 5h Street in Immokalee. All meetings will be publicly noticed in the W. Harmon Turner Building (Building F), posted at the Immokalee Public Library and provided to the County Public Information Department for distribution. Please contact Christie Betancourt, Administrative Assistant, at 239.252.2313 for additional information. In accordance with the American with Disabilities Act, persons needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact Christie Betancourt at least 48 hours before the meeting. The public should be advised that members of the CRA Advisory Board are also members of other Boards and Committees, including, but not limited to: EZDA, Immokalee Fire Commission, and the Collier County Housing Authority; etc. In this regard, matters coming before the Advisory Board may come before one or more of the referenced Board and Committees from time to time. Misc. Cwes- Date: b3 Item #: -IL l Copies to: Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency IMM©KALEE CRA I The Race to Call Home! MINUTES Immokalee Local Redevelopment Agency October 20, 2010 1611 816 Enclosure la A. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Richard Rice at 8:35 A" V. B. Roll Call and Announcement of a Quorum. Advisory Committee/EZDA Members Present: Floyd Crews, Ana Salazar, Richard Rice, Kitchell Snow, Eva Deyo, Julio Estremera, Chief Tom Davis, Ski Olesky, Jeffery Randall, Carrie Williams and Melissa Martinez. Advisory Committee /EZDA Members Absent/Excused: Robert Halman, Mike Facundo and James Wall. Action: A quorum was announced as being present. Others Present: Daniel Rosario, Steve Hart, Drew Lee, Barb Cachoine, Dottie Cook, Michael Taylor and Lewis Telcy. Staff: Penny Phillippi, Rosemary Dillon, and Christie Betancourt. C. Announcements. Ms. Phillippi announced that she would be out of the office the week of October 25- 29, 2010. D. Adoption of Agenda. Item E. Elections was added to the agenda. Action: Mr. Randall made a motion to adopt the Agenda, Mr. Olesky seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved. E. Elections. Action: Mr. Rice opened the floor for nominations for the office of CRA Advisory Committee Chair. Floyd Crews nominated Carrie Williams who declined; Carrie Williams nominated Jeffery Randall who declined; Eva Deyo nominated Floyd Crews who declined; Kitchell Snow nominated Mike Facundo. Floyd Crews made a motion to close the nominations, Kitchell Snow seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. Action: Mr. Rice opened the floor for nominations for the office of CRA Advisory Committee Vice Chair. Floyd Crews nominated Carrie Williams. Jeffery Randall made a motion to close nominations, Floyd Crews seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. In the absence of the newly elected Chair, Mr. Rice turned the gavel over to Ms. Williams, Vice Chair. F. Communications. Public Notices, flyers for Celebration of Cultures Planning Meeting and news articles were passed around in the Communications Folder. G. Consent Agenda. a. Minutes --CRA Meeting September 15, 2010 b. Fagade Grant Monthly Report- August & September C. RWA September Invoice and Monthly Report d. CDM September Invoice and Monthly Report Action: Mr. Snow made a motion to adopt the Consent Agenda, Ms. Deyo seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved. 1611 816 H. Old Business. a. Master Plan and Interim LDC Update. a. Master Plan and Interim LDC Update. 1. DCA ORC Report Response. Ms. Phillippi reported on the various conference calls and meetings with planning staff, consultants and DCA. The ORC response was reviewed briefly (Enclosure 5a) and the Committee was informed that RWA will attend their November meeting. 2. The revised Adoption Schedule was reviewed. EAC -Dec. 1St, CCPC — Jan. 6, 2011, (Consent — Jan. 20th), BCC — Jan. 27th, 28th. 3. Land Development Code- Due to push to respond to the ORC, RWA has asked if the LDCs can be pushed to the November meeting. The Executive Director consented. b. Stormwater Master Plan Update. Project Manager's Report- Mr. Muckel provided a very detailed review of the various aspects and status to the Stormwater Master Plan. C. Banners and Christmas Decorations — Mr. Muckel informed the Committee that the banners and Christmas Decorations are still in the hands of the Transportation Department waiting approval of wind loads for the poles. d. Code Enforcement Highlights- Kitchell Snow provided an update. e. Marketing Update — Steve Hart apprised the Committee of the on -going activities of the marketing plan. He informed them that the CRA will be heavily marketed in the November issue of the Florida Trend Magazine. 1. New Business. a. Celebration of Cultures Events: Fundraisers — Rosemary Dillon listed the various fundraisers planned for the Celebration of Cultures, Inc., i.e. the Art Auction, the jewelry party, the Bowling event and the on -line contributions. b. Pepper Ranch — Ms. Phillippi called the Committee's attention to the announcement that the Pepper Ranch will now be open to the public with the exception of the weekends of hunting. C. Housing Study Proposal — Ms. Phillippi provided a brief overview of the housing study being proposed by the housing consortium. The cost to the CRA would be $20,000. Action: Eva Deyo made a motion to recommend to the CRA Board that the CRA partner with the Housing Collaborative to fund a 2011 housing condition inventory for the Immokalee Community. Julio Estremera seconded the motion and the motion passed by unanimous vote. Ana Salazar, Ski Olesky and Melissa Martinez recused themselves from the vote as they either serve or are board members in one of the Collaborative organizations. d. ED Evaluation — Ms. Phillippi reviewed the work plan spreadsheet for 2010 and indicated that 90% of the tasks planned had been accomplished by the staff and the Advisory Committee. She asked the Committee to complete their evaluation of her and pass them forward to Christie Betancourt. 2 1611 B 16 e. ISDA Grant — Ms. Phillippi informed the Committee of the opportunity to receive the Agricultural Rural Business Enterprise (REBEG) grant. Vice Chair, Carrie Williams called for a motion to submit for the grant. Action: Dick Rice made a motion that the CRA pursue the RBEG grant and recommend approval to the CRA, Mr. Olesky seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. J. Citizen Comments. K. Regular Meetiniz and Operational Plan Workshop November 18, 2010 — 8:30 to 1:00 L. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 AM. 3 t V E iD ED 0 3 2011 Goard Ci'f i.,,oul,tj L ;ominissioncrn 1 17 - 1-lelt[i'i ?, Coyl 1: ca 4 ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE/RESCUE ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 11, 2010 ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE STATION ATTENDEES: Emilio Rodriguez, Fire Chief Kirk Colvin, Chairman Ted Decker, Advisory Board Member Joe Langkawel, Advisory Board Member Jim Gault, Advisory Board Member, by telephone Barbara Shea, Minutes Preparer I. CALL TO ORDER Kirk Colvin opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. II. OLD BUSINESS A. Chief's Report. B. August 2010 Advisory Board Meeting Minutes. 1. Copy of Minutes distributed. 2. Motion to approve August 2010 Minutes by Joe Langkawel. a. Motion seconded by Ted Decker. b. Motion carried unanimously. c. Minutes signed off by Chairman Colvin. C. ICFD Dock Project. 1. All required permits have been obtained. 2. The Purchasing Dept. will begin the bidding process shortly. D. Results of Dennis Nolan Consulting departmental interviews. 1. Interviews included several employees of ICFD and EMS. 2. Dennis Nolan provided a synopsis of his interviews to Mr. Summers & HR. 3. Dennis Nolan could not collaborate or prove any allegations. 4. Chief Rodriguez's annual evaluation was negatively impacted by this issue. 5. An anger management training class was attended by all ICFD employees. 6. ICFD Board Members would like to meet with Mr. SuJ eA*f S11 /08/10 a. Discussion to include functions of the ICFD Adory Board. b. Discussion to include what steps will follow these l Item #: IIAT l g-� C C pic, S �. 1611 B17 E. Mutual Aid to Marco Island. 1. The excessive false alarm calls to Marco need to be reduced. 2. Chief Rodriguez met with Chief Murphy & Chief Byrne of Marco Island. 3. Options will be provided to Mr. Ochs & Mr. Summers within 30 days. III. NEW BUSINESS A. Fire district consolidation straw ballot. 1. Fire Service Steering Committee has issued an opposition statement. 2. FSSC is holding a meeting on 10/14/10 for further discussion. B. Collier County American Red Cross Charity Event on 11 /10 /10. 1. Event to be held at 5 p.m. at the Hilton Naples Ballroom. 2. Proceeds to benefit "Stockings for the Troops" & the local Red Cross. C. The next ICFD Advisory Board meeting will be held Nov 08, 2010. IV. ADJOURNMENT A. Motion to adjourn the meeting by Kirk Colvin at 7:10 p.m. 1. Motion seconded by Ted Decker. 2. Motion carried unanimously. Z1/ Approve& —, r Date: I �Co1 I'O g� JAN 1 Fiala 1 Hiller Henning Coyle Coletta r� ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE/RESCUE ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 8, 2010 ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE STATION ATTENDEES: Emilio Rodriguez, Fire Chief Kirk Colvin, Chairman Ted Decker, Advisory Board Member Joe Langkawel, Advisory Board Member Jim Gault, Advisory Board Member Kevin Walsh, Advisory Board Member Dan Summers, BES Director Barbara Shea, Minutes Preparer 1. CALL TO ORDER Kirk Colvin opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. II. OLD BUSINESS A. Chief's Report. B. October 2010 Advisory Board Meeting Minutes. 1. Copy of Minutes distributed. 2. Motion to approve August 2010 Minutes by Ted Decker. a. Motion seconded by Joe Langkawel. b. Motion carried unanimously. c. Minutes signed off by Chairman Colvin. C. ICFD Dock Project. 1. Dock project is currently "out for bid" by Collier County. 2. Vendors have until 11/12/10 to submit bids. D. Mutual Aid to Marco Island. 1. Marco Fire may open a second fire station on Elkam Circle. 2. The plan consists of opening a closed existing facility. 3. Marco Fire hopes to open the second station prior to 12/01/10. Mist. Cares: Deb: Item #: Gz cries to: 1611 817 III. NEW BUSINESS A. Question and Answer session with BES Director Dan Summers. 1. Discussion of the role of the ICFD Advisory Board. a. Fire Chief submits an Annual Work Plan to Mr. Summers. b. Fire Chief vets department issues to the Advisory Bd. Members. c. ICFD Board Members can contact Mr. Summers at any time. d. Board Members must follow the chain of command. 1. The ICFD Advisory Board reports to the Fire Chief 2. The ICFD Fire Chief reports to the BES Director. 3. The BES Director reports to the County Manager. 2. Discussion of ICFD budget issues during the annual budget process. a. No changes can be made to HR, Fleet, or Facilities cost allocations. b. Board budget guidance must be followed by all county depts. c. Any ICFD budget issues can be vetted directly with Mr. Summers. 3. Discussion of IT cost allocation to ICFD. a. All county departments are frustrated by their IT costs. b. The County is looking at ways to reduce IT costs in 2012. 4. Discussion of the possibility of a future countywide fire district merger. a. 2010 Straw ballot indicates the voters favor consolidation. b. Consolidation of Fire & EMS would provide benefits. 1. End differences of opinion on fire code enforcement. 2. Opportunities for efficiencies. c. Consolidation of Fire & EMS has many challenges. 1. Differences in salaries & retirement participation. 2. Departments have different union memberships. 5. Discussion of FYI Property Values. a. Mr. Summers estimates an additional five percent decline. b. An end to declining property values may be two years out. 6. Discussion of the Adv. Board's annual evaluation of the Fire Chief. a. Mr. Summers appreciates the completion of this evaluation. b. Mr. Summers welcomes the continuation of these evaluations. 7. Discussion of recent ICFD disciplinary actions. a. Much was learned from the investigations. b. Corrective action plans are ninety percent complete. c. Mr. Summers will have a review with HR within 30 days. d. HR has completed its due diligence on this incident. e. The rumor mill has been very active. 8. Discussion of the Fire Steering Committee. a. Joe Langkawel attends most of the meetings. b. The Committee has no official charter. c. The Committee has no official guidance for "sunshine." 9. Mr. Summers welcomes open communication with the ICFD Board. B. Steering Committee Report by Joe Langkawel. 1. The next Steering Committee meeting will be on Nov. 18. 2. Joe would like to pass on ideas for items to work on in 2011. 1614 B17 C. 3 ICFD Advisory Board member terms expire in December 2010. 1. Members Decker, Langkawel & Walsh have expiring terms. 2. Members Decker, Langkawel & Walsh will reapply for additional terms. D. The next ICFD Advisory Board meeting will be held Jan. 10, 2011. IV. ADJOURNMENT A. Motion to adjourn the meeting by Ted Decker at 7:35 p.m. 1. Motion seconded by Jim Gault. 2. Motion carried unanimously. Approved: Date: 4Z/ 161. 11 %1 Coyle Ittl GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION MSTJef ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, Fl 34104 R EC E. D October 21, 2010 DEC Q f' 010 AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: September 16, 2010 V. Budget Report — Gloria Herrera VI. Landscape Maintenance Report — CLM VII. Landscape Architect's Report — McGee & Associates A. Maintenance Report B. Reuse Mixing Chamber —Warren Street C. Doral Bridge Project D. Lighting Study — Pebble Beach VIII. Transportation Operations Report- Darryl Richard A. Project Manager's Report B. Review of the To Do List IX. Housekeeping Item X. Committee Reports XI. Old Business XII. New Business XIII. Public Comments XIV. Adjournment The next meeting is November 18, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. Misc CWM: Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenanc 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Date: 631 Naples, FL 34104 - Item $J LIE l Copies to: 161. B18\-", Ittl GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FI 34104 September 16, 2010 Minutes I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Bob Slebodnik at 4:00 P.M. II. Attendance: Members: Robert Slebodnik, Tony Branco, Kathleen Dammert, David Larson (Excused), Jennifer Tanner County: Darryl Richard - Project Manager, Michelle Arnold -ATM Director, Pam Lulich- Landscape Operations Manager Others: Mike McGee -McGee & Associates, Jim Fritchey -CLM, Darlene Lafferty-Juristaff III. Approval of Agenda Add: Xll. B. Advisory Committee Appointment (3 Applicants) Kathleen Dammert moved to approve the agenda as amended. Second by Jennifer Tanner. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. IV. Approval of Minutes: August 19, 2010 The Committee requested to add the following information to the Minutes: Pg 5, Vll. D, Evaluation Criteria (bullet 4) should read. - Cosmopolis Lamp "(70 input watts)"- $1,587.75 per year - LED "(75.6 input watts)" - $1,711.85 per year Kathleen Dammert moved to approve the August 19, 2010 minutes as amended Second by Jennifer Tanner. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. V. Budget Report - Gloria Herrera Darryl Richard reviewed the Final FY10 Budget Report as follows: • Total Revenue $236,006.04 (collected) • Operating Expense Open P.O.s $30,389.98 • Reserves Insurance Claims $266,600.00 • FY11 Budget Report format will change for the following - The Work Order /Bid will be removed - A description on Services provided will be included 16 111"1 g18 VI. Landscape Maintenance Report - CLM Jim Fritchey reported the following: • St. Andrews Tree trimming will be conducted on 9/17/10 • Fungicide and Insecticide Treatments are complete • Torpedo Grass treatments is scheduled on 9/17/10 • Additional Root Tissue samples (Xanadu) were sent to the lab - Anticipate the Tissue sample test results next week • (3) Trees are on order - (2) Tabebuia Trees - (1) Holly Tree Robert Slebodnik questioned if maintaining Bougainvillea at a lower height will affect the flowering of the Plant. Jim Fritchey responded affirmatively. Discussion ensued on site line issues by maintaining the Bougainvillea at a higher level. Mike McGee recommended postponing any change to the Bougainvillea until after season to determine if color is affected by maintaining at a lower height. VII. Landscape Architect's Report - McGee & Associates A. Maintenance Report Mike McGee reviewed the following items: (See attached) • Expressed concern with the High level of Weeds • CLM Crew is onsite actively working to address - High Grass behind the Podocarpus Hedge (Dora) Circle) - Trim Lantana - Pulling Weeds around the Bus Stop - Weeding in the Medians • McGee and Associates Monthly Maintenance Report will be submitted to Staff electronically • Staff will distribute the Monthly Report to the Committee B. Reuse Mixing Chamber - Warren Street Lely MSTU Irrigation Reuse Water Source Renovation Bid Tabulation (ITB 10- 5482R) was distributed and reviewed. (See attached) Mike McGee recommended awarding the Bid to Hannula as they were the lowest qualified Bidder. Noted the Automatic Filter cost was removed from the Bid. Darryl Richard reported Hannula Bid amount is $54,480.95 for the Pumping Station and Mixing Chamber. Robert Slebodnik moved to accept the Bid for the Mixing Chamber to Hannula in the amount of $54,480.95. Second by Kathleen Dammer . Motion carried unanimously 4-0. 16I�lB18 C. Doral Bridge Project Mike McGee reported no physical activity was observed on the job site. Darryl Richard responded with the following: • The LASIP Project effected the hydrology in the Community - The Contractor was issued a partial Stop Work Order due to flooding • Asphalt work ( LASIP) must be completed prior to moving forward to Bid on the Doral Bridge Project Mike McGee suggested obtaining written approval from the Contractor ( LASIP) to allow access to the (Dora) Bridge) Project Site. D. Lighting Study - Pebble Beach Mike McGee requested Committee comments on the Study. A Power Point Presentation for the Civic Association meeting (in February) will be prepared after Committee comments are received. Tony Branco suggested contacting Light Manufacturers to determine if new Products Lines will be introduced in 2011. VIII. Transportation Operations Report - Darryl Richard reviewed the following reports: (See attachments) A. Project Managers Report (L -47) Installation of Mixing Chamber • Executive Summary will be presented for BCC approval September 28, 2010 • Upon completion the Final Executive Summary will be distributed to the Committee B. Review of the To Do List Item 3 - Sidewalks on US41 at St. Andrews - ADA Compliance Michelle Arnold reported Commissioner Fiala is inquiring with FDOT on the Sidewalk ADA non - compliance issue. Item 4 - Electrical Lighting Related Darryl Richard noted Bentley Electric is under Contract. Mike McGee suggested the following to correct the bright lighting on Doral Circle: • Install Cosmopolis into the (2) Double Fixtures • Replace Ballast and Reflectors The Committee and Staff concurred with the suggestion to correct the Lighting issue on Doral. 161111 B18 IX. Housekeeping Item -None X. Committee Reports -None XI. Old Business -None XII. New Business A. Condolences — Bob Cole Robert Slebodnik expressed condolences on the passing of Bob Cole on September 11, 2010. Darryl Richard remarked on the outstanding job by Mr. Cole as a Lely Golf Estates Beautification MSTU Committee Member Jennifer Tanner sent a flower arrangement from Lely Golf Estates MSTU (paid by the Civic Association.) Robert Slebodnik announced donations may be sent to: ALS Association 27001 Agoura Rd. Suite 250 Calabasas Hills, CA 91301 -5104 Discussion took place and a few noteworthy details about Mr. Cole were shared: • Mr. Cole served in WWII as a B25 Pilot in the South Pacific • He was a Volunteer for Meals on Wheels for numerous years • And he was the Father of 5 B. Advisory Committee Appointment (3 Applicants) Robert Slebodnik reviewed applications for the Committee vacancy. Darryl Richard stated an invitation to attend the meeting was sent to Mr. Powers. Jennifer Tanner moved to recommend (to the Board of County Commissioner for approval) the reappointment of Kathleen Dammert. Second by Tony Branco. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. Jennifer Tanner moved to recommend (to the Board of County Commissioners for approval) the reappointment of Robert Slebodnik present Chairman. Second by Kathleen Dammert. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. XIII. Public Comments -None El 161 1 '� There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 4:55 P.M. Lely Golf Estates Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee Y These minutes approved by the Committee on as presented or amended The next meeting is October 21, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance CC Transportation Building 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 5 _ 1 B A A A —<D CO C1W W W -NW W G1 W NNNN NNNN�N-+�+ +- W "— I A W N +OtO OOV 01N AWN +OlO OD V 01 NA W N 01000 V 9;; AG)N�000 4MM-0, W N+ -4cncmi 110 DOODD�EmOMOOmn, G�c�S mDm�Zp��8D�x�DD<m�GTm� D m m m z zz —� �— Dmzxr�ac�n =° cmm-� OG7 - �m nm z�- �nz5'�m m 55< Dz �Ixzzm x M<<<,,, "rO�xNmmDmzzx�°D��x nn mr�o��TW�yU) 0< aC /) -n i-im0 mZOmCn� °�G7L7 mxzD��D� mmmmmmmmmzcn�x<< v�mmX�A� Og m�C 'nz —OM zCnm�.00T� C)�m�DD G) OOC')DD��cizm�x�nm�zD cn m °�zm000<W- -A '0 TO m ��Ozz �XDmC��m °z mm mzwmiZ�xDD��QC) O2o 1 Cl)0 z�G)mzCCoCC)D��2m m mm 05mCmnxm0 <00��° mOm?KK c� c)0 Z mCl) — mGZ) z K xm cm— OO�D— m�D� -Di z0 OD M Mm cO�00 D r ADC W mZOX zn,�XX C)m rCn -0 D n U) zm r Zm D °� m nn nx r m O m m cDFm �° r- -< 0 D Z K m D m C) D Co -i ° D n -< O H 4A b> fn tf) fA 4161 69 ,69 fA to 49 fn to to to to fH to to fA fo to V 61 to fA 40) tf) fo fn fA 69 fA WO W 01N A_ O Nm J N N NA 00 A Cmil Cn m Cn _ OQ�N - (OD p_ W O W N N0z 00 O- 00 O CI C110 O O N m 00 A O� O Cn '� mtow t O A 00 O O O a 00 0 O a O 00 O 000 000000 000 J 0000 O O W tit 0 0 0 00 O O 00 O 000 000000 A 0. P 001 O O O"" t0 O O O 00 O O 00 O 000 000000()1000 A 0(00 c O O (J7 0 0 0 CD 00 0 O a O 00 O 000 00000007000 0 CY 001 O c O O !A fA Efl En ffl En ffl fA Eo f9 EA 4o En 69 EA EA EA 69 fn ffl EA fo to f-n Eo EA EA fA Eo Efl En En n Ma "m Wr e m A O O W N O W N O O O O O O 00 O O O W N Cn _ N CnW W Nom OrD[rr- r-050Prmm=7x E 0 3 DDDD0 c(0) aC° 63� �Nm(n O (Om CnsJO 's + +-�-� AA A AAAAA AA Cn CD NOAO O (00 (nO W O J j A tON 01 40 (0' OO cn cn M 0 0 C) C) O 00 00 0 0000000 V NOAO O 000 CONGO NNNQOpp(�(N '� '�NNNNN NN O cn 0Cnr 0 m -0 G n n n 0 0 (D CD .L7 .0 (n W m o 0 0 O N O O W O Cn O Cn O R A OAO �Nm jNN V 0)A OONJ co V -4 -4 j 00 -4 OONO 000 A ACnO CD N C =3 y 0 0 0 Z N to 69 to fA EA fn to to to to to f9 fo to fo fA tn M tn to 64 .69 64 69.6n fA V7 fn H O N �1 N (D N Q 'W6 W= 77 Z W W N W A m fD O (O CD CD (D W, O >CD W CL j CD :� 3 m� O (i CnCD =a) CD 0 C O W X O 3 (D N 1 n O N 3 v WG (A J ?c00 d n n. � 1 N W N C CD <N G m m m O T N W (a n - fn fn fA to to to to fn f-n fo to to fo to fn EA EA to to to to 1.0 to to to to 69 69 l (D A A N A N m Oo�m Jm(n AOmN _ CC( co N O G1 Cn 01 OCn Nm 0 J00-+0 W (n CO W 4 O i J 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O m 0 0 0 0 0 00 O m 0 0 0 C J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O m O O C 0 0 0 0 0 -4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O CO O 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,9 0 0 0 0 0 '90,9S s O C (O OHO W O� O N NCnW WN WN NOt CO 0700AAm -�C0 �Cn0070 W O 7 D W DO A K g K K m OOA: �0 A 0-N 0(O NOO Cn0 00 m —NA 200 NOO (DO � B Nd K N O_m O p p 0 0 o W to !n O OOAOCn ON O W0000 Cn0 0 0 0 0 0 m O N 4000040 D CD CD —W CD W W 4. N N to (n (D fD lD W fD 0 W ° 5i0 90 Si0 90 go (� 0 N N N N N lG (/Di n +� m(nmw(n CD r C1 W 0 r�M.'< 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 c o W CD N 000 A (� (D (D 7 7 C ;(7 � (mil � � O y m �' 0 = O O J CO A 0 co m m y � CD 3 3 CD - m ���-n OrD[rr- r-050Prmm=7x E 0 3 DDDD0 c(0) aC° 63� j(p + +-�-� AA A AAAAA AA Cn CD O-�Am m(nAAAAA(n CnCntnCn(n(n(n CI Ln j A tON 01 40 (0' OO cn cn M 0 0 C) C) O 00 00 0 0000000 V N r(D W NNNQOpp(�(N '� '�NNNNN NN O cn 0Cnr 0 m -0 G n n n 0 0 (D CD .L7 .0 (n W m o 0 N C) C) N NNC)ik 6 N�� A OAO �Nm jNN V 0)A OONJ co V -4 -4 j 00 -4 t0 CA C11 00) W 00 (C) c) (0 0 w 0 0 0 m 0 CnN 01 JmWOOD OD m O om -n a C r 'vim N � ch O_ C 0 ���-n OrD[rr- r-050Prmm=7x E 0 3 DDDD0 c(0) aC° 63� moo CO O W c (0@p W C (n Cn in (n 7 0) (� — M T (D ('p y � D a1 (D CD c CD 0) � Q. `2 C 0 < Qo CQ -02.2.9.2 >>> 21212, cn 0Cnr 0 m -0 G n n n 0 0 (D CD .L7 .0 (n W m o 0 6 N�� - �. � N N N y (n ? cn n� N C < 0 W W cc N C =3 y 0 0 0 Z N tT N (D (D (Q d X CD N CD N C O N �1 ID X `G N N (D N Q 'W6 W= 77 Z W W N t0 O w°o� CD C C �'CDM fD O (O CD CD (D W, O >CD W CL j CD :� 3 m� O (i CnCD =a) CD 0 C O W X O 3 (D N 1 n O N 3 v WG (A W d n n. � 1 N W N C CD <N G N T N W (a n - CD 7 (D (D W p X CD i 0 J W N N Co U O G to fA Efl fo to to in to to Ee En fn fn to fA to Efl to to En T N N (D (O OHO W O� O N NCnW WN WN NOt CO 0700AAm -�C0 �Cn0070 W O 7 D W DO A OOA: �0 A 0-N 0(O NOO Cn0 00 m —NA 200 NOO (DO � B to !n O OOAOCn ON O W0000 Cn0 0 0 0 0 0 m O N 4000040 fA to fA fA to to to to f.9 to to fA fA to to 16 9,69 to N 0 N y C C1 W m W � A CO ad • � (mil � � O O J CO A 0 co m m m O om -n a C r 'vim N � ch O_ C 0 1611 ' B 18 Report for Lely MSTU Meeting date: October 21, 2010 Lely MSTU Project Status (L -49) ACTIVE — Lighting Study (Pebble Beach pilot study for lighting options) 08- 19 -10: McGee to provide additional detail related to `on going operational cost' associated with lighting installation. 10- 21 -10: Concept to be presented to HOA at annual meeting. (L -48) ACTIVE — Modifications to Doral Circle Bridge (Committee Request for `lighting on bridge') 08- 19 -10: McGee to provide 90 -100% plans for final Committee review /approval prior to bidding. 10- 21 -10: Plans have been submitted for ROW Permit review. FDOT review /approval is required for this project. (L -47) ACTIVE — Installation of Mixing Chamber 09- 28 -10: BCC approved award to Hannula for Bid #10- 5482R- "Lely MSTU Irrigation Reuse Water Source Renovation (MIXING CHAMBER PROJECT 10- 21 -10: Hannula request 11 -2 -10 `pre- construction meeting' for project coordination. Project to begin week of Nov. 2, 2010. (L -34) - ACTIVE - On Going — Ongoing Maintenance Contract: Commercial Land Maintenance; 7- 27 -09: Commercial Land Maintenance has trimmed all shrubs to required specification of "Cut to 18 inches and maintain at 24 inches "; Staff will inspect the project on a `weekly basis'; Contractor is to provide service reports within 12 hours of completion of any contract service (ref: notification originally sent on 6 -30 -09 to CLM via email) (L -45) ACTIVE — On Going - McGee Annual LA Services — Landscape Architectural Services 10- 21 -10: McGee & Associates under ongoing contract per Committee approval. ib ti 8 is October 21, 2010 Meeting Lely MSTU "To Do List" 1. Subrogation Recovery: a. Accident 859; damage amount: $515.00; Median #8 on St. Andrews Status: Landscape Repair Completed (CLM Estimate E1002519); No Traffic Accident report found to match damage b. Accident # 947; Found on 01 -15 -10 on Forest Hills Blvd. Status: Estimate for $607.00 from Commercial Land approved for repairs. 2. Sidewalks on US 41 at St. Andrews — ADA Compliance: Status: Project has been brought to attention of FDOT for funding. (see attached email dated Oct. 15, 2010 regarding Project) CLM: have A & L Labratoris do analysis on Xanadu at Augusta and Forest Hill. Existing plants have some yellowing. Status: CLM has sent sample to A & L Labs; A & L Labs reported that there is a `fungus' affecting the Xanadu plants. Plants have been treated with fungicide to remedy the problem. 4. Electrical Lighting Related: Find out what type of `lower' wattage bulb is available for Doral Circle. Residents are complaining that `the lights are too bright' Status: Lumec is to provide pricing for the `Cosmos' type fixture which is less bright than the current one installed. 161 X818 Richardliarryl Subject: FW: RM 2474 Fiala /RE: U.S.41 & St. Andrews Blvd. From: ChesneyBarbara Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 4:33 PM To: fiala_d Cc: Feder—N; arnold_m; Cann, Stan; Vlietlohn; KhawajaAnthony; AhmadJay; LynchDiane; Bathon_d Subject: FW: RM 2474 Fiala /RE: U.S.41 & St. Andrews Blvd. Good Afternoon, In -House Design staff will be developing a design to improve the pedestrian crossing on St. Andrews Boulevard at US 41. Once the design is complete, the plans must be approved through FOOT since they have jurisdiction on this right -of -way. We anticipate 2 -3 months to get the work designed and permitted. Once that is done, construction should be rather quick. Please note that US 41 is under MOT jurisdiction. We will refer the ADA and the type of pavement surface (Asphalt Vs. Concrete) issues to FOOT for response. On behalf of Jay Ahmad, Director of Transportation Engineering Jecika Cook for Barbara Chesney From: fiala_d To: Feder _N; arnold_m Cc: 'stan.cann @dot.state.fl.us' <stan.cann @dot.state.fl.us >; 'rsiebodnik @aol.com' <rslebodnik @aol.com >; 'Bob Murray' <bobsails @embarqmail.com >; 'Charlie Cortright' <sircharl @aol.com >; 'Father Tim Navin' <frnavin @earthlink.net >; 'Hal Ousley' < housley9@comcast. net>; 'Jack Mischung' <wb4zei @comcast.net >; 'Karen Homiak' <ARWKJH @aol.com >; 'Ken Drum' <kjdrum @embargmail.com >; 'Patrick Philbin' <hphilbin @comcast.net >; 'Robert Fisher' <RDF1919 @yahoo.com >; 'Ron Cummings' <ronsuzy @gmail.com >; 'Sam Platt' <samplatt07 @comcast.net >; Tom Cannon' <thomascl70 @aol.com> Sent: Tue Oct 05 17:18:112010 Subject: U.S.41 & St. Andrews Blvd. Norman and Michelle, You have received quite a few complaints regarding the crossing at this intersection, as 1 have, and now I have been contacted by Bob Slebodnik from the HOA who informed me that this unsafe intersection is a violation of the handicap laws, it is a safety issue and there are funds budgeted within the safety transportation funds to correct this violation. The sidewalk goes from asphalt to cement, but by law it must contain a surface that people with a vision problem can feel is different and feel the difference. He advised, and I went out and looked, that the area has been dug up repeatedly for utilities and repairs, etc., and it looks "hacked up ", as he put it. He said the county employees even admitted it is a safety problem. The area is about 20 ft by about 6 ft. I've already mentioned to Stan that U.S. 41E has an asphalt sidewalk rather than cement like most other parts of Collier County, and this only adds to the dilemma. When can we expect this intersection to be upgraded and improved? Donna Fiala 4 eo as o v�qp.q. V m 2) ; U) co - aCD o -n ,o r .� -n x °X CO D K) N W z VP O -n O O (A a: m W r' a� �F >E D O CD CDCD C) C� CD CL fl- w+ W FL CD G1 D�O — Vim! ;o v o aim o oo o 0 cn D 2)� w D Q. N W C N O D Z C m D �o I I CD m ADD �� C rt CD m �(�D I -n I I I D n v� m Q O ° CD '0 3 O O 0 I (A 7 rr c�D (D C17 3 o C I 3" I I I I I I m L I I I I I (D fv C7 Q)() n c m m '-' O v< v n 7 m w n< O m 7 - -- . m w n O— o 7 m O CD 0 �, m — CD CD ° CD CD O =• -0 CD < m — m �. O X< :5. as Q CD I m ��'MCDCD °'X(in. o 0 vovQV D'C,0�nm0 W N CD CD CD x N _.� �' O C7 m (t� Q m D v m O Q) ° 7 n sy ID m M o m CD v s (Q (n _0 C2 C c 0 o 0 * N — m (n -a C1 C c CD 0) w C o(z °m Q w w v vcr D O ' m 0 m y O o 0 �?.o 3(n m=r o Duo 3 z o a r° c Dm Cz m 0 m a c < °'� �• m �_ 0QCn� (D �•L m m- m N -. (° < o 0 onmi ago 70 °Q (D ��3(ll��� :3 �o acne' A r v Q -,�' CCDD C_ 3� Ci o� CD O =' c (D -0 C O 0�� O (1 (n C (n O O a (n 3 CD om= 0 3� =r o 3 �' 3m-'m -p C C"D c � -0" 3 m 2° CD m m (n (n '-. _ cr cn m CD v rm. = am ° (n Q Q v m ° m ° Q 0 Z c m 0, 0 0 0(n 0 o =3 D v cc � (ll : fi CD r. � - m = m< a .. �-0 ., aO O FD m � C O � C? Cz z N o cn =r =3 ° cn 3 �' (a H O N m O T C) m � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I � C) CD C m °0 CD G1 D�O — cn v --I -n z -2 c) aO•0 CD -1 , O E3 O CD .. O l N' 5. O m CD (n" CD Q o -i 0 n C o (n a � � a CD CD Cn CD 0 s� m o S) (n o- cn CD 0 CD 0 CD = (n v O CD (n (s o (D o v n (n CD �. CD :3 m 0 'o C p m Z cn • m C O 0_ 5• m z Q Cl) CD n O_ 1 N c CD � CD v 0' CD E m I 0 c� 0 CD p- 161 1 ;o 0 0,0 rl"v M 0 0 0 " -a = = O n O• O - N cD w m d = — 0 ,ny C7 .+• vr►iy �� 'O N CD � m °O r o Wpm C) CD C m °0 CD G1 D�O — cn v --I -n v o aim o oo o 0 cn �-— CD D o�v�m p I n > Cl) I I CD 3� ADD vo C rt CD I 0 CD I -n I I I D n I I I I I I Q O ° 0 z 3 O CD I (A 7 rr O o C 00 r �c v = (n 0X 0 o m (n (n O X ;u 0- CD CD Z3 COD CD m (D 3 O CU c O iu < < �7 3 n O n CD 0 =rD CD 0 z O o CD (D 3 su CD (n v ^L+-. ^<W W Q ro (D n n (D A G Fj CD • 0 (D I iii I (D I I m I I I I I =3 I I CD I I CD I I I 0 I I I 0 I I I I I I I I ii' I I I I I I Q rt 1 I I I rt rt I ° 7 rr O o % I "S I I O I I I I L I I I I I CD _ IL I_ ^L+-. ^<W W Q ro (D n n (D A G Fj CD • 0 0 o 3 M(D rt rt rt rt � 7 rr c o e o e L .;r w ELI I rimer`. � 1 ^L+-. ^<W W Q ro (D n n (D A G Fj CD • n 0 3 3 0 rt 3 0 O 1611" B'l 8� I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t i I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I i I f I I I I I I I I m n 0 3 3 (D rt 3 0 ca I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I n 0 3 3 rP a rt 3 0 V MOM= N ti O n 2) y CD (D _ CD r n C ((D n � N N M-4 C c1 C? =r n r c C N fy N O 0999939'0 a) n �. (a (D C. -1 (D C. CD C. -4M(A CD C. (D C. C C. ,0 m a (D CD W C. < � CD a 7 W o sv n � Q, X CD ggn (D C. CD C. A� C W 9999999 (D (D m (0 0 sy CO CD m (D (D (D m O 0 � 0 v m O Cr- � 0 O � � � 7 �l p C CD CD CAD ' - 0 -„ 0 CD CD @ 0 (�D c � N Cv o C-o (D ° 0 0 0 •0 (D � m o v(D m fn °' o m (n Dv cm oLCD c Cn v a) o 0 O < Dnc) C L v — CD v C 3 0 0 O CD o(D�n'� ��CDc'- c(D CD (0 cD '<M c(D90CDDo (D CD p n�(n 3�sv3���Q o � f 0.0 0 •�m�C1C_d m-�o c (D O 0 N O 0 c CD CD C C C_ C (D C 0 CD w CD O O �. C1 < c CD `G n O {y C: CD w (D O �-« Sv C2 c C - CD O C1 @ N CD " 0 [D CD 0 CAD � =r.0 0 O ill O _ Q C O o= C 7' -s v O 0 N Q (� 2) �' CL 0 C N v 0 L O 0 7 C1 3 N �. ' W -n O O 0 (C� O a (a = CD cn (D (D 0 p C- �. 7 (D 0 CD 0 i7 ((D c Q O O 0 0- O 0 3 �. 3 � Z Q Q a �_ Sv (7 CAD 17 C C ! (n CD (D CD = 3 CD C = -: O 0' C _„ CD O O C. CD c CD 0 ( Q 7 — CD cc CD CD 0 O 0) CCDD -, O CD :3 -n cc O � C .. C C1 (D Cb Q O C (C -i Cll O S O 0 C2 CD (,p W CD <, 0 N 7' ? �. (n O Vi v 7 0 CD '-. (n .< 7 0 -n + O O - C 0 p) (n O C 0 < C CD m �. + O fv O CD C CQ to CD X� �' c� CAD r- 0 `-' C;D Q (On S 0 - N CD 0 CD O O O0 CD O_ '00 N 3 (-`n C- (_n j 0 to Q 7 v 0 O C Q7 , w CD C C CD Q 0 `< CD M v CD CCD O (D M O . F C2 fn = Sy 0 C C ._. I] v CD 0-0 — C () (n C C 0 (C �- (C 0 _ -i lD __ S O C 'O C 7 C ^� CD C2 7 3 n 0 CD C Cy cr 0 (D . r (C fn `� IT x 0 CD - sv 3 3 :' (D -� CD v CD -� c CD -� o cL �, �, o m o - ( o MO C rn Q c m o 0 0 CD (n w Oam' O( cC ° � (n L< CD o = X � v o �� v mo v `-' fl cr m , o 17 n. c Q =r m o m CD a �' o a) CD CD 07 Q(D a o v rn Q a 0. < CD (D a �' c I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t i I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I i I f I I I I I I I I m n 0 3 3 (D rt 3 0 ca I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I n 0 3 3 rP a rt 3 0 V 14, "1 i I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I C. N W GL 60 9 y X m u m 0 w w -ip -- ° r - XXmm� mcnm ���0 C_ 0 =-- vi c (D 0 N� CD -0 - 3 C CQ m m c c cQ n O ;3 CD O 3c p Q (D 3 CD (D CD (n CD 7 X� _ri W 0 cn�33���, O. CD �' O O CD (D j N• O S O S Op O �3 CD O p Cj p cn O v p XO 0(o N C<D 'p C1 C C2 CD C<D CCDD CD � C<D �-« CD C— Q 0 C iy N Cb c Q ZT �. 2 Q O v O• CD O(n 7 n �� v O S O ?_ N COD Op CD j O < C7 < 3 C c cQ C° _ Q Q O �' CD O Q CD O< (D _ `< 0 O -, C1 (n _ O 00 j S CD CD COn O 0 0 0 C2 o Q� v O ° o Q Q O TI ° Q� " sll CD CD Qom= < (D o Q �3 _. C O O j O O 7(n Cv n �, 7 Q (n CD fl? L2 7 6 CAD Z3 CCDD p a) 7 S v Q ill X S 0 0 7" C O= p Q —C1 -� O -O 7 07 5' S° =CD v'v • 0 � 3 °!° CD O O cr </� O 3 O CD cc -� S -0(n O Cj �< I S CS ( O C-00 N (n " _Q- w CD {y -n CD (n O- cn O CD O C L O Q 0 7 7 0 .O-n O - 0 S -O—n .� zr 0 cn C_ �_ �' CS O 7 77 a) O �' 0 0 N o S p� c) O O � .�. O_ O N -(0 3• CD 0' S O X cn tS O ,-« O c0 N 0 CD co °- N S" CD D C L - C2 o CD O cn co Cp Oo n ° ° •� m v m cn 3 CD CD CD w S 3 m So o �,�.. m : OL .ccnn o � �. N-0 v °c a— 0 S o �' m v CD CD 4_. cn cn 0 CD S- v cn ° ° c° - p < o Q Q 5. 6 CD 9 O O :3 -z C2 i I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i 1 1 I I I I l N Q CD U 73 Q v CQ CD cn N 5D a- lz CD CD N 0- O S CD CD CD 0 W O Q 0 C2 O 0 3 0 3 CD cn S CD CD U Henning Coyle .�._,� GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION MSa it ti ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, Fl 34104 RF:CEIVED November 18, 2010 DEC 0 6 9010 AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order 11. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: October 21, 2010 V. Budget Report — Gloria Herrera VI. Landscape Maintenance Report — CLM VII. Landscape Architect's Report — McGee & Associates A. Maintenance Report B. Reuse Mixing Chamber — Warren Street C. Doral Bridge Project D. Lighting Study — Pebble Beach VIII. Transportation Operations Report-Darryl Richard A. Project Manager's Report B. Review of the To Do List IX. Housekeeping Item X. Committee Reports XI. Old Business XII. New Business XIII. Public Comments XIV. Adjournment The next meeting is December 16, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & MainteVIM nes: 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Esc. o Naples, FL 34104 Date: Item #: _— 1611 B18 11tv GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, Fl 34104 October 21, 2010 Minutes I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Bob Slebodnik at 4:03 P.M. II. Attendance: Members: Robert Slebodnik, Tony Branco, Kathleen Dammert, David Larson, Jennifer Tanner County: Darryl Richard - Project Manager, Michelle Arnold -ATM Director, Pam Lulich- Landscape Operations Manager Others: Mike McGee -McGee & Associates, Jim Fritchey -CLM, Darlene Lafferty- Juristaff III. Approval of Agenda Add: IX. A. Discuss Fixed Cost Estimate for current FY XII. A. US41 Sidewalk Improvements Kathleen Dammert moved to approve the agenda as amended. Second by Tony Branco. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. IV. Approval of Minutes: September 16, 2010 The Committee requested to add the following information underXll. B. in the Minutes: "Mr. Powell was not present." Kathleen Dammert moved to approve the September 16, 2010 minutes as amended. Second by Jennifer Tanner. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. V. Budget Report - Gloria Herrera Darryl Richard reviewed the FY11 Budget Report: • Projected Ad Valorem Tax $209,400.00 • P.O.s were Opened - $101,928.95 - Mixing Chamber P.O. is not reflected in the October Budget Report • Fiscal Year 2011 Taxable Values decreased Robert Slebodnik stated based on his calculation the MSTU Basic Operating Cost ($255,886.00) is more than ($209,400.00) incoming Revenue. ibiri B18' Darryl Richard responded the Operating Budget Items are estimated and the actual dollar amount for expenditures is unknown. Robert Slebodnik noted the following: • It will be necessary to drawing from Reserve monies ($400,000.00) for Future Projects • $250,000.00 was allocated for a Hurricane Disaster Fund Line_ Item (included in the $400,000.00 Reserves Line Item) Discussion took place on the Reserves Line Item and incoming Revenue Stream to include the following: • Staff will request the Hurricane Disaster Fund be listed as a separate Line Item on the Budget Report (as on the previous Budget Reports) • Cost for Upcoming Projects will be monitored closely due to inconsistencies between the Projected Operating Cost and incoming Revenue Stream VI. Landscape Maintenance Report - CLM Jim Fritchey reported the following: • Mulch was installed • Fertilization was conducted • Turf areas were sprayed to address - Chinch Bugs - Grubs o Plumbago was treated for Chili thrips (Valley Stream) Robert Slebodnik inquired on status of the Xanadu Lab Reports. Jim Fritchey responded: • Lab Reports were received • Xanadu were sprayed with the recommended treatment (by A &L Lab) VII. Landscape Architect's Report - McGee & Associates A. Maintenance Report Mike McGee reviewed the following items from the Landscape Observation Report: (See attached) o Damaged Bougainvillea were replaced (due to auto accident) - Recommended replacing the damaged Periwinkle with a different type of Plant Material Discussion ensued on the damage sustained to the following items by the auto accident (Front entrance - 1St median): • Irrigation Reuse Sign • Season Annuals • Bougainvillea 2 16f1 B18 Staff stated they are in the process of verifying if an accident report was filed. Discussion took place on the Committee preference for the Plant replacements. The Committee agreed to install red Geraniums. Jim Fritchey stated additional cost will be incurred to maintain Geraniums as they require additional care. Mike McGee resumed with the Observation Report: St Andrews o (1) Foxtail removal is required in Median #10 Forest Hills o Replacement of (1) Tabebuia Tree is scheduled US4 9 and St. Andrews Entrance o (1) Tabebuia Tree replacement is scheduled Cart Crossing — Forest Hills o Requested contact (by CLM) for Pruning instructions on the (2) Mahogany Trees Doral Circle • Replacement of (1) dead Podocarpus is required • The Sign requires repair as the clear coat is peeling Darryl Richard will notify a Sign Vendor (under County Contract) of the required Sign repair. B. Reuse Mixing Chamber — Warren Street Mike McGee stated a meeting is scheduled on November 2nd with the Contractor to move forward with Construction. C. Doral Bridge Project o Project is under review with ROW and FDOT Dave Larson inquired on the status of the Conduit installation. Darryl Richard stated the Conduit was installed by Haskins at no charge to the MSTU. 161'1 g18 D. Lighting Study - Pebble Beach Discussion ensued concerning the Power Point Presentation. After discussion it was concluded: • The Power Point Presentation will be reviewed by the Committee at the January meeting - The Presentation will be revised to incorporate Committee comments • Following MSTU Committee review Mike McGee will give a Presentation to the Civic Association Board (prior to the Civic Association meeting on February 22nd ) • Subsequently the Presentation will be given at the Civic Association meeting on February 22, 2010 VIII. Transportation Operations Report - Darryl Richard A. Project Managers Report (See attached) Darryl Richard reviewed a Quote by Lumec ($1,400.00 material cost) to retrofit the Fixture with a Cosmopolis Light on Doral Circle (correct the bright light issue.) (See attached email) David Larson stated he prefers to see the Fixture when it is illuminated. Mike McGee perceives Cosmopolis Fixtures are installed at the Naples Pier. Mike McGee recommended adding surge protectors at the Poles. He suggested the Electrical Contractor evaluate the Poles on US41 to determine if surge protection is installed. Darryl Richard requested the Committee visit the Naples Pier see the Cosmopolis Light while it is illuminated. (L -47) Installation of Mixing Chamber o Anticipate the NTP will be issued the first week of November B. Review of the To Do List Item 2 - Sidewalks on US41 at St. Andrews - ADA Comvliance Darryl Richard reviewed an email from the Office of the Director of Transportation Engineering: (See attached) • Project commitment was received to improve US41 Sidewalks • The Design will be produced in -house by County Staff (No cost to the MSTU) Michelle Arnold stated the email indicated the following: • The County will Design the Pedestrian Crossing Improvements • FDOT is responsible for the Asphalt Sidewalk 4 1612 Robert Slebodnik noted the following on the ADA Compliance issue: • The item has been on the Lely MSTU Agenda for over (1) year with no progress • Commissioner Fiala was contacted to request assistance with the issue • Within (1) week of contacting Commissioner Fiala the ADA Compliance issue is being address IX. Housekeeping Item A. Discuss Fixed Cost Estimate for Current Fiscal Year - Previously discussed under V. X. Committee Reports -None XI. Old Business -None XII. New Business A. US41 Sidewalk Improvements- Previously discussed under Vlll. B. XIII. Public Comments -None There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 4:55 P.M. Lely Golf Estates Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee ' ci Robert Slebo nik, Chairman These minutes approved by the Committee on 1,1 - as presented or amended �— The next meeting is November 18, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance CC Transportation Building 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 5 16111 B 18 Report 'for Lely MSTU Meeting date: November 18, 2010 Lely MSTU Project Status (L -49) ACTIVE — Lighting Study (Pebble Beach pilot study for lighting options) 11- 17 -10: Concept to be presented to HOA at annual meeting. (L -48) ACTIVE -- Modifications to Doral Circle Bridge (Committee Request for `lighting on bridge') 11- 18 -10: Project Plans under review for ROW Permit. Bridge has been assigned Number 034821 in State records. (L -47) ACTIVE — Installation of Mixing Chamber 11- 18 -10: All locates have been completed. Contractor Notice to Proceed issued on 11 -18 -10 for 140 day project. Final completion is by April 7, 2011 (by Contract); however, staff will pursue `early completion' for project. (L -34) - ACTIVE - On Going — Ongoing Maintenance Contract: Commercial Land Maintenance; 7- 27 -09: Commercial Land Maintenance has trimmed all shrubs to required specification of "Cut to 18 inches and maintain at 24 inches "; Staff will inspect the project on a `weekly basis'; Contractor is to provide service reports within 12 hours of completion of any contract service (ref: notification originally sent on 6 -30 -09 to CLM via email) 11- 18 -10: Ongoing Maintenance is by Commercial Land Maintenance (L -45) ACTIVE — On Going - McGee Annual LA Services — Landscape Architectural Services 11- 18 -10: McGee & Associates under ongoing contract. L_ 16 818 November 18, 2010 Meeting Lely MSTU "To Do List" Subrogation Recovery: a. Accident 859; damage amount: $515.00; Median #8 on St. Andrews Status: Landscape Repair Completed (CLM Estimate E1002519); No Traffic Accident report found to match damage b. Accident # 947; Found on 01 -15 -10 on Forest Hills Blvd. Status: Estimate for $607.00 from Commercial Land approved for repairs. 2. Sidewalks on US 41 at St. Andrews — ADA Compliance: Status: Project has been brought to attention of FDOT for funding to address ADA deficiencies noted. 3. CLM: have A & L Labratoris do analysis on Xanadu at Augusta and Forest Hill. Existing plants have some yellowing. Status: CLM has treated plant materials per A & L Lab report/recommendation. 4. Electrical Lighting Related: Find out what type of `lower' wattage bulb is available for Doral Circle. Residents are complaining that `the lights are too bright' Status: Lumec has provided updated quote with discount for Lely MSTU. 92 RichardDarryl 161-1 B18 From: rlumenator @aol.com Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:02 AM To: RichardDarryl Cc: mcgeeassoc @aol.com Subject: Re: Inspection of Lumec Domes on Doral Circle - Rust reported within the'dome' of the lights (potential warranty item) Darryl, have spoken with Lumec regarding this. In that you are consid anging to Cosmo units for these fixtures, we would propose to supply the conversions $275.0 each (per head), which supplies the reflector at no charge. These fixtures are out of n , cut in that Collier County is a valued customer, we wanted to work with you to both eliminate the problem, and upgrade your system. Thank You, Ron Steedman R.J. Steedman, LLC 2268 SE 28th Street Cape Coral, Fl. 33904 P 239 - 573 -9427 F 239 - 573 -9477 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: RichardDarryl <DarrylRichard Qcolliergov.net> To: RichardDarryl < Darryl Richard (ailcolliergov.net >; BENTLEY ELECTRIC <bentleyl(a-)bentleyelectric.com >; 'Bently Electric (BentleyelecO -embarg mail. com)' <BentleyelecOembargmail.com >; Chuck Bentley <chuck ,bentleyelectric.com> Cc: rlumenatorO- aol.com <rlumenatorO- aol.com >; 'officemanager @mcgeeassoc.com' < officemanagerCcD-mcgeeassoc.com >; 'McgeeAssoc @aol.com' <McgeeAssoco-aol.com >; lulich_P <PamelaLulich0colliergov.net >; arnold_m <MichelleArnoldCDcolliergov .net >; sillery _t < TessieSillery(c�colliergov.net> Sent: Fri, Oct 29, 2010 11:43 am Subject: Inspection of Lumec Domes on Doral Circle - Rust reported within the'dome' of the lights (potential warranty item) Chuck (Bentley Electric) In addition to the items listed below for service — there is a potential product warranty item I would like for your company to investigate. On Doral Circle there has been a report of 'rust' occurring within the Lumec fixtures installed. I would like for your crews to investigate — to include disassemble and /or re- assembly of the parts and pieces to determine how moisture is getting inside the fixtures. After your investigation — I would like to confer with the local Lumec Product Representative (Ron Steedman: (239) 281 -0220) to review the product, installation, and reason for the problem being observed at Doral Circle. See attached for product spec sheet. 161 l A W N �OfD lbV ON AWN +OtO Lb V WNA W N�OEC W V O)N A WN�000 VO)NA W N� 0-M MOIJ10JW- {1C-- OOT�pprr -xl:l Z�mOrZC/)m- 1- iZ>09-X-xm -n 00 (mi��cmn DoODD�0mi�TiG )mZ=��ac�m=zoMp�D��XDD<cmm�rX D mmm zc0ZZ :A ;m�nmDz4 T, -0)Z9 Amnmo�<0,DzO,xxXXzzm�XMN =DD cmmmmm�mpDOmzOm(n�Uwoo mxz>5 D - izcmi>mmmoOmmmn�m D< W <<T'M,�Cr<� N DmzZ r ��OOC�DDw�OZmMX=M,mm<mZD X�OCn- <zmp'TgmQx����Qc�D��cpO m omSOZz �r iXDmCr�m0 mm xz0)m=c mDD00- �OXZO�� nz(ntn cD(nm� "mr —xO� 0 z >0 mmmn<����0 c��zmm C2 W> Z�OmzW(nD���m m mm �pm(n� Z oo�DNm0rr cz cam Z mz0c� �z =iooz �� cm— 00DD� T��m�D�DD DzO� O mm o 00�ZZ K Dr D,W TmxM, Zncn�X >z rD 0 m m C 00 y D C W MZOX zowx mz mm 0 r m �m r� nD�� Np � nC) 0 x m m m .rm,, K z CO 0 M Z � M 5 W 0 D � -< O fA fA Efl EA 0 EA fA Efl 69 EA EA En ffl E/+ 69 N EA EA 69 69 69 fA 69 EA fA EA 69 69 fn EA 69 69 EA _ _ _ A N -11 W O W CnN ? O Nm J N NN. 00A Ut UtOUt _ _ OmN � (D " W O W h NOw w O� 00 O Cn Cn Opp "Moo AO8OUt Ut(D W O A W O O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 J O co O O O $A O O O 00 O O 00 O 00 0000000.000 OCnp O O w C O O 00 c O O 00 O 00 0000000 Cn 000. cc OCOO O O tll O O O 00 O O 00 O 00 00 00 0 0 0(n 000 OV O O O H fA Efl 69 fA Efl EA Efl Eli 69 H9 ffl EA EA EA fA 69 EA � EA Efl Efl fA EA Efl E9 fA fA Efl Efl EA Eli fA fA EAl In R CD O fA IfA lu 110 EA 00 W O W . W O W m O O O O O O O W C O O N coo W N �Nm V7 N O A O COONO O O N O N W O m A O A 07 O J J O CO A O O O Ut co CO NW A A J Cn . 00 0 m.Ut0 N m (Jl O EA Efl EA fA fA 69 Efl V3 f-A EA ffl EA EA Efl EA Vi . I . . (. 1 . 1 . � . . EA EA fA 6m 069 fA EA EA EA N N Cn N W 0) i ff) Efl EA EA EA EA fA (A EA EA 69 &9'r.9.69,69 Efl EA EA EA V9 Efl EA Jog W Cn Ut O W W O W m N 0 Un O P. Un. p ' 1 C" t0 c� V' (DUI ' m W m J W Cn 00 O' 0 0 0 000 . 0 0 0 . I . . (. 1 . 1 . � . . EA EA fA 6m 069 fA EA EA EA N N Cn N W 0) i ff) Efl EA EA EA EA fA (A EA EA 69 &9'r.9.69,69 Efl EA EA EA V9 Efl EA Jog V to fA 69 Efl fD O� Am A N CD ACO N� 0 0 0 0 —C) (D OO O 0 00 X00 00000 00 _ N C" t0 c� V' (DUI N . m W m J W Cn O O m co N O al (.n Cn 0(n N.O -4 0000 _ m cow Co 4 O 000 O -4 0 0 0 0 0 00 O Ut O m 00 (J7 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Oo 0 O Ut O J N . N — 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O� CCCC� gc�mom ;p ID DDDD (D N O (C) O O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Cn O fD CD (D fD N 7 in ZK����L20 O m -n O 7 A O Ua�ZZZ?.°',O 0�����4��f N OpC�pn�N (n a�OOOO omo(o N X O CD , N `G ?mmmmmmgO @mrvO,icaB o (D O (D (D (D (D (D 7 U) C N !� d: y N N (D N (D N O N 7 �. j N 6�C N N.y 0 0 0 N N N C N O O O N Z,N (n C -N OSpfpR0�Ro= CD (� mO Z ] 9Q (a =3 m� m O N N N N N �ii O n (D X C (D y N ((D y (D 6 _ `G 0 n y N N (A N 0 (D N N O n 0 O '� r �_ 3 (p (D 7 0 (D N (D N N 7 cu Co lD CD n n 0 n n fD (D C j Co X Dm m W o i m — =CD cn _ _ Q CA O S tp y 7 ry 0 3 N O N NCD N N N D_ co M N n A = N (D (D C (D < Z O m r m Z 103 w N C 0 fD O� Am (J7 (nAAAAA(n (n Ut Ut Ut Ut Ut �� N CD ACO N� 0 0 0 0 —C) (D OO O 0 00 X00 00000 00 O C" t0 c� V' (DUI N N00o NN '� 'ANN NNN NNI O "-1 Om O O(n WNmNNN -4 N W nnNNNNN NNf AO AO (061 c" 0) -N JW Oo-4V-4� Oo-4 000 to O)�0 CO ON j000 m0 O O)W CnN U7-4 -4mW00oM {��{ O� CCCC� gc�mom ;p ID DDDD (D N —oma°o �vcU)(n(ncn�w ���yvo msf -D fD CD (D fD N 7 M N� O 7 A O Ua�ZZZ?.°',O 0�����4��f �� N N N N X O CD , N `G (D O (D (D (D (D (D 7 U) C N !� d: 0 0) O O X X <ONN N N.y 0 0 0 N N N C N O O O N Z,N (n C -N N (D D'O' ] 9Q (a =3 m� m O N N x CD CD n (D X C (D y N ((D y (D 6 _ fD O !^� \� (D N N (D 7 0 (D N (D N N 7 cu Co lD wC, �N m m Dm m W o i m =CD O X O S tp y 7 ry 0 3 N N N N N D_ co M N n A Q = N (D (D C (D < CD (n O. =O N CD N (D 7 r < 0) �_ (n (D A Z C ^ 7 X O O W O Cl) (D (O � O d �. EA fA EA fA f.9 f-A 69 69 69 EA EA EA EA EA EA fA 69 EA fA EA 1 N N cn (WOO �O Oo0 �O NA W W m ON NCn00 O Wm. COm�Am WO 110, � 40 0004 (O�.M ..N OOJ AO 00 —m OOO AO .JN JO Uf0 0000 al C) N0 ACD(O AO m0 O O O O Ut O N Un O O O O O NO (A EA EA EA EA 69 69 fA fA 69 69,69 69 EA EA EA EA fl) i N W Ut m Cn f 0 m c n m w W � O N W W m f N p NN al J Cn Cn Ut0 Ut -+W (r f 4 9) !l) OOCnO NO. f O? 0 00 -4 00(n 4 m 0 W i 0 00 00 03 0040 0000 f Z O m r m Z 103 w N C 0 0 V t0 07 v3 =rd 0 3 co � n> m w _ m m A � � V DD O :u ■ V C, r V c ' co w "n x D x o N m d � N V �n o 0 0 CO =. a w A 0 J aD m N O w m 0 3 d <D CCD 7 �F a> D as N� 3 m a d N m m s"I d m 0 y .. • y° W o m m a N -► c m a so W 3 m a of OD D 3 m a of 00 c m a fu V c m a 0i T , 3 m a m Ln m m a m A c m a w W c m a N m N gm ID a d - D CL m N W Q (p H m D) cn r" D CL y W a Ro C ib O z O m T T T TI T1 T7 T T T 'O T 'C' T 1l ll �� T T T7 .� T Tl 7V7 T ll C C, O, C C'C, C,O m C C° m C C m O 2 2 `D C7 @'C ° ° 3 ° ° ° ° 3 3 ° 3 > > 0 3 > > 3 > > 3 0 3 m m o m m m m m O o m o m m 3 o m m v o m m o 3 o m 2 z m = o O -° c m m c m 0-0 3 m o o (D m O-0 m 3 m o O O = O N C x n= O O N C� 0 v v° 0 7 v O m O (D O (n 7 O'x-. (n Cn 'Y ° N CL CD (� m m : 0 .-. ° C CD D) C1 m (D (D ,,. (D °; ai m n (D �. d < CmD (n 7• N N D CD (n .�-. :3 N CD 0 m m m m 0 3 n c w - v m 0 m n i v m m° m m n 00 oCD g5m03m o 3 v 3 = CD3�v m (n v v �3 :D m 0 v 0 -0 n0i 3 m 3 0! Q o o c 0 0 0 3 (n 3 0 ��. c 0 0 O m �' a� 3 w 0 zr C 0 m O- o v m zT CL C Q. p� 0 0 O 0 �- O_ Q �; n W 0 0 0 o m< m ?. 3 v o o m v° m (D m 3 v m -° m N 3 o R� (D m O o m O m O- < m O �, v (D O p p °- g CO I O_ m O � v w ° p m >p O O S O< = N . �• (n N v d N N O N& N N N m (n N O� O_ - S m O 0 0 CD _ O_ m 0- (D N<< v° m m � O 3 T. 0 O- O (D N< N 0 (D D ° Nom-. �' O O N O N � C U• � In n cn O fD n n �O0 SU 0" �'.' "' 0 S � `� O LU O_ N n S v O" m �7 v C O < (D m•. (D � O° < CD NN <D N CD m O C O 7 7 C 'm0 .m•. 0' 'm0 Q 0 3 3 m 3 (n S S o (n n- N D =_ v T n C ? N= m ryz Qn O -O -Q - = y a o SS- cn m� o' s � m m Q vQ 6 : 0_ �c v Zr n O m _ ° °°' ° o_ °w S �°0 o< ° o = o m o CD m m Cl- CD CD v < m o v _ v _ O �o o w _ v z CD o Z3 N m n� CL CL CD m 70 -o m m , CD � 90 ° r r m m m n 0 o 0 a CD m N O z CA m 0 O 3 3 m z N z-�c� �nt»r-v O CD 0 cG O O O_ cOi O � � O CD 0) _ 0 p 0 0 00 fl1 `< Cl) CD (D (D t0 c 0- m fD O � O 7 �p _ o r ice° v oo3 G 2 C� o� n � CD O G7 3 g� OA 90n �O N°c - r- ow am �� °' cn O N anv C C D 0-9 En m v m �' pm :3 m n >� ° CS O 5 co =3 cD cn p o p -< C -O x a JU CD Cn � cn 3 c°n m O m D n o �m n O co D Z non _ m 0 � 7 O K Ica cn. 0 N n CD fD 7 < D m n N � 7 CD 3 N M m5-n 0 v (n. • O > (Q to n c cn CL p� 0 5 m ° -t m N --q cn CQ V% cy- CD 0 -0 -0 CD N N 3 m m O 7 7 0 N � S �• =D cD < m m 0 n 3 -n Z S 0 N CD m D 3 m < m m m cn CD m m o v a m CD 16I r C► a PO m liv K A p. cct m 0 (t ►i m 1 v CD Co. v, o O a 0 01 Nd � w . Co =° m n A N p�j O — CC J 00 -4 -4 O 0 w x O D x im o CD W N � Z co J W � O O 3 wa to Cf A o � a O N r•► ED N O W 1611 618' a N 0 K Qo n x N• K m O 17 K m A CD A m d 0 O n W m o CO) _ S CD o < n N N W c CL CD --1 O = y j o c - o 09 m a.c. n o y, 7 CC m m a to 3 m aaaa oa a * co 9 m m s ** -4 J 3 m m a CD 01 3 m m a �k in CT 9 m c. m c �t � A M CD a' a m W m N 0 S W < a m < d m N m O1 n 3 CL ft w m n m �' n 0 o tn. CG ix r m 0 Z O D m D r- m O r TI C/) D m CO D TI D -j 4 � cn c c� 0 v tu tJ CD CD 3 ° �?.'T 0 0 A 0 3 X 0 a x:z p) ?7c < -� m 0 (n o 2 (D � Cp r cn p tD r rn00 ^'w CQ - CD m,0 C ffi 2 T_ ro w c3 J O 3 3 Cp v c 3 v 0- 3° m' a) °- CD m m 3 5� co 3 °' D 3 0 n o v °- m y -� O O O C m 0° cn (D .C-. O 0 0 Q O 0 -' S 3 C m O m c 7 O .O. — OD CD < m m �° m< n) S 3° CD v S 3 �. N< EP Q CD- < * t . c< CD < o 7 ED C CD- N CD n o v c m ?° G ED- � g �- CD O _{ CD O.: 3 Q m CD O< 3 _° O 3 N� O- ..- CD C CD to ED N Q m �, 90 0- m m m W '-i N CD m 2- c C 3� C -n 3 3� n) m O C Z) 0 o m� -'1 v Q C -o O O_ �) v �i S m O 0 o v c 0 0) O c CD 0° 3 m m m m N c 07 m ° v N c o c 3 X o 0 0 7 CD CAD rna c -0 ED O O m O Q X �. N O ? S— Q S 3 O- X U). N N Co) 6 CO/) CD CQn -3 N 7 O S p = O CD CD O' O CD ° O O O< ° O ( CD O. 0 O CD C (D 3 N O Cp O CL QD O < to 0 3 G 2� 0 < (D N m S Q < W W a) Q— c C O C t � -. — O � o c C m OQ `D (D C co ' O •G O ? -0 go 9 � � � O O CJ � O � CU ' Qo � O -p° I7 �°!?o �3�X� o � vmm Q3 Z'C�XS a G 3 o �' i 0 0 - 5-D 0 0 p 0 v i QCD Dm ° D v CL 0 o 30 m ° co n m 90 c )-m o C 0 C C� 3 o c c.m c Q) ° 0 0 v go r m CD y 0 N o_Qo o C m O Qw N C v n 3' v cc _Q=° p = m o Q o c N_ �(D cn 0 m (D Q.- 3 O � 'a 0� CD C CD < 6 CD v C-) N m ro 7 Q +G CD Z Cop 0 c c,D c CD O v a' CD Q 90 Qc �G) m o �� s aW 3 �°v m0 0m i - m ° Q o o N 3 Q (c oC t° ?v Q v o CD 3° CD < o_ n O o 3 C .c-' C -+ ED Cmj 0 °g N O CD O� �. 7 3 0 0 S 0S Q 0 n r 0 Q 5,D rOr, T r f/ n 0 0 CD _? N o 3 C O U) N O O O N fl. p C S CO CL N _CCn N 0 4 Q m, 2 ° cc �! O�m v � -u -i o O 0 m n C 0- m O m O CD to 0 <'CD Qc sv CC DD cn ? o j = 0 3 __ .O-. Z N 0 c 0 O O Z7 ED _ O N Cn N C° 7 0 S/1 `° ZF7 Q m 3 0 m ° a � O3 d ° O3. N < m 3 m 0 9_ �c ° Q N << (D CO X 0 K N c C 0 CD c N (D m O ED C CD C: ED CD CD Q CD O O O � m LA O Z LA m O n O m Z a N 0 K Qo n x N• K m O 17 K m A A A A A ,12 m m m m m m m 3 3 a a a a a o a r r r r r r io << �o4_ O $ M 4 �§ = =E < CD / Wk 2M Ra- E 0 -2 a6� § \§ § '0 2 axq 2 kw » wf E jƒ 00g 2 C', " & 0 k \ \ / § 161 1 ! 018 ' . w1l � k � ( |� / rt � m ƒ � � 2 0 n f 2 0 k > m \ 0 n \ / / R §I co /� + \� k 4� \, \ m k � v 2a o 7$2 _ _ o x±$ _ - o - _ 2 o a - _ _ , o m = , o , = \m ®�® ~\EEC§ = 0. r— CD a a E3 \ cc G &) m 3 0 z\ \/ JW )> \\ /_O 0 \ _ , , _�? - g JCL a :, o;= e \-= Jz� s g t®- k` ==_�©� ®°eeo ® %- 7 2 e§&_ f e o �& gy ®� m¥ -�K c =Zfa / \ \ \ \J.� ¢ /. \, } \7 7 CL 0) / \ ® / \ D'Q 009E , _ - EC')0 , e E ±'0 &77 22' 0 CD (D ° T - \ %/ %/ }m E& ®CD %q / \ - 0 3 \ & 3 f ® '/ % %/ ` ) JO z o /\ \ \ ' \§ ' / ' CD \2 a &� 22 , cr \ « CD § 0 CD & . ./ g eo 0 c 7 0 M . m O 2 m 0 C) 0 � � m z ! 018 ' . w1l � k � ( |� / rt � m N N\ o N D 2232 Say D D D D D � S S 3 3 S berm mm b b A A A mm m y i M C < M m 0 o o � ti mmo a r y H D 3 i�r m ° a M m '� 0 ,^ A n N O O cr S r O CD D A = ♦�% r m r A � CD N Oti A C n !Z � n xm An nEI r A g> �g n� i n H, m � D M T c k C� ny„ OO N yo n C b0 C,j� m In A W N • aofnD0D1DB9 -uCm N D O z m m r r � m D �z2mmmy 0 m -ZO -o 0 ZUi -�i�m ZmO -- >�W 0'0(Z O n mmZ(7r0 A Q>AC-f W m DmNO_(n C = rm20 O xx>ON-mu -0-1 r <�m� _ Tm) -V 0 -1D'� z ��� z Atnjnmf >D -i�f/i r NDN' -1 -o rmoOOO D C ._.1r. C7 r Zzz r Or r Nrr OO i yN r C m U m m 20A C) Z6 D Z O rN m o, Dm z rO -0r- r - ;:o O � m -)ny DDm D O r- Z �m o zo D p Gr*r o m O> room AE� O D rrmZm r N m z Z m 0 m m 0 =-- 400MKm O 00 m m A --Wp -� O 0-1 .Z7 N 0V-< W Z� O A �o �z2Om ;u ", I Dm ND r�XAO O 0 OoDrVroinno Z D W Z Z m��� -1 ={ n Ao 0 0O 1 , mo =10OZ 0 A .0 O n -• Z xVl n L� Z m r G7 =t m vz0L,)�r^ z O =) O _ '1 O -1 In Z 0 ? 0 GSM- -fmA D 0 D m n n m o n Z O -_I Dx-+ _;ur 0 Z Z m D Z o A ovcnDm D O N D O Z N D--Z o Z fnD turn r r D o m z m 0 z f 1 I I\ I I EX. CANAL g µ r r c°s►r c CCU • II vs II � I II v II }� W II ii i I I I.I rn � n 1 D �Z m m D m , m Z r D U x M m r O m m co � D to r 1 Z2:45 a N D 3$ �m N 'I + i i s �p o ml m I 0 N 0 riln ` . x W 0 mS\, D r m r Q -< ;z O O v m f D r C � m [' E S I m m m m x I, o � �t b � I M >r m O n mm O DU, x0 Z C/) z O ti C� M !- O ' m m m z 'rb z m m m ox v / �j m C Or O w m / --1 r \ r / Z# W E D_m - __- --A1V] tv rn > - DZ n y n m C D Z mZ r z= �Z d z --I j C R� [CRC• FIY r n -O m X71 J' g xi I WZ II° og 0. O W` n i ii m x m r r O -1 Z7 C m m x D < m x m � to r m m O D r 0 TO V rD 1 1611616 �!19 O YJ c � cv� � � 0 O 0* r i X t m x� x O m � � D I � d m O D D 1 1� 1 / v m l_J m x 0 /tJ D � 11 ror '' D m N-1 )433210 M0 1 IM cI --- --- -- - - --- ----------------------------- - -- - - - - ---- - -X- -- m m r � m I M x m r r O m x m --I r 1+n o x x J o> � D Z < m x CIO >I I I m rn �... I x = I 17 x I r rn 0 m D > m r r O 0 03 0,:,:) ft mill $ Q�w 13 !. NOONWH V92 GVO oo 00 �f � �I m x m r r O -1 Z7 C m m x D < m x m � to r m m O D r 0 TO V rD 1 1611616 �!19 O YJ c � cv� � � 0 O 0* r i X t m x� x O m � � D I � d m O D D 1 1� 1 / v m l_J m x 0 /tJ D � 11 ror '' D m N-1 )433210 M0 1 IM cI --- --- -- - - --- ----------------------------- - -- - - - - ---- - -X- -- m m r � m I M x m r r O m x m --I r 1+n o x x J o> � D Z < m x CIO >I I I m rn �... I x = I 17 x I r rn 0 m D > m r r O 0 03 0,:,:) ft mill $ Q�w 13 !. NOONWH V92 GVO oo 00 I � d m O D D 1 1� 1 / v m l_J m x 0 /tJ D � 11 ror '' D m N-1 )433210 M0 1 IM cI --- --- -- - - --- ----------------------------- - -- - - - - ---- - -X- -- m m r � m I M x m r r O m x m --I r 1+n o x x J o> � D Z < m x CIO >I I I m rn �... I x = I 17 x I r rn 0 m D > m r r O 0 03 0,:,:) ft mill $ Q�w 13 !. NOONWH V92 GVO oo 00 N o ^ p (n N N \ o N �D V UI W p 0 0 0 0 333 32 ay D D D D a aaaax D D m V c r m m m m r°imA AA ocn n omo .oc d r a D a y M w ; n O xx Z A C N Er o a < Z r m r A N h -i n m zz AA n PP n ns p R . n 0 9 3 7 gas 4a a 3 S N °a 4n S D o =�z �� '$ s �g n 8 x m L7 0 Z V) ti Z7 � y b� 0 O O O rr�� vl �l O N 2 N m I D N -}m-7 N D V ^J r l J go D r mG) D m D r D N D U) r D QO r r m_ .0 _ �T in �.i C/) Tm N rD 1 U) mm C7 D r^ O --� zD m r p >/m V i ) 5--1 z Q1 T -1 -t ? =O 0 O x to � � Trl N Dzm =N= to E5 ri DD ;D = m 0 m r r m LO r- Ml m D Z In 0 Z r n pr ;a m p D f p m O � � O O_ C O V. _ N D Z O Z N <n m pm 0 G-) w W x F, O p Z N N 'D 0 � D X N M--l: O p Z ;, N pl pm ml _ w A r ON p m O O m C) m p x yZ D � O - r O N Z r O N p D N O v -r-1 O S 0 =O SM O M r m cn m O TD N U) 1 W N J x m rn D m N -+r' CD D 2 N O N A 2 m N r _ O m D;u D m Mm D 0 % o 0z I O N m m N o y O- C I z fN �>1 m DO z C) ry M I rr- O K {�° � w II\ D`- Z O = 0 A D^s = pZ y �- z CpO D D N �ED mLn o O? U) � O o m I p m rm m � C � r, m Z 0 >5, m= O O - 3 G7 zm ;v z xp �cn O O m Z 1 D� m 0, 0 T -1 -t ? =O 0 O x to � � Trl N Dzm =N= to E5 ri DD ;D = m 0 m r r m LO r- Ml m D Z In 0 Z r n pr ;a m p D f p m O � � O O_ C O V. _ N D Z O Z N <n m pm 0 G-) w W x F, O p Z N N 'D 0 � D X N M--l: O p Z ;, N pl pm ml _ w A r ON p m O O m C) m p x yZ D � O - r O N Z r O N p D N O v -r-1 O S 0 =O SM O M r m cn m O TD N U) 1 W N J mOD(n000(nD DOz--)000 -+r' S z Z p D z Z Z z D r Z7 W M z (n O (n mXmp�m --10 Z D m D;u D m Mm D 0 ty[7i N0—Z11C�C 0z I O N m m N o y O- C I 3 Z (A c)o �i 0�zm m 001 C O x D X m Z0 z = 0 A D21 « r m I =M0 z D Nm CpO D D N �? -i mLn o O? N o m I m O Ti N � D LID N r= Zm LO W' pD >5, m= O O - 3 G7 O 0° z ;v z xp �cn O O m p 1 D� m 0, 0 < f0 m Nw m O r � Z D- m 0 m 3: z m m n 0 0001 —� -P: m p D O 3 m - r D O N . D m m O m c n N 0 D c n m '3 _1 N (n O (n mp m m � m m Om-em D z M�� � D f m 9 Fn N -i R o m N C �z�o o�t Ow,O�NOO) OA ®=N _z osx Z O= =N mDN D 1 xr I qk A Wr ON Nr m "n 0- C; ,�m LnC -m Nmcn yN ZD \NO - m0� �'- zZA CO r C) m-V O; D Z� OZD CN rr- Cp vii cn�= DD 0 a) � m� m� U) O OD O m O ° c: r O r -0 V u) s Z p W N p m0 I n --1 I n N Z= O Z- O rn D o 0< �O -n X O F � s N Wr w n 0 0 �m =� ::E r m A D m m' 0 D z y D- O D r D �m 0 Zz m D m mp ��0 � N I T n I ry m %>:7N �C m ^^ 0 `J zD m r p DO z OD NM- 2 n mx�X °' OD ^sD ::jj M N p ;a cn O m r Z v 2 m :iJ m _O N M Z O 0 M ®m < p O m -o m D Z min -+ g m mm m=x Z 0 �D m O) O Z 0 -9 mCp TWO pZp� O O D - C Z O m zm C 0 O O mz xn R. o D m > z -� 0 opt= () ) i m r -I p O m p D D O D OEM M N U1 = V O < Z N O O 0 ^ppm^ O '-) m O Ov Cxmv�r z -'{ I l m r C -< ;u T P' � Dm � O C O N N � . < O O j W r m m O m N D C CO N �r D x I m _CO 0 m D Q, r CO n C M,2 G) II � ° D -m> m D r r 1611 818 n � D � r m co Z C I+ Fn ff. li -CO, o 00 m cl0n �0 Fo mm co C, 00 0 � � l n Y 0 1 0 cA m 0 0 in o ko n ' Z �j m o m n � I 0F, N m 0 0 m 0 m 0 ym i A m m D F I m m m �o om Z n Z pm mA mD DF mk m m m m W Im w 3! 0 U O C � mo I v 0 0 0 C m x N T T I x v 0 m 0 W N J mOD(n000(nD DOz--)000 -+r' S z Z p D z Z Z z D r Z7 W M z (n O (n mXmp�m --10 Z D m D;u D m Mm D 0 ty[7i N0—Z11C�C 0z I O N m m N o y O- C I 3 Z mN°ozA?z� A 0�zm m 001 C O x D X Z oAn D D21 O o O, r z D CpO D D N D r E2 m? o z D o m I 0DZ lmzo NM O - 3 G7 O �0 -=,: m 1 D� m 0, 0 C n Z D m O 1 D � Z D- m Z I 0001 —� -P: ? 0 D N 3 m - m m m r O m I p D m m O m c n m 0 D c n m '3 _1 N O m � m m Om-em D D N p O . � D f m 9 Fn os Z r R o m N C �z�o o�t p Z o m 0 70 m DO w z D x _CO 0 m D Q, r CO n C M,2 G) II � ° D -m> m D r r 1611 818 n � D � r m co Z C I+ Fn ff. li -CO, o 00 m cl0n �0 Fo mm co C, 00 0 � � l n Y 0 1 0 cA m 0 0 in o ko n ' Z �j m o m n � I 0F, N m 0 0 m 0 m 0 ym i A m m D F I m m m �o om Z n Z pm mA mD DF mk m m m m W Im w 3! 0 U O C � mo I v 0 0 0 C m x N T T I x v 0 m 0 A m m T m- z D c n m a m m m � z m � m m U `n m m � f m 9 Fn n C o m T�� D D x m V N 0 F b n � f) 11� m 0 a 0 p� , m Y m N C A m= L m <) m 0 N h m T m to T CIn c U Gi m O m m p N y G) om o z ^ �) CD ... 1? y 0 C m ? N $ O B m m X m N T u n (1 F Po^; -� in c� O O m -O >. m � i5 o y N m T A mc) 4m a m p Fn t) v ON ?z z gv<x,m m zz Z m Qb p� j. gz� 0 mg ym � G �. yh z I-n m 0 n T { c 2 � A � o o N n noT m T iip .' N m F mi� mvs A m T b y i Y�j t1 o ro N O a N h Q m r n i) m � V7 U O p m n m = my in m D���� () (1 rtt C m i m c ` n T, 0 m N 3 S m^ pp A .i S A C .�. c r m r m m r r r m r N m r m r r N r r N N \ No N .D V N tJ 3 3 3 3 3 D D D D D 3 3 3 3 3 D D -D A -D O b m m m m m A A A O b f] f] 3 Cl fl N H I \ E y A NO m I A Z p o U N ; m o z m Om 3 A mO m X y m n A c r D< r m r A N -I N -i A C n ti m 2 2 F3 n fl mm mm 2 D n D D n� a n 8 „ e 4a p sm Q J$ 40 e� 4� r Bu nn Z ` ^J O CQ b �y rrb vl O n7 W v� W �MM W NN�NN r y d m OZU ZON nzu DC L PC Hn 2 ~n ��O TX y °m Fn--1 A O, Z_ 1 cZO >� Inn x� n z �i�0 y- � 2 N ° xX n m x Z N O o Z n n m { yv O { A Z 1 O -i { { { N ± < { { m n =III r J mc-, m,U > { I O �Zti � ynm\ \ °p ICnym£ m0 I U n y 1 m -1 a 1 L I U HOC O COp rrz b pmzmy "oTU I'IO + { m OZyo 0�.1 Rm °< °s > { F A { • n O { { O A O N O { � D W m m { Z { m { { { J { { : r D Q° C) :0 O I { { r0 { { I o c, Z o m RO V tI { I f mz 1 y 0 D Off? Z A Z { { do npmv mn { m zm � ?< p y w m?�n -I A y FV '�....: A O 01 Y C �<p� m(7 J. I { { m mmmo oIn m > 4 pxIDF� { x F 1 x 5 x°zRrn + { - - -- S 00 im UP z �n J _ c - _ o_ Fg N U 0 = -in Cy yF Cyx mmm px yS O tit y� m Z mx mmZ 010 '4> z 0 o ° � n� n r<in� =pm =�� 00 0 > p n m -o 'Dn o �olnD� mn- nmmr >n _ x> ;201 o� or >Ino =li OU 0 8-m,- m n < nn 0 > y y�^=y x p yn y Z �C > an r tiA mF£m> - p IAi1�m�Zn� > ym Z O ZoC Ny KZyO 10002 mZZZ V1Z >102n7>Cp�Ony -piNp ?mD NCON Z OOU IZn C F• (ZI/nZ.0 O° p>UI mZm�i >m p C ��. ZZ\ D> =20y -N--IZC CO F-1 s S = >n or F FF fI-xicp y j F Z I.1 Z r K V O ti m Z D-- +ZOniZy00\ °p yOp Orl^ Crmi \�N♦ y snr y ZO�m'v CO O�Om�tiln �nZ _F y0 Oy F COp mDSm ZO �° m9D�naCmmm ->i �O'n Zy [n yn I D �mNyFm O InZO� = c ° °o_iopN >>C� >F o ;mF mpp op�on n obb <im= yN'^bb°z> z p ° NO Z m S'O ytim m0 A-11 T Np y' m m =A � O >njm =RENO vm n�pnp xs DO" O C-1 �Zm8 A, > 01" OFp y A MFU c nA inmm >zrs FK' Ow z n mi °DCZi�m� �Zmv,>i >noz yv o0�0 rr-yzn- po° 0 SAO'.) 2Onm Oy OC D Zp > x A ti 0 ys=mOOmO> Z �2 mL)O O Amyy-0 ym ~OK Rp1 'O O< ZZp F O>= Im�1 y>TOO - Zmleml > >xin O'i� m mO mOy pnm n rO' 1 m£r0 yD ~�C> 2DZ �(m- F^=x fm'I Fpn£ rFZ>Of m °Zm ylO�im �p OCO .'9 C2 9rn >. Ox OA, m OHO Zp OOm BOO pOm nVI2 <~ DOx r �•f -Ir -Zlmr pp Fy C7 r m n 0 OW.D O ON On yin 9 rmnm ZZ-1X > mp AyZ C OT mti rn0 > �OC O',-I O D DO Z �A o � %f0 yn Z0= 2r Z O y1Ar>- 2rnnmmOU m U OZ U2> O OO OO ZI1Z <'n U Inz, rn f7 0y�000 Oo I<-j m Zp= �� SON o ZZX� PUP.- m D mxx=A?Z vrn DI^� OZ "I me yn O C�i� C1 ZU> Z Z < �DytO.1 IX1 IZ�IOnm °AZ y > O O ti SI p y z� b-1 r F x N In r o z o O 2O N N Xy y_. o° m 0 y0< 0- [0 nif >zm Z- m D ry v U � z \ z � N > > z s oLn 00 vz ti UI n� m n n r r O 2 " FF� r b �U0 oA� y - - n Rio oon fnXA o., m L �$m m- M a� Fx D or^ Si n � O Z n v > ¢J 'D n 0(f) rn XO> DyjA 0D m Z r r +� �, D co 0 2 Z 1 I M �D V UI O W D azaxs p, D D D D ➢ 3 3 4 3 3 p b m m m m m A T A onnna nnw om5 .nc E-ly cm �ZO O�n d �+ ; m o > D > x zr o n m A v i ) m Z➢ m Y G A n v~ 0 E o h D < Z r m P A H xl n c m S S m� ap n pii m yr � Z D yO' V m r. ° ti V D e o �. °m e� 4N os � n$ �7 t� 40 I O ti y C b wpm X CZy cwt m m i i- N 1 + 1 � 1 1 2 E D F G A Lq n R o° r C N m 0 a N D "D D G i W N n,wypO m2 0 oZ >D1ZnZin ,AVm �F..W -H OOZD� 2 Z Z Z> Z p f A m mz =Nxz =rriw w�2A' Dpx >ro� prpi� 2 zpp m NwFz -zi nom vocm pz� mgK mm njp� v>if u>i Of Zw OZ.Xy w�nm �pz �wF-- i ZE v> F o m m �z B w B. N r a w r- i N D r v A z N � C) N m m o A� m � m a � r 1 \ U 10 I W D m M n U) > ;° Z �m�m� r� ,=m= cnv-D1 No m m X 0 m D U A \ m +p v N � D � L X O Nm O m 2 Z m O ,m. Z NO w y� 2 mv� x so Z m w o< z l" z Op � y w0 w ` Z xw v O Az Nm o< z l^ m op do a z 0 D r F s v N I rv��# o � x s rsl W y A � U) mm n D n D ? D moo U'Dm icf) O� Z I y O O Cd �y � y o ^00 ^� `V r a w r- i N D r v A z N � C) N m m o A� m � m a � r 1 \ U 10 I W D m M n U) > ;° Z �m�m� r� ,=m= cnv-D1 No m m X 0 m D U A \ m +p v N � D � L X O Nm O m 2 Z m O ,m. Z NO w y� 2 mv� x so Z m w o< z l" z Op � y w0 w ` Z xw v O Az Nm o< z l^ m op do a z 0 D r F s v N I rv��# o � x s rsl W y A � U) mm n D n D ? D moo U'Dm icf) O� Z I 61 181a 1 �. B Hiller GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION M& g ADVISORY COMMITTEE Coletta 2885 Horseshoe Drive South )J(0JEgVJ3J Naples, FI 34104 u - January 20, 2011 BY........................ AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: December 16, 2010 V. Budget Report — Gloria Herrera VI. Landscape Maintenance Report — CLM VII. Landscape Architect's Report — McGee & Associates A. Maintenance Report B. Reuse Mixing Chamber —Warren Street C. Doral Bridge Project D. Lighting Study — Pebble Beach VIII. Transportation Operations Report-Darryl Richard A. Project Manager's Report B. Review of the To Do List IX. Housekeeping Item X. Committee Reports XI. Old Business A. Pinehurst Estates Signage B. Doral Circle Light Fixture Repair XI1. New Business XIII. Public Comments XIV. Adjournment The next meeting is February 17, 2011 at 4:00 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Mainter&fe@Orres: 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Date: Naples, FL 34104 Item #: Ittf 161.1 B. GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, Fl 34104 December 16, 2010 Minutes I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Bob Slebodnik at 4:00 P.M. 11. Attendance: Members: Robert Slebodnik, Tony Branco, Kathleen Dammert, David Larson, Jennifer Tanner County: Pam Lulich- Landscape Operations Manager, Michelle Arnold - ATM Director Others: Mike McGee -McGee & Associates, Jim Fritchey -CLM, Darlene Lafferty— Juristaff III. Approval of Agenda Add: Xl. A. Pinehurst Estates Signage Xll. A. Questions Regarding Audit IX. A. Doral Circle Light Fixture Repair Tony Branco moved to approve the agenda as amended. Second by David Larson. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. Kathleen Dammert arrived 4:02 p.m. IV. Approval of Minutes: November 18, 2010 Change: VII. D, pg 3, last paragraph, first bullet, should read: The Power Point Presentation will be reviewed by the Committee at the MSTU "December" meeting David Larson moved to approve the November 18, 2010 minutes as amended. Second by Jennifer Tanner. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. V. Budget Report — Gloria Herrera Pam Lulich reviewed the Budget Report: • Collected Ad Valorem Tax $52,296.40 • Construction Transfer $4,624.44 • Water and Sewer Expenditure $8,532.39 Robert Slebodnik inquired on the items that were built into the $8,532.39 Water and Sewer Expenditure. 1611 B 18 Pam Lulich responded: • The Expenditure was for Monthly Potable Water (for Irrigation) • The Irrigation System will remain on Potable Water until - The Mixing Chamber is installed - Reuse water supply is connected • The Mixing Chamber Bid Award was delayed Robert Slebodnik was disgruntled that delays on the Bid Award resulted in additional cost of $60,000.00. He questioned the completion date for installation of the Pumping Chamber. Mike McGee perceived the installation will be complete 2 -3 months. Discussion continued on the high Potable Water cost. Pam Lulich will provide a Report to the Committee on (FY10) Potable Water Cost Statistics for a yearly comparison. Jim Fritchey noted the new Plants require additional watering. VI. Landscape Maintenance Report - CLM Jim Fritchey reported the following: • Routine Maintenance is being performed • Chili Thrips were treated and are under control Discussion occurred concerning the Plants with a chloriodic appearance. Jim Fritchey perceived it was due to seasonal changes and the dry weather. Additionally the Bougainvillea is not watered. VII. Landscape Architect's Report - McGee & Associates A. Maintenance Report Mike McGee reported 50% of items on the November Landscape Observation Report have been addressed. The December Report will be emailed to the Committee. B. Reuse Mixing Chamber - Warren Street Mike McGee reviewed the following: o Test Dig was successful - No stone was discovered - Adequate Depth for the Tank is available o Submitted AG TRONIX Proposal to upgrade to an AC Controller for the Pumping Station - Pedestal is not required ($585.00) - Revised Quote Total $6,140.65 o Existing DC Controller will be relocated to Valley Stream Robert Slebodnik moved to purchase a new AC Controller in the amount of $6,140.65 for the Warren Pumping Station. Second by Jennifer Tanner. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. 2 16 I 1 B 18 C. Doral Bridge Project Mike McGee reported the following information: Bridge Sidewalk Construction Plans (See attached) • Type F Curbing will transition from Drop Curb • Proposed Sidewalk width is 5 ft. David Larson moved to finish off the Pedestrian Walkway as described (in the Construction Plans) the length of the Bridge and not tie into anything else (sidewalk that is not presently installed.) Second by Jennifer Tanner. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. D. Lighting Study - Pebble Beach Mike McGee distributed the Accent Street Lighting Evaluation Report and CD for Committee review. Pam Lulich submitted McGee & Associates Proposal $512.00 for additional Services on the Doral Circle Bridge Renovation. Jennifer Tanner moved to approve the additional $512.00 for McGee & Associates for the Pedestrian portion of the Doral Bridge Design. Second by Kathleen Dammert. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. Pam Lulich presented a Scope of Services by McGee & Associates ($892.00) for Public Meeting attendance and Power Point Presentations. Jennifer Tanner moved to approve the additional $892.00 to McGee & Associates for attendance of 2 meetings for the Presentation of the Lighting Project, to the Board and Annual HOA meeting. Second by Kathleen Dammert. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. Mike McGee previewed of the Power Point Presentation on the Accent Street Lighting Evaluation: (See attached) Proiect distance • Approximately 2000 linear ft. • Full length of Pebble Beach Blvd from St. Andrews to the Intersection of Big Springs Dr. North Electric Energy Use and lama Source Lifespan Comparisons o 70 Watt LED cost savings of $25.85 per year (per fixture) Initial Installation LtghtinQ Systems Opinion of Costs o Solar Powered Systems - Visionaire $702,699.50 - Inovus $461,674.40 1611 B18 o Conventional Electric Powered Systems - Lumec $106,660.00 - Lumec LED $114,888.00 Estimated 5 Year BudgetimlOperatinv Costs • Electric Based System - Average Annual Budget $7,814.00 • Inovus Solar Based System - Average Annual Budget $17,562.00 - Battery life expectancy 4 years • Visionaire Solar Based System - Average Annual Budget $17,754.80 - Battery life expectancy 4 years The Committee suggested to stream line the information on the Solar Powered System in the Power Point Presentation that will be given at the Annual Civic Association Meeting. Mike McGee suggested utilizing a survey form at the Civic Association Meeting for Public comments. VIII. Transportation Operations Report - Darryl Richard A. Project Managers Report (See attached) B. Review of the To Do List Pam Lulich reviewed the following: Item 4 - Electrical Lighting Related Pam Lulich will confirm if the Cosmopolis unit has been ordered. The Committee requested the item be completed prior to the February 22nd Civic Association Meeting. Item 7 - Painting Pinehurst Estates Signs Presented a Sign Craft Quote (See attached) • Refurbish Lely Sign $1,966.00 (off Doral Circle) • Clear Coat Lely ground sign $390.00 (Augusta/Forest Hills) • Pinehurst Estates $1,171.00 - Pressure Wash - Paint monuments and letters Robert Slebodnik reported a quote $325.00 was obtained from a Paint Contractor to pressure wash and paint the Pinehurst Estates Sign. The Contractor declined the job as he perceived the paperwork required by the County was excessive for the small job. 4 1611 B18 After discussion Robert Slebodnik suggested polishing the letters on the Pinehurst Estates Sign in lieu of painting as they are made of high tech plastic. The Committee requested Staff obtain additional quotes for the Sign Refurbishment. IX. Housekeeping Item A. Doral Light Fixture Repair - Previously discussed under Vlll. B. X. Committee Reports -None XI. Old Business A. Pinehurst Estates Signage XII. New Business A. Questions Regarding Audit David Larson inquired if Audits are conducted on MSTU Funding as the question was raised at a Civic Association Meeting. Michelle Arnold responded the Clerk's office provides Audits of the County Budget. Tony Branco suggested purchasing a piece of plastic from Plastic Specialties to replace the cracked lens in the Light Fixture on Doral Circle. Pam Lulich perceived the item may be purchased via the County credit card and requested a motion by the Committee to make the purchase. Tony Branco moved to replace the plastic lens on the Doral Circle Entrance Sign Lighting and use the County credit card if possible. Second by Kathleen Dammert. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. XIII. Public Comments -None There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 5:48 P.M. 5 1611 B18' Lely Golf Estates Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee RobertSlebodift, Chairman These minutes approved by the Committee on C-� a,b - I , as presented X or amended The next meeting is January 20, 2011 at 4:00 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance CC Transportation Building 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 3 LL LL T L N T N Z J LL C R 1611 o O � M r- 0 0 0 O O 011000 O (O O O, N M V MOO - OMO,.tO 0 660 0 0 7 C p 000 NO 0 CD V 11 CO(OO OOOU1 0 0 C O r- M O I� 0 0 r` L 0 0 N N ,OOMO N� (`7 C00� O x(0000(0 O M D m U a M W O M r N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = aN- O 000 O N 0 O O 00 COO O 00 O O O O C) CD r- N Efl EA3 V3 V3 V3 Ef3 b9 Ef3 ff3 fig ER (i> (A 60 !A 69 ffi> (fl (A 6l3 6F3 V> _ _OOOOf�O'RNO0 00 r-M 00 0000 c- O 00 O O N(00 Wh WC00000 OMOCD O 00 OMI�CO� W O V N C 00 r-m r- co 0000_0 t` O 00 LO _ - NW W ON V'w ON0 M 't 00 C (Q 'It "- Mn -0O VV- MOO O LO M C �M OOM O �QCO 'M -M MM M M - N 1-: - e- NOO O� OO OO �co V NN N r CON V3 H3 V3 H3 V> LL NM O 64 69 6s 69 (l> 61) (f3 6-3 M el3 H> H3 61).61) 6.3 (l3 6l3 N K3 613 W. (R 69 61316R, (A (l3 (f3 fR 69. w W. V> ul W> (fl ff> H3 609 Ge' LO V Q � to - r N v - oU O V O n m C m X 2 U 7 t N O 220 M a) m u H 2 >O '� C a) d i m N C C > n a) U d 2' m 'O N d m E O U C N CD r m O O L Co °�(n2 C a ~ ~�_ 7 d U C O m w• Q) Q N N (n 0 N a) '1 7 Co r- p co - C (6 m m a) m 2 m Z N s m O. ? m is %� 001 LL (V O 10. C a) E 5 C U X N .m. � x N j� N 7 X N dd W,C"O N N +m., 7 C C U U C m �0 m 3 O N U O O O 2 J N y X X 0 "O O m O (n N N N N w '� E m Q) N N N N N N p N a H F v M C Td N m� U 'O 7 m >m C (n C� O Z� Z E 0 mod > a) Z a C C C N LL E IL H >d> C N ,�, d a) a) a) a) f4 0 m— N U m br(n(nww � V 0000 >t.m+ 7 7 003>:0°'�o�, -0 .0a)m! a— C) 0- w"-i w -LL LL WU J a JO -(nJ _3 -j LL LL LL W OD OD OM(0 I- C)0000) 0�(00 NO M COO 0 C �OOOM hOMN 00.- V ODM � OM Of I�OD nhh r-- 00 Nr- N r-N N N(0(0� NN N N N N N M N 0 0 0 0 CO M N M O VO a N N N N N N N�� N N N � � .- B O N N W CD n O - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 O N 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _.. N 01 � O V O cc =_ D as a 't vvv LO aaava�7�� •-�-!' 2W of E m Z d r C 0 E aA i 7 O 0 N � p E m U U 3 .U+ J CO O N N U U U U U O s 0 0 0 0 0 z UA N N N N CO T CU 417.(4 .m 0 00 c aQaaa'm W U U m off$ off$ .6 off$ OAS ? EmpY V, a"im r�°a)a)a)da)a�ayi� a1 0 0 0 0 `p 0-'O N j, U U U U U ( (Da p m 00 FL LL LL LLCC=Co 22222zcn W ;:� a O (O O 00000060000 0 660 0 0 7 C p 000 OOOU1 0 0 OO0000O001l- O 00007 O M D 0 0 0 0 0 0� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 M D O 000 O N 0 O O 00 COO O 00 O O O O C) CD r- (O C'101(O _ _OOOOf�O'RNO0 O vv0Nw O O N(00 V O OMI�CO� W O V N _ O O� O O CO N O 00(0 O O 00 LO � OO ON �NO M C �M M - : NOO OO OO �co V NN N r CON V3 H3 V3 H3 V> tf> 63 (l3 (i3 64 69 6s 69 (l> 61) (f3 6-3 M el3 H> H3 61).61) 6.3 (l3 6l3 ! � O O (0 �M % (fl (fi (fl (l3 H9 a W, (l3 (l3 69 v O CO V 0 � 0 O- M M N O Or- ,q -00 O(00 r-�0 00 V (00� M V W N M � O 0- 0 0 0 , O , 4 �2(On O r- M M C O O M - 69 60 Cfl Eli ff3 U9,60 co (l> H9 (fl (l> (fl b9 64 H3 I- r 7 0 OON(Or NOCDO M CO 00 0 O O ll� M - Cl) V M O O O0 00 CO v N M (O (O M � O O O O Cl Cl) O 0 O O O N O V N � M r O O C O O O C O 0 O C r O O C co M O C MO(° It d to3N (f3 (0) ff M V M N M V 11, � V) 7Iff> H9u36S 61) v3v>Ivaoll>H3 (l3 Ul164 e3 es>(s> (s>(»(s>(»V>(A(»H3 v3 K31N>Iv31Wi(l>NA kA (l>kl>I(l3 v31 v>IN O O O O O(OO 000 000(OOOOOOOOOO 0 00 v O O O(O OOo 00000 O O o o o O O O C) C) 00 OOOU1 0 0 001 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 00 O O O N O O ONO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 00 O O O 0) V O C000L _ _ O O� O O CO N O 00(0 O O 00 O �0 � OO ON �NO M C �M M - 0 NOO OO OO �co V NN N r CON r O M 01 O " N LO V � to - r N O V O to It w (4 63c eY) 19( 969( A9H3 (l>(a(f>(l>e3u3U3>(l3v), 69K36flu9 es> U>( 131V> IIF >Mlll(/-71r171F3v>NAIco(9419l40 O m z a o 2 F Co W J LLJ J 2 W W W Of w O 0 ~ Q-' (n J a U) F- i:) = J O LJJ w Z w CHOZ WOUZw CO QaJ a 0- W = QJ CD x Ww o XwLL CO ~a J 2 ZZW O 0 wZ O �O Za FF- z�JWma �O z WwH w� W Zm ~zz UC�zW ? I zD ULU 000 LUODLULU 0 ww } zOw-= iw��CLW<D cai)cnz�? f- Jwaxr OHO — 0 of0ZFLL(n cnO oa�wdxOf wzlJ ZZOOO w J_OZH -Uju) LLaf='-WWO OwzHOw W QZ0WUa WOLJJD -U)wX 00 C7 QQ 2Wa =WwLLLLWWWW�UUO(r <QmY ZZ_Wa2wNOHW�Ow��w » >m LL aa=(n�xzU)U) SOU) LL Cn�F W�cZ0P:P:0 U lYa�aln(nWWCn�lY�J 0r J H W W� j a a w CY U' R la- U' Of 5 Z 2 w H:),:2 � J 2 Z W (Jr 2 LL � 2 w Of w a. a a a 0 0 0 U) U) (I% F 00LLLL.???O�F-UVz��wu= 8W:li ?mcan2�D- 00 00n< F- ca WW � �NM�(n COh 000�NM� Nt0nd1010 NM�(n COh 00010 NMI ht0 h00 Oi0� N M � r �!-� ��� ��NNNN NNNN NNMMM MM MM MM NA �a a V a 16 I 1 B 18 C 0 m n m a 0 N m p tp W V [71 A W N O (D 0o V m (n A W 0 N 3 m m n � m D T o Z m m D r N m D C z U) m T= Xi Z -i D Q- 1 Z m - -i 1� ° m D _ D � S -i Dr m� m T p D A T p T p - n p D m cn O 0 (�A m m nn CO T OZ cNn ZZ to T ST ncn O� = O O CO C -zi n n < m D Op T� (7A Ar mZ T n rn(� mS Vl = (fin �S i m D Z� OD AX � m o A -i pn mr r -i m Z m A Om �� D �p o Omp n r Or nm -i A m Dm m z o ° to -1 z ?� =irD- O n uDi m Q. v w; v n O A z 0 - m n T' __ n m o n T < O A m Uf 2 1 z (n 0 m 0 Z < D N S - -i T -� D p -4 O p> r C A n C D n co 0 O A O n m 1 Z T Z K F r n m D N O Z A C A �m W D 0, A m O Z p T i m m0 00 w A n z G1 �r A< m xX rA X m rn mm OAm An < Z UDi m 0S m O> DZ Z T m A Z G7 m D D �0 0 m� po m m Zim p0 v v m A 2 D Q A A A A A m A > (n A N n S p m D 'o n n o� rn(n A C r J n �n Z� �rn D m m n o° N n q O n -i Z r N n D i -i m U7 i _i p T w Z m Oo n i o O m N r m T O = Oz m n m D S Z n o 0 m m n o m Oc SO uCi m Ao pC me C A r� OO Dr w -ipm O rC-D rZ �O Z cn zA A m AO TA r 0o T O A p A - -. co __ _ z 1m ZA 0 A -u -in m 0 mm rm A M �_ p D v+ D -i pT �� Z x m n -Ni 'rpm 2m m rn0 A0 p T r S O i O Dz iv Z _m ? w D m v D-0 pm n °O n n 0 OZ m uzim ZD 0cn mm z TO ,ZDi o n 0 =iA z O -i C m N A D� X A -1 A 00 O< K U) A p -i N v Zrn A A m N ?i 0 D A Z v C O v r T n C ^� cn D?t ZZ nA o n m z D DO nr m n A m p rn m0 n Dm OD m m T 0 0 S rm y O() m= OTo m W n m Z y O N -i W> O n X m A m2 Zz y � m F D �D 00 A n' p m v' m Z 0 r w u cn r i EDn m o - -. -in U) p, _n D m n cn m X to Z m T D m D _ O Z N m O A -6 m-J r0 n T O r O n Z O m X -n D Z nA m0 w rn m r c m m X rn v � � cn rn v �� A N N O C A p `. -n A -i 0 O S D to . cn m D Z� O �� r m O 0 A n0 c -i z p r v 0 K Dm m� n D v r Z m T -n m A- A n O -+ . on 0- w= A n Nm m x < T m n �C z C Z U) 0 m 0 co> nm m v mm m 0 A Dp OD nj K > Uri (f) n pO zN = 0 r n O n m m r0 v Z< T n m <O C Emit p OC ?t A cn Z A m 3 n ? p n -n r 1 o ut Z A � < -4 D m C T W p S x O 0 Ur v 0 .D.iQV0 T X u A v Cmi O A _ z c o � D m c a � S czit � A n 0 Z c 0 Z p D D pm zz m m n in O0 m O m M r m r m m r r r r U) m r U) r r U) r r C m r y T T p T T T T N Im T -n tv T -( -Ti T{ U) U) :3 A f J N N N ? L, 0 p A N A J Ww m O A 1 O O N A 01 J m o D ER 49 Vi ffl EA fA d9 fA fA fA (A fA M Y+ M fA fA M < > O 7 n O O O cn °Q 0 _ m vN O O (n W O _ (n cn O N On _ O U o 0 0 W 0 0 .. n D D D° r ° m OD o 0 u 0 0 0 o m o 0 0 0 0 o _ o 0 w w w Fn 69 -._. Fn at Fn v6 yr F» fA w .n v+ e» cn v+ w cn Fn En 6q cn w co _ m N _ N W o d m O m O N N m W N N U W W N O W O W m N A O N O V (0 m N O O V W W V 0 O 0 W to O O m m A m O O O O N co V O N O N O O O 0 0 1j O O (n O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m A O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O C 0 m n m a 0 N ul O V to d v3 0 m' (D �. N pl w n A M V 00 O r V O O r V c » Co w T x D K 00 O W N c_o m m V In O In o O 00 �. a m w A J 0 J v N On (v m N 0 A v fD N m^ 7 >t m O 3 fD 7 C1 3 fD (D T� V ci 3 7 3 Q N 1611 618 z 3 m aa, ## N m m -n 0 2 v CD a 3 m aaaac.e. d' �# O 3 m ni t#O 3 m d' 00 D 3 m m' 0#0 3 m M. V 3 m ci T 3 m Q.m d CTS 3 m m A o 9 m n d W 3 m a ti N 9� m aD ti n W ° m m lQ m m v M C a W a f7o C cn A r O � D O z O A D m D CD O � (D ° o 0 m oCL o a) (n a�_�� ° , N 3 o (D C� xN;7D 4 OD x x���7T0m r °—' ti N -I �l rm aim x0 x p� ° c�cn m S N m c 7 c 7 (D 3 cn p m c 7 C a 7 c 7 m 7 O M ' N< m 7 m Q 3 Q Q M m �' N 3 O- °- N n N C :3 m 3 m m 3 c 7 N 3 7 N n N 0= D 7 7 7 m m N U Q O < Q� n 0 z m m m m m — 0) 0 C cD SD 0. O m < Cl) cn zy N O � a', O' -ls O' O < N O O < m N< a7, N CL � O_ wm a y N (D == (� N -0 m -a 0 = o O- 0 m x m 3 7 m< ° o N m Q N� °- N CL 2 m Q 7 m c 7 c j (° N m TJ m O m T1 O �_ m = _ 0 j(P N 7 (n d (D n N C In n N N ° 0 , m n� I m(D " j O N 0- Q 7, C m (D < Q^ m 0 0_ O .. C N O_ + m d 7 °(a ... .-. 7 _0 ... Q 7 (n m m o< m N z W j m' 7 m — D m m m :L N 7 O N (D D ( c m 3 m fn m Ul n O ^' m c. O N N 7. n C U S O C 7 m N to m N Q' N 0 O N N N 6 N N N - O O O m S S m S m-0 o r m o°(D '.3 �_ 7 3� 3 :r .--. ? 5.3 d 7 O 0 ° 3 m Q K-0 3 (mD O 7 m N o O_ O m= < O 3 (p 3 m co m m C m m m S 0 3 0 O (Q 31 m O 0 0 o m 3. m o 7- N 1 Q m 3 �-'. 0 9 m m �. 7 m$ 3' m 3' m 0 '0- � m -(On 00 C/1 (SD _0 'O 0 7 O N 7 7 -p ? 7(D (D 7 W Q a O_ �- m 03 Q 7 m N N ID ZI << ((D m (D (n < ((D m 0 o_ �- m m 3 � 0 Q aT co (D N o 3 S c- 0 3 N ,r 7 Q v co m N D m S o o 0 = 0 N T= 7 7 Q m N m 7 0 C 7 N (D O '� m -° (DN a �1 N 7 N m O (D :E :E 7 (n O7 7 j D x 7 7 N c x 7 3 CD N N Q N O 7 (D m Q N r° (D N Q r° m M 20 7 2 c 7 NpOj °- N Q ... Q 3 7 N j 7 ii o o ((D C:31- 0 3° 0 O - a ,< o s m o 7 O (n 0 7 O ° 0 N 3 00 S 0 < = 3 C v Q N N o(nm N 4. - U(n N 7 CL 0 CL (D S °_(nm m 7 v (� N Q U) (D0 (D 000 :5 Zr (D o (° j (o . o z a - °< to n k N �_ N (SD 7 O m S (o 7 m 7 N m N O O 0 CL (p p a !n 0 .(n.. C p m Q N 0 -(D m (D 0 (D < m N o Q 0 m N- o 0 ? n (D s s o 3 m _0 m Q (D m (D m N O z N m O n O 3 m z --I N z 7 �� o 'O m 0m 1 i o�v (D Q) C 0n o — O .•' n .d•r 0- < 3 �' m (D lD lQ m m c ° (CD: CD O � (D ° o 0 m oCL o a) (n ° , N 3 o (D C� S,' 4 2. (D ° tOn r °—' ti N -I �l rm aim o �3 p� ° c�cn x 5 'I', IV cn p m CL ° °gym n00, 7 O M O O O ON �*D M m �' v0 o -<C m 3 (nn p m m o D 0 E m -t ° � � r a N U Q Q� n 0 z m o � _0 a 7 C cD N cn zy C j 0 ((D D <, Z7 H. wm a y (D (� N -0 0 -a 0 0 3 c N CL 2 0 0 (D 6 O O nri = �.� O 7 (n d (D Q N C In n N N ° m , m n� I (n cn O y(D (D (D (n "a O -9 (U L c m (D < N 3 m m 7 7 0 d 7 m m m m 7 _0 CL 3 z zr N S n 7 (D = C7 z N D < U) M 07 N (D D ( c m n O < N c. O n N a q• 4 'i % AL 'I', IV CA 0 V to a 3 o -4 r° m n J M G V 00 O a 0 r 4 C * W w T K Ci D x O N N �Z .D J V (A Q T 0 0 0 1 a m w A 0 v 01 Oo m N O -•n A v m t' 7 m 0 0 m C1 al Q m lD 7 T� V 7 7 to t7 O N M ib1 i B 18 r a a c N• ct n rt M II� K T7 i 2 w '� omm (7 0.m Et O N (A c+ S (1D r a .n 0 N N 003 m n - -mow r C CL T a) o 7 f1 N o c m m 0 It o d � n 0 �. M c. Dl 7 3k W M c.c.aaaQ d 7 W M d 7 Xkk V d 7 T M DJ 7 # M M d 7( *k A m Q W Gni S W_ < a m — m O f7 3 m a �* w m 0 f?o A) m O n O Z O ;a D X m D m r Q r -n � D m c TI D 0 Z � cn � c (D a 0 v CI m m m Cpps (po(p (D N N N O N 3 CD (D -(Dy. m (D cn (D cn (D m m (n (D (n C ° w O m o K C N m U) m O�' 7 Cf 0 Q O m m 7 m N 3 9 D v � m O 7 7 w N 7 d 0 0 S 3 C C 0 N 0 <3< m�mcN_..2�3m o <°m(°� O..O 3cW3�a�m� 3 N -O S 6 N 7 N. N. (D 00 mom S S Q �m Q Q a) 0 III, =° � O N nmo0m�2 C p (y n 7 N 7 7 0 7 m 7 m _- N (U N O U) 7 m N _. p U U) O 7^ m CD a C " 3' m 3 U) O O m X C 0 N� _� �. N m (mD O 0 (D N G� N N �'m m o p N m 3� QSO Q;m (n (Op U 0 N �_ N O' U7 o o O O (D m T p W (D -O S 3 O j(A O i < < -„ 0 Q < (p ^ m X < a' c Q v m m : :3 c ; m fp m Qo 0 �. (D Q° p °� 0< � m W (D w m OL, �. Q 0 c v O c ((D x 7 7 r. U) m (� 7 0 m 7 S n 7 C 0 o �� m o Q D d 3 o°< 0 0 0 o N n O - O1 (<D v (h � Qm (� -�0 O D v Q (p 0 m o W Qo r m c c c 3 c ... c.m c(D v m c m ° Q� o m m T m - a= o d �, O � m m (mp 6 (D (n (A l< N m Z 2 O' (n N O .0-. m C C C v n O' C =r o m @ m 3 3? i O n N 0(D CL 7 Q 3 7 N N n O N °_ N °_ d Q U) S D) OC N C_° m O- C 3 m Q C 3 T m 7 N Q N G° O °_ n ? o 7 0- (n (ND C v (D m � o =� o r D) O � D. o' = =r m ° o 3 o - N� o O o Q0= 3 (p -.a 0 X o 0 0 3 �m ,) p m 7 D) r 0 m fM O 7 p 7 to w o o O C_ IL Q- Q ?� m U = O Z Q CL _ r m.(D(Do�� � mm N 6-0 ut 7 O< m 3 S m U j S N > O Q 'O Q^ OS S g- Q 01 :3 v°i ° ° . FD n (D "- � 4-O =1 o - -'• N m m (o m ° _ o � Q m 3 (n ° o cm (D o Q (� m v7 O Z m O n O m Z r a a c N• ct n rt M II� 33 3 3 3 33 o a o a 8 M � N N N O 10 00 It r a a c N• ct n rt M II� j �{ =E ) \ Ra/ 2 - a 008 /\9 } 23 (2 « m �Z /ƒ �f j \ �CL # 0 � w h a 0 $ U' � m 2 0 § � E ■ § k ] (D � � to » � 7 \ 161 1 E E E ƒ O k ■ ■ r k= q o 2 / D m % \ 0 0 % § / / \ w 9 \ / � / \ X 2 0 0 m .. 2 >w0!=na@� A ■ K K K , Q. :D (D « m CD - ��x&® 0) m .�: C j S E to = oq - aFfF& IEIn e = /kGm 7m* *;& ,m W :a^ =mom \ 0' - -. (D W W ® ° ° o m Fn D �/® rr =x, / }% §/Q o ;q8; a(n \ m -m 777 fu ) (D 0- =� E {yzq±] p& _yp <; %)-a ° \� / q E 0 k =m \ $' 2 ~ / / \ E (D S }_ / \ \ k m \ &J / J q % 0 @ CL \ L 3 Ln. CL � § � /w ® ® - ; \ :m E 2 E \m 2 \ j2 zzG % )$ 3 $ 0 z o \} \ a }2 Q� \\ / \ ,\ ? % cn j I 7 m Z 0 ■ m 3 2 m 0 q � � z ¥ ICA E E E E ■ ■ , § A A A ■ K K K K @ # # .�: ( ( § / \ n ( m .® \ .■ > ■ �■ � $ 0 0 V m d �3 0 3 to m n A N O J H V � 00 o „ 0 O r V C * W N n K D x o N N vD 0) A � m V (/1 O T_ O O aD 1_ CL m w A 0I v w w ID A O T A v m 0 m 01 7 lC (DD M W 'O 7 7 Q O v 1611 B18 r a t a 0 Al 10 I I "'P c N• ft (D n ft G M 3 3 3 `L 3 m �(D co y � � 00 < pm c d a ' < = D N O n O Z O ;o X = m D m r O r T m C/) D m Cl) m m D A n D -j 0 z if (o � c m v O v v m � x o 'Q d r d S aa) �_ aa) 0 v 0) o a o IN+ O 7 7 c 7 N 7 7 3 F p B a r a) —ava m m v n—aSa rot m c p c N T7 LJ <. Z7 O x O x ! (D 7 (D 0 7 (D (D 7 N (D 7 S (D p 7 (D 7 O O ,.. O d O Ln N O^ N O N O O1 - N 7 7 7 7 7 J O D D D D D D ty N N fll a) N Di W M s p (� a� D cn a( cn z ° Cl) cn (D (D m o O S O S O N fy G 3 (D m u o o D v D (D n (p m (D 7 O m s s m m a Z E D 0 c > m > m ? (o 0 3 7 >_ >_ m m o o m n (o w ((D o o o < < < ? v (D m FD- (D m 0 CD N (D r-j O N 7 (D d 7 al N N (D < Z CD to) O N m �_ — X N �+ N w _ N eo Q c O (0 m N 2 (a N S f N < N m CA M O Z m O n O 3 m Z ILA r a t a 0 Al 10 I I "'P c N• ft (D n ft G M 3 3 3 3 3 3 � A o N a a 3 a o IN+ O TV DD V F � S ! 1611 B18 Report for Lely MSTU Meeting date: January 20, 2011 Lely MSTU Project Status (L -49) ACTIVE - Lighting Study (Pebble Beach pilot study for lighting options) 01- 20 -11: Concept to be presented at the following meetings: 1) December 16, 2010 MSTU Meeting. 2) Saturday, January 8, 2011 Lely Civic Association (9 am) 3) February 22, 2011 - Lely Civic Association "Annual Meeting" (6 pm - 7 pm) (L -48) ACTIVE - Modifications to Doral Circle Bridge (Committee Request for `lighting on bridge') 01- 20 -11: 100% plans are under review by staff for ROW Permit (L -47) ACTIVE - Installation of Mixing Chamber 01- 20 -11: Contractor has mixing chamber and pump system ready for installation. Order for Motorola Equipment is pending issue of PO based on quotes. (re: contract expiration for Motorola/Ag- Tronix) (L -34) - ACTIVE - On Going- Ongoing Maintenance Contract: Commercial Land Maintenance; 7- 27 -09: Commercial Land Maintenance has trimmed all shrubs to required specification of "Cut to 18 inches and maintain at 24 inches "; Staff will inspect the project on a `weekly basis'; Contractor is to provide service reports within 12 hours of completion of any contract service (ref: notification originally sent on 6 -30 -09 to CLM via email) 01- 20 -11: Ongoing Maintenance is by Commercial Land Maintenance (L -45) ACTIVE - On Going - McGee Annual LA Services - Landscape Architectural Services 01- 20 -11: McGee & Associates under ongoing contract. a 1611 B18 January 20, 2011 Lely MSTU "To Do List" Subrogation Recovery: a. Accident 859;Median #8 on St. Andrews Status: cost of repairs $515.00; pending accident report/recovery. b. Accident # 947; Found on 01 -15 -10 on Forest Hills Blvd. Status: cost of repairs $607.00 ; pending accident report/recovery. c. Accident # 1055; Found on 10 -26 -10 at median tip -St. Andrews at US 41 Status: cost of repairs $540.00; pending accident report/recovery. 2. PENDING: Sidewalks on US 41 at St. Andrews — ADA Compliance: Status: Project has been brought to attention of FDOT for funding to address ADA deficiencies noted. 3. COMPLETED: CLM: have A & L Laboratories do analysis on Xanadu at Augusta and Forest Hill. Existing plants have some yellowing. Status: CLM has treated plant materials per A & L Lab report/recommendation. Plants show improved health per the treatments. 4. COMPLETED: Electrical Lighting Related: Find out what type of `lower' wattage bulb is available for Doral Circle. Residents are complaining that `the lights are too bright' Status: Lumec has provided updated quote with discount for Lely MSTU. Per Ron Steedman: I have spoken with Lumec regarding this. In that you are considering changing to Cosmo units for these fixtures, we would propose to supply the conversions at $275.00 each (per head), which supplies the reflector at no charge. These fixtures are out of warranty, cut in that Collier County is a valued customer, we wanted to work with you to both eliminate the problem, and upgrade your system. (RS) 01- 20 -11: Update: Material Purchase requisition has been submitted. 5. 2 COMPLETED: FPL Lights on St. Andrews Status: Kate Donifrio, FPL reports that contractor has been called to investigate /repair the lights on St. Andrews. Ticket Numbers: 2815 & 2816. [Repairs reported completed on November 19, 2010 by FPL staff.] 6. COMPLETED: Copy of Traffic Counts for St. Andrews Status: Staff is confirming traffic counts — copy will be scanned and sent to committee. [Sent: Fri 11/19/2010 4:19 PM] 7. PENDING: Painting Pinehurst Estates Signs Status: See new quote from Painter. 8. PENDING: Sign Refurbishment: (1) Doral Circle, and (2) Augusta @ Forest Hill Status: See new quotes from SignCraft 9. PENDING: Planting Sunshine Mimosa at Valley Stream 0 16 1 B18 Status: CLM to provide quote. Quote has been reviewed and approved — recommendation is to hold off on plantings until new irrigation controller is installed. 10. Lighting Presentations by McGee & Associates Status: Mike is going to present on the following days: 1) December 16, 2010 MSTU Meeting. 2) Saturday, January 8, 2011 Lely Civic Association (9 am) 3) February 22, 2011 - Lely Civic Association "Annual Meeting" (6 pm-- 7 pm) AGnTRONIX SPECIALIZING IN MOTOROLA IRRIGATION CONTROL SMEMS 1304 N. 15th STREET IMMOKALEE, FL. 34142 239 - 657 -5519 I CUSTOMER NAME I Collier County DOATM /Transportation FINANCE DEPARTMENT 3301 Tamiami Tr E, Bldg F 7th Mr. Naples, FL 34112 1611 B18 QUOTATION /PROPOSAL DATE QUOTE NO. 1/19/2011 1826 QUOTE GOOD FOR 60 DAYS. Sonya @ag- tronix.com WWW.AG- TRONIX.COM 9 Awn TERMS REP SHIP VIA PROJECT Net 30 SLC LELY MSTU PUMPING ... ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY PRICE TOTAL LELY MSTU PUMPING STATION - WARREN ST F4864A IRRInet -M AC 12 DO and 4 DI, w/ Radio Kit (Radio 1 1,462.50 1,462.50 Ready) FUE5522A CDM750 Radio 450- 512MHz 1 -25W 1 888.00 888.00 FLN3707 CDM Install Kit 1 120.00 120.00 967 -0159 Power supply, switching, in:85- 264VAC, out:12VDC, 1 110.00 110.00 12.5A, 150W, power factor corr FLN9588A 110/24v AC Transformer (Irrinet M) 1 160.00 160.00 MLB -I2 -AC Surge Protector AC 4in/l2out 1 378.00 378.00 51020 -WM Leviton Surge Protection 1 189.00 189.00 7299 -NW (8299 -... GFI W /Switch and Cover Leviton (15Amp) 1 39.00 39.00 TP7010 (T -11) Single Gang Box 1 4.15 4.15 70072 Yagi Antenna 450- 470UHF 7.1db (N Female) 1 150.00 150.00 451969 LMR400 20' Antenna cable w/ conn (LMR400) 1 60.00 60.00 SB -24DSS SS Enclosure DD 24W X 36H 24D 1 2,280.00 2,280.00 PED -24DSS SS Pedestals 24W X 12H X 20D 1 585.00 585.00 Assembly Assembly & Bum In 1 500.00 500.00 DOCS OPERATIONS MANUAL 1 0.00 0.00 Thank you for your business. TOTAL 1 /�i $6,925.65 QUOTE GOOD FOR 60 DAYS. Sonya @ag- tronix.com WWW.AG- TRONIX.COM 9 Awn CONTEMPORARY CONTROLS & COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 505 WEST HICKPOCHEE AVE. SUITE 200, BOX 107 LABELLE, FL 33935 Name /Address COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2885 SOUTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 ATTENTION: A/P DEPT. 1611 618 Proposal Date Estimate No. 1/19/2011 6979 Phone # Project E -mail Description Qty Rate Total IRRlnet -M AC UHF 12 STATIONS 4 INPUTS 1 1,413.75 1,413.75 CDM750 UHF RADIO 403- 470MHz 1 -25W 1 858.40 858.40 CDM INSTALLATION KIT FOR MOSCAD 1 187.50 187.50 IRRINET PS CHARGER 115 VAC 114 VDC -8A APC 1 819.25 819.25 214 110 To 24V AC Transformer for AC Solenoids 1 116.00 116.00 MLB -12 -AC SW ITCHABLE OUTPUT PROTECTION 1 255.15 255.15 PROTECTION MODULE ( LEVITON) SURGE 1 252.56 252.56 PROTECTION /NOISE FILTER LEVITON WHT GFI RECPTACLE & COVER 1 18.28 18.28 SINGLE GANG BOX 1 7.81 7.81 406 -420 7.1 dB YAGI MYA4063 1 55.04 55.04 3/8" LMR400 Coaxial Cable 20 0.957 19.14 DBL DOOR STAINLESS ENC 24Wx36Hx24D 1 2,624.50 2,624.50 24" DOUBLE STAINLESS PEDESTAL 1 739.50 739.50 Assembly of equipment 1 110.00 110.00 INSTALLATION AND POLE IS NOT INCLUDED. Total $7,476.88 Phone # Fax # E -mail Web Site 863 - 675 -2372 863 - 675 -7140 holman863 @embarqmail.com http: / /controls.embargspace.com n 1611 B18 RichardDar From: Streem Center [please @donot.reply] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 6:10 PM To: RichardDarryl Subject: Streem Fax Results - 1 of 1 Successful - [FAX: 239 - 657 -4849] - QUOTE REQUEST FROM DARRYL RICHARD - COLLIER COUNTY - MOBILE NUMBER 239 - 253 -9083 Result Summary Job 14865 Number Subject [FAX: 239 - 657 -4849] - QUOTE REQUEST FROM DARRYL RICHARD - COLLIER COUNTY - MOBILE NUMBER 239 -253- 9083 Total 2 Pages Desktop Faxing Submitted 1/19/2011 6:06:35 PM Recipients 1 Successful 1 Recipient Results Name Number /Address Attempts Pages Sent Attempt Time Result Elapsed Time (239) 657 -4849 1 2 1/19/2011 6:07:29 PM Success 02:09 (9.6k) 01Z 161 1 January 18, 2011 Collier County Growth Management Division Painting Proposal Steven Constantineau Dan Anderson Complete Painting and Restoration 105 Palm View Drive Naples Florida 34110 239 -591 -2035 PAINTING PROPOSAL COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION Att. DARRYL T. RICHARD 01 /18 /2011.Constantineau Painting/Proposal/ 133 Boltusrol Rt 161 1 January 18, 2011 Collier County Growth Management Division Painting Proposal JOB: 133 Bultusrol Dr Golf cart crossing Signs Stucco and Letters Pressure wash with chlorine and water mixture then high pressure clean. Grind top of wall to remove rust and treat with rust inhibiter. Caulks all cracks. Prime one coat with S.W. Loxon Primer, Paint one coat S.W. Super Paint satin. 01 /18 /2011.Constantineau Painting/Proposal/ 133 Boltusrol rtA)* January 18, 2011 161 i Collier County Growth Management Division Painting Proposal TOTAL PRICE: I, Steven Constant! neau /Dan Anderson Complete Painting and Restoration, propose to provide the services mentioned in the above scope of work at 133 Bultusrol for the following dollar amount $1500.00 Fifteen Hundred Doiiars and no cents. There will be no deposit before the commencement of contract. Upon completion of project $1500.00 Fifteen Hundred Dollars and no %nt will be due. NOTE: Price presented above will be valid for a period of ninety (90) days following the date of this proposal. You may request an updated price list at any time after that date. Thank you for your time in considering us for your painting needs. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (239) 591 -2035. Respectfully, Steven Constantineau /Dan Anderson Complete Painting and Restoration ACCEPTANCE SIGNATURE: DATE: PRINTED NAME: DATE: 01 /18 /2011.Constantineau Painting/Proposal/ 133 Boltusrol D(5 ( 1611 B I SIGNCRAFT QUOTATION 3861 MERCANTILE AVE. NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 CELL (239)20-0503 OFFICE (239) 643 -1777 exL 203 FAX (239) 643 -2499 DATE: December 22, 2010 TO: Daryl Richard PHONE: 252 -5775 EMAIL: DarrylRkhard@eolliergov.net FROM: Kara Kaleta SUBJECT: Small Lely Ground Sign We are pleased to quote as follows: Small Lely Ground Sign mounted on to posts Clean and Prep Apply urethane Clear coat $390.00 plus tax PLEASE NOTE THAT A 50% DEPOSIT IS REQUIRED AT TIME OF ORDER. BALANCE MUST BE PAID WHEN INSTALLED. CUSTOMERS SIGNATURE Kara Kaleta PRINTED NAME Kara Kaleta SALES CONTRACT THE ABOVE INSTALLATION IS FIGURED ON SAND SOIL DIGGING CONDITIONS - IF ROCKS OR OTHER OBSTACLES ARE ENCOUNTERED. THERE WILL BE EXTRA CHARGER AS DETERMINED BY THE SIR I ER THIS ORDER IS NOT SUBJECT TO CANCELLATION, SINCE IT CALLS FOR MADE TO MEASURE GOODS. ALL ALGREMBNTS ARE MADE SUBJECT TO STRIVES AND OTHER CAUSES OF DELAY OR INABILITY TO PERFORM WHICH ARE BEYOND SELLERS CONTROL IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT THE MERCHANDISE COVERED BY THIS CONTRACT SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE SELLER UNTIL FULLY PAID FOR. AND THE PURCHASER HEREBY SPECIFICALLY AGREES THAT IF, UPON DEMAND, SAID PURCHASER DOES HOT PAY BALANCE DUE ON THIS CONTRACT. THE SELLER AT ANY TIE THEREAFTER MAY ENTER SAD PREMISES AND REMOVE SAID MERCHANDISE, RETAINING AS LIQUIDATION DAMAGES ALL MONIES PREVIOUSLY PAD ON ACCOUNT. IF ANY PAYMENT DUE SELLER IS NOT MADE WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF ITS DUE DATE, PURCHASER WANES ALL RIGHTS TO GUARANTEES AND WARRANTIES. PURCHASER AWM THAT IN THE EVENT SELLER RETAINS AN ATTORNEY TO ENFORCE ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CONTRACT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PAYMBI T THEREOF, HE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO RECOVER FROM PURCHASER ALL COSTS INCURRED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LISTED TO A REASONABLE ATTORNEY'S FEE 1611 818 SIGNCRAFT QUOTATION 3661 MERCANTILE AVE. NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 CELL (239)293-0503 OFFICE (239) 843 -1777 ext. 203 FAX (239) 643 -2499 DATE: December 22, 2010 TO: Daryl Richard PHONE: 252 -5775 FROM: Kara Kaleta We are pleased to quote as follows: EMAIL: DanylRichard@colliergov.net Refurbish Lely Entrance Sign off Doral Circle Remove sign and Bring to shop Clean, prep and paint in order to restore finish to new Re- Install Sign $1,966.00 plus tax PLEASE NOTE THAT A 50% DEPOSIT IS REQUIRED AT TIME OF ORDER. BALANCE MUST BE PAID WHEN INSTALLED. CUSTOMERS SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME 2C4 ra ?valeta Kara KaleM SALES CONTRACT THE ABOVE INSTALLATION IS FIGURED ON SAND SOIL DIGGING CONDITIONS - IF ROCKS OR OTHER OBSTACLES ARE ENCOUNTERED, THERE WILL BE EXTRA CHARGES AS DETERMINED BY THE SELLER. THIS ORDER 18 NOT SUBJECT TO CANCELLATION, SINCE IT CALLS FOR MADE TO MEASURE GOODS, ALL AGREEMENTS ARE MADE SUBECT TO STRIKES AND OTHER CAUSES OF DELAY OR INABILITY TO PERFORM WHICH ARE BEYOND SELLERS CONTROL IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT THE MERCHAM[M COVERED BY THIS CONTRACT SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE SELLER UNTIL FULLY PAID FOR, AND THE PURCHASER HERESY SPECIRCALLY AGREES THAT F. UPON DEMAND, SAID PURCHASER DOES NOT PAY BALANCE DUE ON THIS CONTRACT, THE SELLER AT ANY TIME THEREAFTER MAY ENTER SAID PREMISES AND REMOVE SAD MERCHANDISE, RETAINING AS LKXxDATDN DAMAGES ALL MONIES PREVIOUSLY PAID ON ACCOUNT. IF ANY PAYMENT DUE SELLER IS NOT MADE WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF ITS DUE DATE, PURCHASER WANES ALL MGM TO GNARANFEES AND WARRANTIES. PURCHASER AGREES THAT IN THE EVENT SELLER RETAINS AN ATTORNEY TO ENFORCE ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CONTRACT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED To PAYM@IR7HETE1DF, HE SWILL BE ENTITLED TO RECOVER FROM PLDCNASER ALL COSTS INOUR ED, SOLUDM G BUT NOT LWM TO A REASONABLE ATTORNEYS TEE. 6 Commercial Land Maintenance Full Service Landscape Management 3980 Exchange Avenue • Naples, FL 34104 Office: (239) 643 -6205 • Fax: (239) 643 -5012 E -mall: info @commiandmaintnet BILL TO: Collier County Dept of Transportation 3341 East Tarriiarrrdt Trail Naples, Fl 34112 LELY MSTU 12116/2018 4500122710 1611 B18 v %i }`. &0 - El 00-3465 CUSTOMER NO. TOTAL THANK YOU! WE APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS PLEASE NOTE PAYMENT TERMS ON REVERSE SIDE 1.5% WILL BE ADDED MONTHLY TO ALL INVOICES OVER 30 DAYS UNTIL PAID $5,370.00 &I LELY- (VALLEY STREAM CUL -DE -SAC a 4 Irrigation Technician Supervisor (Supervisor labor to remove ind 65.80 260.00 dispose of approximately 2,500 sit. 11. of turf and treat with round -up) for the planting of Mimosa Stringilosa. I 8 Regular labor to assist. 55.00 440.00 � 385 Bougainvillea; 3- gallon (purchase and install 385 Mimos 1 12.00 4,620.00 I! Stringilosa, 1- gallon placed on Z centers) 1 Reimbursement for round -up materials purchased (cost + 25 ) 50.00 50.00 1 � TOTAL THANK YOU! WE APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS PLEASE NOTE PAYMENT TERMS ON REVERSE SIDE 1.5% WILL BE ADDED MONTHLY TO ALL INVOICES OVER 30 DAYS UNTIL PAID $5,370.00 &I 1611 B18 Landscape Architecture December 30, 2010 Mr. Darryl Richard, RLA, Project Manager Lely Golf Estates Beautification, M.S.T.U. Collier County Transportation Services Division Alternative Transportation Modes Department 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, Florida 34104 Subject: Annual Landscape Architectural Maintenance Consulting Services for Lely M. S. T. U. 2011 -001 P. Dear Mr. Richard, The following is presented for your review and approval. The maintenance consulting services will be provided on a monthly basis generally coordinated with the M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee monthly meetings. The limited refurbishment design services will be quoted on a per project basis due to the unknown requirements of the work to be performed. McGee & Associates agrees to provide the following services for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months. Monthly Services Task I - Attendance at all Lely M.S.T.0 publicly advertised meetings. (Based upon one meeting per month 16 hours) Task II - Attend no less than two (2) meetings in the field with staff to review the project. (Based upon 4 hours) Task III - Review and comment on the "General Maintenance Report Sheets" which is required to be submitted by the Contractor with pay request submittals. Review of estimates provided by Contractor with recommendations. (Base upon one review per month 3 hours) Task IV- Provide written and/or oral comments and recommendations based upon on -site observations of the M.S.T.U. areas addressing: improvements, landscape plant and irrigation maintenance problems or deficiencies. This includes evaluation of Contractor performance per contract specifications. (Base upon one report per month 24 hours) Task V - Submit monthly written report to Collier County Alternative Transportation staff three (3) days prior to M.S.T.U. meeting. (Based upon one report per month 12 hours) OPTIONAL SERVICES Task VI - Upon Request Limited Refurbishment Design Services 1. Provide limited (minor) refurbishment design services and observation of installation on an as requested basis, i.e. deliverables/functions might be as follows: a. Diagrammatic area sketch planting plans with a recommended plant list. b. Plant field locations by staking, flagging or paint marking_ Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist 5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. Q. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101 Phone (239) 417 -0707'" Fax (239) 417 -0708 LC 098 * FL 11 023A 1611 g18 Page 11 Lely Golf Estates M.S.T.U. Grounds Maintenance Consulting 2011 -001P Task VII - Upon Request Miscellaneous Services (Estimated) 1. Provide assistance in developing the contract maintenance specification for purposes of bidding. 2. Attend pre -bid meetings and assist in preparing any necessary addendum related to maintenance contract bidding. Maintenance Consulting Services Fees Based upon the scope of services McGee & Associates will provide monthly Maintenance Consulting Services for a fee of $8,584.00. Principal /Senior L.A. 36 $128.00 $7,552.00 (Time & Materials) AutoCAD Technician 6 $ 62.00 $ 372.00 (Time & Materials) Administrative 12 $ 55.00 660.00 (Time & Materials) $8,584.00 Total The limited refurbishment design services for Optional Services Task VI and VII will be billed per Schedule B hourly rates only upon written request for services. Limited refurbishment design services for Optional Services Task VI and VII allowance: $2,500.00 Reimbursable expenses allowance: $ 250.00 If you should have any questions or need further information please contact me any time. We look forward to working with your Department while improving and maintaining our roadways. Cordially, ichael A. McGee, President, McGee & Associates LC 098 1611 B18 LELY MSTU WATER USAGE - BASED ON 10 MIN. RUN TIME FOR ZONES Gallons used per cycle: 27,410 Gallons used per week at 2 days per week: 54,820 Gallons used per month: 237,553 Gallons used per year: 2,850,640 Station Meter. Actual 1 2333.2 2333.6 30 2 2333.6 2333.7 30 3 2333.7 2334.1 30 4 closed 5. 2334.1 2334.4 30 6 2334.4 2334.9 30 7 2334.9 2335.2 30 8 2335.2 2335.6 30 9 2335.6 2336.0 30 10 2336.0 2336.4 30 11 2336.4 2337.0 30 12 2337.0 2337.2 30 13 2337.2 2337.4 30 1 2340.1 2340.3 30 2 2340.3 2340.5 30 3 2340.5 2340.8 30 4 2340.8 2341.1 30 5 2341.1 2341.3 30 6 2341.3 2341.6 30 7 2341.6 2341.8 30 8 closed 9 2341.8 2342.1 30 10 2342.1 2342.3 30 11 2342.3 2342.6 30 12 2342.6 2343.0 30 13 2343.0 2343.4 40 14 2343.9 2344.3 30 15 2344.3 2344.4 30 16 2344.4 2344.6 30 17 2344.7 2344.9 20 18 2344.9 2345.3 20 19 2345.3 2345.6 20 20 2345.7 2346.0 20 21 2346.0 2346.3 20 22 2346.3 2346.5 40 0 Now SSOWOO $ 7.oMOO -ot� 32 WO W-0 S m Gallon Usage 1300M iii.i t 1 i i i 1 i 1 1 i ♦ sp t C� #""� D 161,1 1319 T =i cost i SuOiDtt w cm SSO fm _.. WOO -" 7 i � o i l t I t 1fi .1 , y N91 !P #aftn uaw p 303973 161all Wtile*-- !)F(' 0 6 2010 Hennin Coyle Coletta THE OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 20, 2010 In attendance were the following: Alan McLaughlin, Fire Chief Mitchell Roberts, Chairman, Copeland John Pennell, Plantation Island, Advisory Board Member James Simmons, Port of the Islands, Advisory Board Member Tod Johnson, Everglades City, Advisory Board Member Ronald Gilbert, Port of the Islands, Advisory Board Member The meeting was called to order at 6:04PM. ,B 19 Mitchell Roberts — He welcomed the new Board Member Ronald Gilbert. Mitchell Roberts —The minutes will be passed around for review by the board and approved later in the meeting. A motion was made by Mitchell Roberts that the Advisory Board Reports for May, June, July and August 2010 be reviewed by the board members at home and if they have any questions they could be discussed at the next meeting. The motion was seconded by John Pennell and was passed. Approval of Minutes for May 17, 2010: Mitchell Roberts made a correction on the front and second page of the Minutes in regards to the middle name of the new board member it is Gilmer not Gilmore. Then a motion was made by Mitchell Roberts to accept the minutes as written it was seconded the motion was passed and Chairman Mitchell Roberts signed the minutes. Page 1 Misc. Cones: Dale: d -LL item f l� Copies to: 16l i 819 Old Business: 1 -75 Station Chief McLaughlin — He had a meeting with FDOT's Deputy Director and his associates. Matt Hudson's personnel, Commissioner Colletta, Dan Summers, John Norman and a representative from the Federal Transportation System were also there. After much discussion the State is not interested in a stipend or help with funding for responses to 1 -75. They have concerns that if they do it here they will have to do it everywhere else in the State. The Chief made it clear at the meeting that with the budget constraints is put the Department in a bind. Mr. Summers explained that the County has a moral obligation to respond. The State's question was should they be doing medical and fire responses as a State transportation system? His question to them was this is your State road are you responsible for the people on it since people are paying for it. It isn't a free road like US 41 or County roads people are paying to be on your road and you already contract with a company to fix flat tires and take gas out there. Mitchell Roberts —The whole toll thing has been our contention. Tod Johnson — That toll road generates a lot of money. Chief McLaughlin — He mentioned at the meeting with the State that the Florida Highway Patrol received 50cents of the toll last year which is about 4 million dollars a year but they are a State agency and they cover all of their State roads not just a section of road and that is their concern they would have to do this all over the State if they do it for our Department. However, there was a lady from the Federal Transportation System was there they have 6.8 million dollars tucked away to fund certain projects like this out of federal money. She is going to take the information back and make a proposal. She felt there is a chance of possibly some federal money could fund the station. The Chief made it clear to the State that with the current budgetary crisis and where we are with this year's overtime it may be possible that if we run out of money he might have to shut an engine down. If he has to do that he will not respond to 1 -75 they will be on their own we are not going. Page 2 1611 ' 819 (Continuation Chief McLaughlin) He told the State that he was not removing the protection from the tax payers to respond to transient people using 1 -75. Dan Summers feels that the County has a moral obligation to service that area and that the short fall of funds could be met through general fund however, that would be a loan our funds and general fund cannot be mixed we are an MSTU. They could offset the cost by giving us personnel from EMS or qualified personnel paid out of general fund. The best hope we have now is monies from the Federal Transportation System. He found out they are building another facility at the 63 Mile Marker on the north side and they are going to redo the whole facility on the north side. Mitchell Roberts asked if it was the Wilderness access. Chief McLaughlin — He said no that is at the 72 Mile Marker. Right at the 63 Mile Marker they are also going to build some facilities on the other side of the road he spoke to them about that. This is about a year to two years down the road to re- building that facility and making changes. James Simmons — He asked if the two deaths yesterday at the 62 Mile Marker was out of the Department's territory. Chief McLaughlin — That is about 400 feet from where the fire station would sit on 1 -75. It was on the on ramp at the 63 mile marker. We respond all the way to the County line which is the 51 mile marker which is 50 mile response one way for us. We go from the 83 mile marker to the Broward County line. Mitchell Roberts — He was wondering why the State has not raised the tolls if they need the money. Chief McLaughlin — He said that there is a directive not to raise the tolls but his perspective is the users should pay for the station. The State feels it is a bad political move to raise the tolls. Mitchell Roberts — It is a tough decision because if your budget was cut where you could not pay any over time you could be in a bind. Page 3 1611' 819 James Simmons — He asked Mitchell Roberts if he had spoken to any of the county commissioners. Mitchell Roberts — The last time he talked to Jim Colietta he suggested the Chief set up a meeting with all the transportation people for us to attend to actually open the door about additional tolls or revenues but it sounds like that is what they just did. Chief McLaughlin — He said John Norman pushed this thing forward he is the representative in our District. He told the Chief he would not forget us we are in his District. He is well aware of this problem. Mitchell Roberts — As a board we are still concerned of our resources traveling up to a hundred miles which is significant wear and tear on the vehicle to provide emergency /rescue services on a toll road to a population base that is not paying taxes for this service. He asked the Chief as a Board is there anything they can do. Chief McLaughlin — At this point no we are waiting to hear back from the Federal people we want to pursue this first. Todd Johnson — He brought up the fact it is not only a stress on our system but also people having to wait and hour for help. Chief McLaughlin — He said they had an example of that yesterday there was an accident 40 to 45 minutes away and the people involved did not make it. However, there is no way to determine whether being closer would have made a difference or not. He said Golden Gate and Broward County are funning about 80 calls a year on 1 -75 where as we run 300 calls a year. Eighty percent of the accidents happen between the 52 and 72 mile marker. Historically well over 60% of the call volume on 1 -75 is in our District. This District provided 827 apparatus hours and 1776 man hours servicing 1 -75 the tax payers paid for that is also the number of hours the equipment was outside and away from protecting the tax payers. Mitchell Roberts — He asked what the dollar cost would be. Page 4 1611'819 Chief McLaughlin — He said it is $75 an hour for an engine @ 827 hours then Man power costs @ 1700 hours. Mitchell Roberts — He stated that if an engine goes to 1 -75 the engine at Port of the Islands goes to Carnestown. So Port of the Islands looses their fire Protection for that time period it is now 12 miles from their residence responding to a call on 1 -75. Chief McLaughlin —Yes, to the center of the District so it can respond anywhere in the District equally. Ronald Gilbert — He asked what percent of the operating budget is going to 1 -75. Chief McLaughlin — He couldn't tell him that but we did $7,000 in fuel. As an operating percentage we would have to break it down in man power hours, apparatus hours and fuel hours. James Simmons — The calls run from anywhere to 48% to 65 %. Chief McLaughlin—The calls vary a lot of times the call will be canceled. Mitchell Roberts — He said if you look at the Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board monthly report a call volume for 1 -75 has been included. Chief McLaughlin — He said we can break that down by FEMA has an apparatus hour costs plus a fuel costs. We would have to obtain the miles and man power hours as well. Ronald Gilbert — He said because of the distance you cost of operations out there is going to be higher. Page 5 1611 Chief McLaughlin — One of the reasons we bought the attack truck was to save on fuel. The engine is 4 miles to the gallon where as the attack truck is 12 miles to the gallon. Also the wear and tear costs on a 30,000 pound rig is more than on a 550 replacement costs for the 550 attack truck is a lot less than an engine. This way the engine can stay in the District so that we don't lose our fire protection. Mitchell Roberts — He said it is the off season and it averages 40% to 42% the responses to 1 -75. Chief McLaughlin — There haven't been that many people on the road but it is picking up. Boat Lift Chief McLaughlin — Next on old business the Chief brought up that there was power to the boat lift it's up and running. James Simmons — He asked if we got a new pole. Chief McLaughlin — LCEC got the permit for the pole and we paid for a streetlight. We already had the power running to the dock we had to get an exemption for the City of Everglades there was an issue with DEP and the docks. We ran the power to the dock with a letter from the head of DEP which exempted the City from any liability for work on that dock as a matter of public interest for rescue then LCEC put in the pole and hooked it all up. New Business: Budget Chief McLaughlin -- The final budget hearing is this Thursday night (9- 23 -10) so by the next meeting he will be able to present them with the final budget. We took a hit this year we had a 27% reduction in property values mostly in the City of Everglades. Page 6 16 11 B 19 (Continued Chief McLaughlin) It really affected our budget it took most all our carry forward approximately $300,000 we had to put it in the budget to cover payroll to keep our personnel $150,000 we had for part of our construction project for Port of the Islands station had to be taken out and put back in reserves. In the last three years we have lost about 42% of our budget between the 2.5% roll back Governor Crist put in our first 12% from last year then this 27% By the next meeting he will have the actual numbers for them. We are down to 1.27 million from almost 2.8 million. We are down to bare bones minimum there are not capital projects for next year. We had $30,000 in capital projects we do a lot of things for the stations we don't have that now. James Simmons — He asked about the Port of the Islands Station. Chief McLaughlin — He said there isn't any money for that station. The budget balanced this year but next year is more of a concern because that $348,000 of carry forward isn't there our reserves which at one time were $600,000 is down to $40,000. Next year is going to be very grim he has already had a meeting and the union is well aware of it if somebody doesn't come up with an answer we'll probably being laying off three or four people which means we will have to shut down the station at Port of the Islands. Everyone is aware of this it is in the AUIR Book and if you read the bottom of my budget there is a paragraph there explaining what is going on. The Commissioners are aware of it and so is the County Manager we are looking for a solution. He has a Meeting with Commissioner Colletta on the fifth to discuss some of these things. As you well know Corkscrew had to lay off three and they are looking to lay off another eleven next year they are in worse shape than we are. Golden Gate is not much better, East Naples, North Naples is following right behind and Isles of Capri is in the same boat we are next year as well just the impacts are not the same. Along with the movement of tax reductions comes a loss of service. A lot campaigners out there not to raise the taxes but when they lose the services they are going to wonder what happened. James Simmons — He wanted to know where the money was coming from for the new code enforcement building. Page 7 1611'819 Chief McLaughlin — That is funded through a totally different means. We are a MSTU we were created for the sole purpose of collecting taxes for fire protection we are not part of general fund EMS is part of general fund. Isles of Capri is a MSTU created by the County Commissioners and can be dissolved with the stroke of a pen. Your independent fire boards which are Golden Gate, lmmokalee, Big Corkscrew, East Naples and North Naples were created by State action as an independent special district and they have an elected board they collect those monies for the sole purpose of providing fire protection. The two municipalities the City of Marco and the City of Naples provide fire protection and that is incorporated with police protection and everything else. We have the highest millage rate in the County 4.0 we have the lowest population. What hurts us more than anything is that we do not have any large commercial industrial area like some of the other Districts we are largely dependent on residential. We have commercial in the City of Everglades but it is small compared to other areas. We have reservation people that don't pay money and the government areas don't pay either. The burden is being maintained by a very small share of people. Mitchell Roberts -- He asked what it you have to lay off staff and we have to close Port of the Islands what does that do to roll a unit out to 1 -75 then for protection here. Chief McLaughlin — We can't do it. It is in the budget that if the Station shuts down at Port of the Islands for any reason whether it's a lack of money for overtime personnel or job bank personnel or budgetary reasons of any kind then he will not respond to 1 -75 because he only has one engine for the whole District. Mitchell Roberts — So if right now you lay off positions Port of the Islands would have to close. Those are positions that were taken from here and put out there if they need to meet up they come back together. At what point do we legitimately say we've got to either "A" get with the commissioners and raise the millage rate or "B" we need to cut our service area period. One of those two things is going to have to happen. Chief McLaughlin — He feels we are going to have to look at that in January of 2011. Page 8 161 1 B 19 Mitchell Roberts -- Everyone else has taken hits it's almost like we are going to have to lose jobs before we have actually done everything that we could. Chief McLaughlin -- Those are considerations starting in January the beginning of our second quarter we need to look at we are starting our budget process a little early this year. If no one else has come up with any other solutions yet those are valid and serious concerns if we are going to lose personnel then we have to maintain what we have here we cannot send units out to provide protection in an area that is not paying for it. Mitchell Roberts -- If we have no capital funds if something happens to one of our trucks we would have no resources. Chief McLaughlin — The Department has insurance and we pay to the shop a fee to cover repairs to the vehicles unless something occurred beyond the normal wear and tear then we would have to do a budget amendment to cover the cost out of reserves. Mitchell Roberts — That could bring your reserves down to $30,000 or $40,000 overtime could eat that up. Chief McLaughlin — We use job bankers pretty heavily. They are part time personnel that are fully certified. Instead of paying an employee time and a half we pay them straight time and they receive no benefits whereas a full time employee receives benefits. As an option trying to save the District as much money as possible as a manager it is a great tool for me. Last year we saved almost $26,000 in overtime by using Job Bankers instead of full time employees. When we get the final budget by the next meeting I will have more solid answers. We had first meeting regarding the union contract it went very well and signed off about 80% of the contract at this meeting. The union is quite aware of the financial situation they are not asking for any money or rises. There were some language changes, some in house tiding up, and some policy changes. The second meeting should be next week. We will probably be up to 98% to 99% of the contract to be signed off. There is only one item out there it's not a real problem item we are just trying to work out some details everything is going smoothly. Page 9 1611 James Simmons — He asked if every Fire District in Collier County had a union. Chief McLaughlin — All but Isles of Capri they are the only Fire District that does not have a union. Port of the Islands Fire Station Chief McLaughlin — The plans are finished. The STP, environmental and engineering has been paid for. Mitchell Roberts — Asked how long they were good for. Chief McLaughlin — They are good for three years we were actually just about to pull permits until we got into this snag. We are about to pull permits and they are good for 18 months just to get the process going in case the money shows up. He met with the owners of Sun Stream LLC which owns the hotel complex. They want to start their project on the ten story building again. Originally they had planned a 7 story, 9 story and an 11 story building. They are making their 9 story building a 10 story and it will be a time share. In the past they had water flow issues which they have overcome so this project should move forward. That does two things for us in the Fire District it will be a huge tax revenue for us once they get the units sold that would be two personnel just from that building. In the past there have been in lieu of impact fee agreements done. He had the authority to go to them and say in this process of in lieu of impact fees for this project and the next two. Part of their problem for a final CO is not having a Fire Station on site for a ten story building. He is willing if they will provide the $350,000 for the renovation of the building for Fire Station he will waive the impact fees. Mitchell Roberts — He asked how much that would save them. Chief McLaughlin — He feels it will be a wash for them they could even come in and do the construction at their cost according to our plans. Mitchell Roberts — Would the County let them do that? Page 10 1611 g Chief McLaughlin — Yes it has been done before you can do things in lieu of that would be one way of getting that facility built without looking for grant money. Last Wednesday Chief McLaughlin and Captain Morris went over to the Department of Agriculture to look at the Rural Assistance Grant he would have to hire a Company to apply for the grant and due to its complexity it would probably cost $20,000 just to do that. It was an hour just going through the 14 forms so that's not going to happen. So this is an avenue we can pursue to as a District through the County if they are willing to do that we could build that facility and get it done. Impact fees are going to drop this is something that would be beneficial to us. James Simmons — The original study was to remodel the building. Chief McLaughlin — Yes, that's what the plans are to remodel the building. James Simmons — if they come in would that be a new building? Chief McLaughlin — No, they would do the remodeling they could either do it or fund the money to do it. The biggest expense will be the sprinkler system. Mitchell Roberts — He said whichever option is fastest would be the best. He mentioned the two options that if they were to do the construction there could be the possibility of them running out of money whereas funding the project in lieu of the Impact Fees would be faster especially if the permits were already pulled. Chief McLaughlin — They did discuss these options and those possibilities there would be a Fire Station in place before they start the structure. A Mr. Frank Hawkins from the Port has sent several a -mails to Commissioner Coletta. The Chief sent them on to Dan Summers and he has responded back. He brought up the issue of a CID Loan which was brought up several years ago. Two years ago the CID offered a loan to the County for the Fire Station. Initially the CID was going to build the building and then that fell back to they were going to give us land by the water plant, then it fell back to we'll give you a loan. The County is not going to take a loan from another agency. Page 11 16f 1 B19 (Continuation Chief McLaughlin) He has been pursuing that with some letter to the Commissioner. The second item he was talking about a new station six miles away. He is referring to the re- zoning of the land at the entrance of Fiddlers Creek which is 8 miles away in east Naples which is definitely on hold now. That is still outside of the 5 mile range so that would not change their ISO rating. He told Mr. Summers it is up to the Port of the Islands residence to shop for insurance the Chief told the CID that Emerson Insurance last year was giving an automatic 5 for us just being there. So if you have an insurance company that is not giving you a break you need to shop around. Some of the residents have saved from $700 to $1700 a year on their insurance depending on the company because of the satellite station at Port of the Islands. Mr. Hawkins said he was not getting a break on his insurance. The Chief said that is not the responsibility of the Fire Department or the County's job to make an insurance company lower their rates. The property owner has to shop around. Doing an ISO rating at this time is not a good idea because half of the man power was moved to Port of the Islands from Everglades City that affects this area also. ISO looks at miles to the station if you are outside the five mile radius you are a 9 or a 10. Chief McLaughlin — One of the DOF Brush Trucks is finished and a new well was put in at the Ochopee Fire Station 66. James Simmons — He asked if there were anymore thefts out there. Chief McLaughlin — No, not since we put a security system out there and new locks. We got the rats under control as well. If you walk around the back of the Everglades City Fire Station you will see two big 400 gallon tanks they are putting in a new RO water system for the entire building. They are going to change out all the faucets and fixtures it is about a $20,000 system the Facilities Department is paying for it. They also put a new air conditioner in the GYM. Mitchell Roberts -- At the school they provide bottled water because the students can't drink the water out of the water fountains. Page 12 1611 B19 Chief McLaughlin - We pay approximately $20,000 a year out of our budget to Facilities Maintenance for our buildings. Even though the Everglades Station Building belongs to the City we maintain it. So for years we have paid towards these building without Facilities doing anything. Recently they did both the air conditioning systems on both buildings; they painted and put in flooring. They have been real good about coming out and maintaining the buildings. John Pennell made a motion to adjourn the meeting and it was seconded by Mitchell Roberts it was passed and the meeting ended. Jl • J G� Mitchell Robe ts, Chairman Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board Page 13 LZ Y 3 161 1 FIE 2 Hiller rks & Recreation Advisory Board Meet"Q -- bls NGVemb®r-.17, 2010 - 2:00 PM North Collier Regional Park GO&Ai I ia AGENDA I. Call to Order VI. Old Business IL Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation a) Sale of Alcohol in County Parks - III. Approval of Agenda Barry Williams IV. Approval of October 20, 2010 Minutes V. New Business a) Employee of the Month for October b) Disc Golf in the Parks - Bob Buchan c) Gordon River Greenway Land Management Plan - Melissa Hennig d) Tobacco Use in the Parks - Jennifer Robertson b) Field Usage - Barry Williams VII. Capital Projects Highlights - Update on Gordon River Greenway Park - Tony Ruberto VIII. Turf and Irrigation Highlights - Rick Garby IX. Adopt A Park - Barbara Bue �: bg X. Director's Highlights -Barr I ((�� XI. Informational Items Item #: I 6J XII. Public Comments /Board Comments XIII. Adjournment C "' s'".a: B 2� Nove1 mber I 17 ,1010 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD Naples, Florida, November 17, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 2:00 P.M. at North Collier Regional Park Exhibit Hall, 15000 Livingston Road, Naples Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: John P. Ribes VICE CHAIR: Edward "Ski" Olesky Barbara Buehler Phil Brougham Kerry Geroy David Saletko William Shafer (Absent) ALSO PRESENT: Barry Williams, Parks & Recreation Director Sidney Kittila, Operations Coordinator Tona Nelson, Administrative Assistant Tony Ruberto, Sr. Project Manager Annie Alvarez, Regional Manager II Rick Garby, Parks and Recreation Jean Benoit, Parks and Recreation 1 6 I 820 ovember 2010 I. Call to Order Edward "Ski" Olesky called the meeting to order at 2:02 PM. A quorum was established. II. Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation The Pledge of Allegiance was recited and Invocation was held. III. Approval of Agenda Phil Brougham moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by Barbara Buehler. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. IV. Approval of September 15, 2010 Minutes V. c. Page 3 —1" bullet should read "precedence " V d. Page 4 — Last motion should read "Motion carried. " X. - 1 s` paragraph should read "Staff stated recommendations on the Master Plan will be submitted by the Advisory Board in January, while the Master Plan was due to the BCC in December. Staff anticipates Master Plan will be submitted to BCC in February 2011. " Phil Brougham moved to approve the October 20, 2010 Minutes as amended. Second by Barbara Buehler. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. V. New Business a. Employee of the Month Barry Williams announced the Employee of the Month for October 2010. Edward "Ski" Olesky commended and presented Jean Benoit an outstanding individual with the "Employee of the Month" award. John Ribes arrived at 2:05 pm b. Disc Golf in the Parks — Addressed after VIII. Public Speaker Albert Doria Jr., President of Naples Cal Ripken Baseball (NCRB) asked to become a co- sponsor organization with Collier County Parks and Recreation. He noted this is a not - for - profit organization and NCRB meet all the requirements to be a co- sponsor organization. He gave a brief presentation on their programs, the differences between NCRB and the Little League and baseball rules. (See attached) Discussion was made on concerns by both Staff and the Advisory Board and it was decided Staff will review and bring recommendations to the Advisory Board in December. c. Gordon River Greenway Land Management Plan Melissa Hennig, Principal Environmental Specialist — Conservation Collier gave a slide presentation on the Executive Summary. The Gordon River Greenway Preserve Land Management Plan was distributed. (See attached) 4 161 1 B20 November 17, 2010 Conservation Collier asked Collier County Parks and Recreation to consider endorsement of The Gordon River Greenway Preserve Land Management Plan. Conservation Collier land butts together with the Gordon River Greenway Park. She addressed the Management Goals as follows: • Remove or control populations of invasive, exotic or problematic flora and fauna. • Develop a baseline monitoring report • Restore and maintain native habitats • Develop and implement a plan for public use • Facilitate uses of the site for educational purposes • Determine if prescribed fire and /or mechanical treatments are feasible to decrease woody invasion resulting from past fire exclusion • Provide a plan for security and disaster preparedness Staff stated the Gordon River Greenway Park Land Management Plan was exceptional and recommended the Advisory Board endorse the Plan. David Saletko moved the Advisory Board endorsed the Gordon River Greenway Park Land Management Plan. Second by Barbara Buehler. Motion carried 6- 0. d. Tobacco Use in the Parks Jennifer Robertson, M.S. — FDOH Regional Coordinator reported on County and City Tobacco Policies in Southwest Florida Parks. (See attached) The following Counties have Tobacco Free and Smoke Free Policy and Ordinances: ➢ Sarasota Countv — Tobacco Free Ordinance prohibits tobacco products at youth athletic parks and beaches. ➢ DeSoto County — Tobacco Free Policy prohibits tobacco products in playground areas and ball park areas. ➢ Hendry County — Tobacco Free Ordinance prohibits tobacco products at youth parks or league activities ➢ City of Sarasota — Smoke Free Resolution on city beaches ➢ City of North Port - Smoke Free Ordinance prohibits smoking at the skate park and sports complex ➢ City of Punta Gorda — Smoke Free Ordinance prohibits smoking at children and youth parks and athletic fields ➢ City ff Cape Coral — Smoke Free Ordinance prohibits smoking in bleacher areas and dugouts in and around all ball fields ➢ City of Sanibel — Tobacco Free Ordinance at Community Park ➢ City of Bonita Springs — Smoke Free Ordinance prohibits smoking at youth parks, athletic fields and have designated smoking areas ➢ City of Marco Island — Tobacco Free Ordinance prohibits smoking at all city parks and have designated smoking areas She distributed and reviewed Tobacco Free Policy Myths and Tobacco Free Policies for Parks and Playgrounds Make Sense. (See attached) 3 161 1 B20 November 17, 2010 Staff asked the Advisory Board if they would like to pursue a Resolution or Ordinance for a "Tobacco Free" Parks environment. Discussion was ensued on how the Advisory Board would like proceed. John Ribes stated he was not a smoker and does not condone it. He would not support any broad policy for "no smoking." Phil Brougham stated he would support a reasonable policy and suggested Staff draft policy alternatives for review. David Saletko would support prohibiting smoking in dugouts and athletic fields but will not support "Tobacco Free." Edward "Ski" Olesky stated he was not a smoker and would support with designated smoking areas. Kerry Geroy stated she was not a smoker and has mixed thoughts and would support with designated smoking areas. Barbara Buehler agreed with Kerry Geroy. Jennifer Robertson stated they will provide County Ordinances being used by other Florida Counties. Staff will review other County Ordinances and provide the Advisory Board with options for their review and approval. VI. Old Business a. Sale of Alcohol in County Parks —Addressed after V. b. b. Field Usage — Addressed after V. b. VII. Capital Projects Highlights — Update on Gordon River Greenway Park - Addressed after V. b. VIII. Turf and Irrigation Highlights Rick Garby gave a slide presentation on "From Green to Beat Up" field conditions at several parks. In addition, he reported ➢ Early morning fog causes fungus leading to discoloring and other issues. ➢ Worn areas with heavy usage. ➢ Rotation of field use on measure of play ➢ Soccer fields need to be fenced. ➢ Every park does not have Maintenance Staff Kerry Geroy left at 3:21 pm A suggestion was made to use different grasses or artificial turf for areas with heavy usage. It was also suggested using dirt or sand in the soccer goal area. V. New Business b. Disc Golf in the Parks Bob Buchan, Southwest Florida Disc Golf Association (SWFDGA) - Special Projects Coordinator distributed the Proposed Disc Golf Course for Palm Springs Public Park for Staff review. (See attached) He reported not receiving any negative feed back. M 161 � R%November 1 , 2019 ` O The SWFDGA provided a proposed installation of a 9 -hole disc golf course in Palm Springs Public Park with a total cost of the project including labor was estimated at $7,365. Phil Brougham moved to support a Disc Golf Course as proposed for Palm Springs Public Park. Second by Edward "Ski" Olesky. Motion carried 5-0. Staff will review proposal and provide recommendations to the Advisory Board. VI. Old Business a. Sale of Alcohol in County Parks Barry Williams addressed the following concerns from the October meeting. Staff was directed to "provide historical data on sales before and after the sale of beer and wine approval as follows: • A record of any complaints or disruptions at Naples Grand No reports of concern were filed. • Input from the Purchasing Department regarding the sale of alcohol Contract can be amended to allow for alcohol. • Who approves Board of County Commissioner approval required to amended contract. Staff was not prepared to give their recommendation at this time due to some concerns with other parks making the same request. The International Festival requested approval from the BCC to sell alcohol. The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) directed Staff to cease directing this type of request to the BCC and to develop a Resolution or Ordinance to address special permitted use of alcohol in parks. Staff will meet with the County Attorney on this issue. b. Field Usage Barry Williams responded to a previous concern from David Saletko on the scoreboard remote device as follows. One of the controllers was malfunctioning. The scorekeeper, with the controller, should sit in line of site with the receiver. Team Captains can request controller. VIII. Capital Projects Highlights — Update on Gordon River Greenway Park Tony Ruberto gave a slide presentation on the Gordon River Greenway Park Site Plans. He provided hard copy site plans for trails, shade shelters, boardwalks, a bridge and 2- parking facilities. (See attached) Parking facilities will provide restrooms, a pavilion and a dumpster enclosure. The main parking facilities include: ➢ Kayak Launch and Kayak Storage ➢ Children's Play Area ➢ Bus Parking ➢ Pavilions ➢ Turnaround with Additional Parking at Kayak Launch by Gordon River ➢ 12' Asphalt Trail 161 1 B 2 0 November 17, 2010 ➢ Road going to Conservancy and Naples Zoo It was noted if there were no delays in permitting, contract documents will go out to bid in the fall. IX. Adopt A Park Barbara Buehler distributed and summarized the Golden Gate Community Park, the East Naples Community Center and Golden Gate Community Center - November 2010 Parks Report. (See attached) X. Director's Highlights Barry Williams stated the 25t" Annual Snow Fest will be held December 3`d. This is the 1 St year there will be a $1.00 admission fee. Staff worked with Consultants to draft the Master Plan and will be submitted to the Advisory Board in January and submitted to BCC in February 2011. He thanked the Advisory Board for participating in the TDC Workshop. With the Resolution from the Advisory Board and recommendations from the TDC Workshop funding will be received from alternate sources. XI. Informational Items — Read only XII. Public Comments/Board Member Comments David Saletko suggested Staff consider installing batting cages at Veterans Park. He provided a picture of Fleishman Park setup and stated costs would be minimal. (See attached) Barry Williams responded Staff will review options and consider the request. It was noted Edward "Ski" Olesky, Phil Brougham and Kerry Geroy terms are scheduled to expire in December 2010. Edward "Ski" Olesky has reapplied to Parks and Recreation for Advisory Board and BCC approval. Kerry Geroy does not intend to re- apply. Barry Williams stated Mr. Mitchell mailed a letter to William Shafer requesting his resignation based on attendance at Advisory Board scheduled meetings. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:05 PM. COLLIER COUNTY PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD Chairman John P. Ribes 0 COLLIER COUNTY PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD c Wdap 1611 B20 These Minutes were approved by the Committee/Board on I.L • to) • (O , as presented x or as amended s� 7 1611 B20 - -s 59v ■ -- 1611 B20 Why Babe Ruth / Gal Ripken? - More Focus is placed on the local league season. Participation allows a child to grow and excel at their own pace and ability while learning individual skills, sportsmanship and teamwork. We aim to recapture the good old- fashioned values and traditions of the past — promoting excellence in academics, athletics and the arts; nurturing character development; fostering an understanding and an appreciation for others; offering a wholesome outlet for children to engage in group activities; guiding children to take responsibility for their actions; and fostering a sense for family and community. - Honesty, Respect, Caring and Commitment are stressed to our children. - Believing that childhood is a crucial time of our life that molds the kind of adult we will become is what sets BRL head and shoulders above the rest. - Using youth baseball and softball as an avenue to teach how to play well the game of life is detailed utmost in our policies. - We promote youth baseball and softball as venues to foster fair play and honest competition instead of a win -at -all -costs attitude. - Last, but certainly not least, WE PLAY BY THE RULES and strongly emphasize respect for the rules by ALL participants. Our Motto is: "Where the PLAYER comes first!" 1611 B20 Cal Ripken Baseball Division Ages 4 -12 Keeping Baseball Fun — especially in the early stages of youth baseball- is a primary concern of Babe Ruth League's Cal Ripken Division, which is comprised of the following divisions: Major: Recommended for players ages 10 -12. Featuring a 50' pitching distance and 70' base paths, this new division is offered as an option to current league format, and still includes a tournament trail from district competition through World Series. M i n o i : Recommended for ball players ages 8 -10. Players build and refine their fundamental skills while beginning to understand game strategy and teamwork. In most regions, participants first experience post -season tournament competition in this level. Rookie: Designed primarily for ball players 6 -8, this division makes use of a pitching machine to allow for more hittable balls at the plate and more action in the field, while avoiding the fear of being hit by a pitched ball. T -Ball: Ball players 4 -6 learn hitting and fielding fundamentals in a supportive team environment. Young athletes hit the ball from a batting tee which is height — adjusted for a level swing, batting in order through the line up for the entire game. "The Babe Ruth/ Cal Ripken system allows youngsters to learn and play baseball with a gradual increase in level of difficulty, thus, producing better prepared players down the line....." W-� --1 0� Cl) oo CA � -o N a� Cr n `D '0 "< CD -p ;; O = � =r B. U3 °, •-�, to CD CL a 0) � CD c� 0' m '+ n c CD N 0 N CO) Q• PIL :r m fy c O CD p W U -p cD M ai < N CD _ O, C N (D o 0 2) N + M CL 0' m CD U) < CO) a o _O . �� 3 CD a) 0 ° rn oML (D O M 3� o a O CL .a U) N < A (n CD CD W O- N O' —,, , CO 1611 B20 n --1 0 Cl) oo v -o 00 0 �' m � cn a m PIL :r o Cl) (D o 0 CD 3 U) CD — cn 0 CD -11 U) rn rn N a 3� o a O < .a N CD (n CD CD W O- N CD - —,, , CO CD cn CD v cn n CD O O 3 W cD r, Q O -p 3 CD C) cn N o CO CD CD CD o cn --4 0 cn .cn .cn cn cn z w Lv a ors �- ° a-*< 0 CD = r* rn 0 cc cn m U CD 0 c 3 o v 0 C? CD o O w m 1611620 Naples Cal Ripken Baseball seeking to become a Co- Sponsor Organization • We will offer Fall Ball (only 2 Little Leagues out of 6 in Collier County offer this) • T -ball will start at age 4 (Little League starts at age 5) • Cal Ripken & Little League can inter league and play each other. (Both Little League International and Babe Ruth League, Inc have already agreed to allow this) • Local Little League Cope Tournament Director has agreed to allow Cal Ripken Major teams to play in the Tournament • Cal Ripken offers something other than Little League for the youth of our county (many kids have left little league for various reasons and are either not playing youth recreational baseball or are playing in leagues outside of Collier or are just playing travel baseball) • Cal Ripken should not be seen as a threat to Little League rather as a supplement (there is no reason why kids can't play in both leagues as my child and at least 20 other young boys from Golden Gate American Little League did last year when we also played for the Estero Cal Ripken / Babe Ruth league) The Estero Babe Ruth League 13 -15 yr old Division was State Champions in 2010 and this team was made up entirely of kids from Naples) • We meet all the requirements to be a Co- Sponsor organization: 1. We offer the recreational component 2. We are a not - for - profit organization 3. More than 51% of our games will be played at Collier County Parks 4. Our league will be made up of 100% Collier County residents as our charter is for Naples only. 5. Naples Cal Ripken Baseball will provide a recreational youth sports program as a service for Collier County. 6. All children who register will be able to play on a team that matches their age and ability. 7. We will provide proof of Liability Insurance of not less than $500,000 and name the Collier County Board of County Commissioners as a Named Insured. 8. We will have a background check process in place for all coaches and assistant coaches involved with the organization. Contact information: Albert Doria, Jr. / President Cell: 239 -398 -1994 Email: adoria @gulfcoastinsurance.com Secondhand smoke harms everyone and kills thousands every year. It contains over 4,000 chemicals, poisons, and cancer - causing agents. Can cause asthma, respiratory infections, and cardiovascular disease. It kills over 2,900 non - smoking Floridians every year. The 2006 Surgeon General's report concluded there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Children model adult behavior. Every day, 3,900 children between 12 and 17 smoke their first cigarette. One -third of those children will become regular smokers. Children view smoking as acceptable when adults use tobacco in family oriented places. Cigarette litter is hazardous. It is the most widely littered item in America and takes at least 10 years to decompose. Small children are at risk of swallowing, choking, or burning themselves. Butts poison thousands of children and small animals every year. Cigarette butt cleanup is costly to taxpayers. ■ Discarding cigarette butts on the ■ It takes 10 years for littered cigarettes to ground does not hurt anything. decompose; butts also poison thousands of small children and wildlife every year. ■ Tobacco policies at recreational ■ Policies restrict tobacco users from usin facilities will restrict tobacco users tobacco for a short period of time to from using these facilities. protect the health of community members and children. Recreation -based tobacco free po are needless regulations and a governmental interference. Tobacco -free policies for recreational facilities will be impossible to enforce. ■ Tobacco free policies are no more restrictive than those that prohibit alcohol use. Park directors enact policies to protect the health and well being of all citizens. ■ 82% of Floridians do not smoke. Tobacco policies are largely self- enforced and can be properly enforced with signage and education. Infractions are usually handled the same as a litter violation. For more information contact FDOH Regional Coordinator, Jennifer Robertson, M.S. (941) 915 -0826 16 0 Tobacco Policies in Southwes I-, Florida Parks` Sar I ota� Desoto Charlotke Glades d r.� Hendry Lee Map Key = has a county policy = has a city policy Collier *The table below lists the policies from North to South* Sarasota County Tobacco Free Ordinance (Tobacco products prohibited at youth athletic parks and beaches) Desoto County Tobacco Free Policy (Tobacco products prohibited in playground areas and ball park areas) Hendry County Tobacco Free Ordinance (Tobacco products prohibited at youth parks or league activities) City of Sarasota Smoke Free Resolution (City Beaches) City of North Port Smoke Free Ordinance (Smoking prohibited at the skate park and sports complex) City of Punta Gorda Smoke Free Ordinance (Children and youth parks /athletic fields) City of Cape Coral Smoke Free Ordinance (Bleacher areas and dugouts in and around all ball fields) City of Sanibel Tobacco Free Ordinance (Community Park) City of Bonita Springs Smoke Free Ordinance (Smoking prohibited at youth parks, athletic fields- - designated smoking areas) City of Marco Island Tobacco Free Ordinance (All city parks -- designated smoking areas) Jennifer Robertson, M.S. FDOH Regional Coordinator Communities Putting Prevention to Work (941) 915 -0826 M 1. Proposed Disc Golf Course For Palm Springs Public Park: The Southwest Florida Disc Golf Association is proposing the installation of a 9 -hole disc golf course in Palm Springs Public Park. Total cost of the project is estimated at $7,365.00. About our club: The Southwest Florida Disc Golf Association was formed to promote disc golf as an environmentally and socially beneficial sport that is challenging and rewarding for people of all ages and backgrounds and that can co -exist amicably with other recreational activities in the city's parks. For more information go to: SWFDGA .org Rationale: There are now more than 2000 Disc Golf courses in the United States and Canada, nearly all installed by city and county parks departments. They have found that there are few recreational activities that offer the high benefit -to -cost ratio of disc golf. Disc golf has relatively low capital and maintenance costs compared with other recreational installations, is environmentally sound, is played year -round in all climates and is enjoyed immediately even by beginners of all ages. What Is Disc Go r Disc Golf is played much like traditional golf. Instead of hitting a ball into a hole, you throw a more streamlined looking Frisbee disc into a supported metal basket. The goal is the same: to complete the course in the fewest number of shots. A golf disc is thrown from a tee area to each basket, which is the "hole." As players progress down the fairway, they must make each consecutive shot from the spot where the previous throw has landed. The trees, shrubs and terrain changes in and around the fairways provide challenging obstacles for the golfer. Finally, the "putt" lands in the basket and the hole is completed. Who Can Play? The simple answer is that everyone can. In studies measuring participation in recreational activities, "throwing a Frisbee" has consistently been a top -ten activity. A disc golf course serves a broader portion of the community than many narrower interest activities with higher cost, skill or fitness levels required to even begin to play. Men and women, young and old, families with small children -- all can play disc golf. Because disc golf is so easy to understand and enjoy, no one is excluded. Players merely match their pace to their capabilities and proceed from there. How Much Does It Cost To Play? Many courses are located in city or regional parks where citizens play free. Most private and several public facilities will charge up to $5 per day to play, or earn passive income from annual passes and/or fees to enter the park. The equipment itself is quite inexpensive — discs designed for golf sell for $8- $15 each and only one is needed to get started. What Kind of Construction Would Be Planned for Palm Springs Public Park? The installation of a 9 -hole disc golf course at Palm Springs Public Park would include the construction of tees and the installation of signs and baskets. No foliage would need to be planted or removed. A few branches usually need to be trimmed or removed near a few tees and baskets, especially near the lake. 1611 B2� Tees: Each hole would have one tee at this point with the possibility of another tee added at a later time. The tees would be made of concrete measuring 4" thick approximately 4' x10' would be built flush with the ground. We estimate that a maximum of 9 tees of this size would be required. Baskets: Each playable hole would have a basket mounted on a pipe that slides inside an anchor pipe that gets cemented into a hole measuring approximately 8" in diameter and 18 -24" deep. The basket pipe and anchor pipe each have collar tabs that line up and are securely locked with a padlock. Signs: Tee signs are very important to help first time users find their way through the course. Each hole would have a sign indicating the number, length, recommended flight path and par. In addition, a rules sign and information board should be installed before the first hole. The signs can be constructed with a variety of materials although we believe it would be preferable to construct signs with a natural appearance to fit in with the surrounding area. Commercial signs designed for disc golf are also available from several sources. What Maintenance Is Required For a Disc Golf Course at Palm Springs Public Park? After installation, the maintenance needs for a disc golf course are primarily grass mowing. Unlike other parks, this park is well maintained and would not require any additional maintenance for Disc Golf. The targets are made of welded steel anchored in concrete and need no regular maintenance. In the unlikely event that one of the targets is damaged beyond repair or stolen, they can be replaced for around $350. Disc Golf Club volunteers would be eager to undertake an initial clean up of these areas and then maintain them as trash -free zones. How Much Land Is Needed? A significant advantage of disc golf is its ability to utilize areas that are not very desirable or usable for other activities such as woods choked with non - native foliage like palmettos, rocky areas and slopes. In addition, a disc golf course need not be an exclusive use area -- it can co -exist amicably with other active and passive recreation uses such as hiking, dog walking, etc. Finally, the relative portability of baskets and signs allows the park department to inexpensively relocate the course to another site as the needs of the master plan dictate. 2. HOW DOES THE PROJECT BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY: The installation of a disc golf course in Palm Springs Public Park would benefit the surrounding community by increasing and enhancing recreational opportunities, park safety and conservation goals. Recreational Needs: A disc golf course would provide an inexpensive form of recreation for people of all age and skill levels and be a much needed addition to the recreational facilities at Palm Spring Public Park. Unfortunately, there is currently no disc golf course in Collier County at which physical education staff or SWFDGA volunteers can teach basic disc golf skills. Given the high density of diverse demographics in the immediate vicinity of the park, the installation of a disc golf course would provide an important recreational resource for the citizens surrounding the park, as well as for the wider community. A disc golf course would give youth in the neighborhood a healthy and challenging outlet for their energies and would allow members of the SWFDGA to organize clinics and youth leagues on their behalf. For the growing number of disc golfers in Southwest Florida, the presence of a disc golf course in Collier County would obviate the need to travel to play and would give them a base from which to further promote the sport. Although Collier County has never had a permanent disc golf course, it has been home to many players at every skill level, who must travel to play. V ( a 1� 0 Conservation: Disc golf can be an environment- friendly sport. Unlike traditional golf, a disc golf course may not require trees to be removed; grass mowed and watered daily, plants uprooted or non- native species planted. Many courses can be designed to fit into the existing flora of the park like Palm Springs Public Park. The impact of a disc golf course on the surrounding area is minimal. In addition, disc golfers overall tend to take great pride in where they play, helping reduce potential litter on the course. In the long -term, a disc golf course would also help in the preservation of the park by giving young people in the neighborhood a stake in its preservation and protection. Economics: A deluxe 9 -hole disc golf course with one tee, professional signs and baskets can be purchased and installed for under $7,500.00, less than the cost of a single tennis or basketball court. A 9 -hole course can serve more than 40 people at any time, compared with a tennis court (4 maximum) or basketball court (10 maximum). The cumulative square footage of 27 x 60 sq. ft hard surface tee pads is also less than either a basketball or tennis court. Economic Summary Example 9 -Hole Mach VTM Disc Pole HoIeTM Course Note: Figures can vary and prices do not include shipping and handling The following is a general summary of costs associated with the purchase, construction and installation of 9 Mach V Disc Pole HoIeTM baskets, 9 Cement Tee Pads, 9 Tee Signs, a Message Board and Trash Cans. This summary is a broad - spectrum guideline to provide insight into the cost associated with installation of a Disc Golf course. Disc Pole Ho/esTM: Disc Pole Hole TM Prices: • Disc Pole HolesTM $322.00 x 9 = $2,898.00 • Locking Collar Assembly: $11.50 x 9 = $207.00 • Anchor Assembly: $22.00 x 9 = $198.00 • Concrete (Approx. 1 cu.ft. Per. hole): $4.00 x 9 = $36.00 • Total Basket Costs: $3,339.00 Tee Pads: Tee Pad Prices: • Concrete (Approximately 34, 60 lb. bags): $68.00 x 9 = $612.00 • Forms: $12.00 x 9 = $108.00 • Total Tee Pad Costs: 720.00 Tee Signs: Tee Sign Prices • Standard Tee Signs: $60.00 x 9 = $540.00 • Concrete (Approx. 1 cuf. Per. hole): $4.00 x 9 = $36.00 • Total Tee Sign Costs: $576.00 1611 B20 .......... Message Board And Trash Cans: Message Board And Trash Cans Prices: ...... ........ ...__ _.. .. .. ......... ......... _ ... ..... Message Board (estimated): $300.00 Trash Cans (estimated): $30 x 3 = $90.00 Total Message Board and Trash Can Costs: $390.00 _........ ......... ................ ............ Installation Labor Estimates: Installation Labor Estimates Costs: ........ • Baskets: 4 hours each (estimated): 4 hrs. x 9 = 36 hrs. • Tee Pads: 8 hours each (estimated): 8 hrs. x 9 = 72 hrs. • Signage: 1 hour each (estimated): lhrs. x 9 = 9 hrs. • Total Installation Labor Hours: 117 hrs. x $20 per hr = Summary Totals: TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS: • Total basket costs: $3,339.00 • Concrete Tee Pads (estimated): $720.00 • Total Tee Sign costs: $576.00 • Total Message Board and Trash Can costs: $390.00 • Total Installation Labor Hours: $2,340.00 • Total Estimated Cost: $7,365.00 Additional Funding: As of now, our Club and it's members have agreed to provide all labor and the 1" 2 baskets. If and as necessary, we will, as the funding is available, provide the balance of the project. On behalf of SW Florida Discgolf Assoc. I would like to thank the Collier County Parks and Recreation Department for the opportunity to present this project. Robert Buchan, Special Projects Coordinator 1611 820 c 2 i 16 1 92 1611 B20 1611 B21 November 2010 Parks Report Golden Gate Community Park Community Center This park has Aquatic and Fitness facilities but they do not have meeting rooms as some of our other parks. They do have ball fields - tennis, racquetball, basketball and shuffleboard courts. Todd is thinking of turning the little used remote control car track into a sand volleyball court. There is also a 1 mile paved fitness trail, picnic shelter and rest rooms. Programs This is one of the things Todd has on his to do list. He has lost 4 employees in the last year and is making programs a priority in the coming year. This park does have two youth soccer programs, SWFL Soccer and Eagle Soccer Club. The Senior Men's Softball group plays in this park Tue /Thurs. Fall Flag Football and The Latin Baseball League practice here. Spgcial Events While this park has not many special events - it should be noted that several swim teams use this park for High School swim team training. Making use of the beautiful 25 meter pool with its' 2 1 -meter springboards and 13 -meter springboard. Overall Appearance This park is beautiful - with the many huge mature trees that are everywhere. There are several projects in the works for the near future. The park will be sealed and paved where necessary with special attention being paid to the fitness trail. Over the years the tree roots have grown into the path causing bumps that could become dangerous and are in need of repair. The parking lot will be lined at the same time. This will give the park a fresh new appearance that will add to the overall beauty of this facility. Also Brandanna Inc. will start a construction project this week to correct a drainage issue between ball fields #2 and #3. They will connect to the current drainage system and alleviate the standing water that occurs after heavy rains. I would like to thank Tony for his help getting this corrected. Staff The staff at this park are always friendly and helpful. There is a welcoming smile when you enter and leave. Recommendations The only thing that needs to be done, and this was Mr. Irbys' suggestion, is the painting of the locker rooms and rest rooms in the main building. This is not a new park but paint will do wonders and go a long way towards eye appeal. 1611 B2 East Naples Communi y Center Communily Center This is a very busy center. The entryway was neat and well maintained, the rest room was clean and orderly. The park grounds were very nicely taken care of The general appearance of the park was beautiful. The parking area has just been paved and striped. I also noticed that the huge bump at the entrance to the park had been leveled and widened. I talked with Kathy Topoleski and she told me about a grant the park received from Home Depot that provided 12 shade structures along with benches for various areas in the park. They are replacing aged wooden fencing with new metal fence and posts near the skate park and tennis courts. Programming I've talked about some of the programs at this park in the past so this time I would like to talk about the VPK program that is going on at this park as well as several other parks in Collier County. The VPK stands for Voluntary Pre kindergarten. If you will remember this was a presentation given to us in June by Julie Allen and Yvette Spiker. The program started August 30"' and seems to be going very well. The program is for children that will be 4 years old by Sept. lst. Kathy lost her Program Director earlier this year so Vicky Wilson and Shannan Peters are helping out until Kathy's new Program Director starts this week. The classroom is set up with a class area and a skills area. Every one seemed to be very enthused about this program. The children were well mannered and polite. They were even helping each other in the bath room. Overall Appearance The one thing I would like to mention here is that even though this park did not get a new maintenance building I was really impressed by the way it had been paved and cleaned up to give the grounds keepers covered work areas out of the sun. This is much nicer looking but I will keep asking for a building. Staff The staff in this park as well as other parks are helpful friendly and courteous. They all seem to really like their jobs and it shows. Golden Gate Community Center Community Center The center was very clean and orderly. All signs were legible and descriptive. Each time I have visited, the grounds and area around the complex are well kept and show that the people using this facility care about how their park looks. Programming Golden Gate is busy wilt many programs. PW Soccer, Tumbling/Gymnastics, Zumba, Marcia Galle Dance, Volleyball, Bone Builders, 2 Karate, Cheerleading and Tia Chi. They also have 12 Indoor adult Soccer and12 Youth Teams. 1611 gp Special Events I'm sure you will remember last meeting when Ray Coriano and Annie Alvarez gave a slide presentation on Bicycle Moto Cross (BMX) Program. The October 31St event was held at Golden Gate Overall Appearance A quick walk around at this facility is always a pleasant experience. Walking past the Wheels Skate Park I noticed that the moguls were covered. You can tell that Ray takes pride in its' appearance. He did mention in his presentation that the GGCC BMX Summer Series Event had not received any write -ups from the State. Staff The attitude of everyone I saw at the park was friendly and caring. I get the feeling that they enjoy their jobs. Overall Recommendations One thing that could be investigated would be expanding the staging area for future BMX events. It sounds like the next one will be even bigger than the last. � ,IV Ao "i, SI s': (;i�Kitt9"41S51US18fS PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 1611 BZ1 'I 4111 #r . Hen�t'ia'i Coreita Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2010 THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET IN REGULAR SESSION, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2010 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, LOCATED AT 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES. AGENDA The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll Call 2. Agenda Approval 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes a. October 6, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4. Audience Participation 5. Administrator's Report a. Monthly Financial Report b. Status of Permit for Clam Bay Maintenance C. U.S. 41 Berm d. Status of RFP for Environmental Services 6. Chairwoman's Report a. Implementation of Community Improvement Plan J. Chandler b. Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update T. Raia C. History of Navigation Markers T. Raia d. Announcements 7. Community Issues 8. Committee Reports and /or Requests 9. Old Business 10. New Business 11. Miscellaneous Correspondence a. Ongoing Projects Status Sheet 12. Audience Comments 13. Adjournment SPEAKERS FROM THE AUDIENCE WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES ADDITIONALLY, THIS NOTICE ADVISES THAT, IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD, WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, THEY WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THAT FOR SUCH PURPOSE, MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PERSON REQUIRING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS AT THIS MEETING BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY OR PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENT SHOULD CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION OFFICE AT LEAST FIVE CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT (239) 597 -1749. Misc. des: D*: d 3 1IM ' � 1 Copies to: Current Assets Cash and Investments Interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Accrued Wages Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Serls Di6isil BI RegulaF6bsZ 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 1 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - October 28, 2010 Operating Fund 109 (Unaudited) Assets 1,084,829.53 1,912.30 $ 1,086,741.83 $ 1,086,741.83 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (7,167.75) (41,053.24) (1,173,770.02) 135,249.18 $ (48,220.99) (1,038,520.84) $ (1,086,741.83) Page 1 of 1 — .► . 0 0 r 1611 ' November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 2 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - October 28, 2010 Operating Fund 109 (Unaudited) FY 2011 Budget Actual Operating Revenues: 134,300.00 2,589.47 Carryforward $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 Special Assessment - Water Management Administration 728,400.00 2,672.73 Special Assessment - Right of Way Beautification 1,938,600.00 7,115.71 Charges for Services 1,500.00 - Surplus Property Sales 1,500.00 - Interest 11,700.00 - Total Operating Revenues 3,623,300.00 952,888.44 Operating Expenditures: 500.00 - Water Management Administration - - Payroll Expense $ 41,200.00 $ 763.61 White Goods 8,800.00 - IT Direct Client Support 200.00 IT Office Automation 8,000.00 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 108,200.00 Interdepartmental Payment 14,600.00 Other Contractural Services 30,800.00 - Telephone 4,100.00 277.05 Postage 3,000.00 1.79 Rent Buildings and Equipment 13,600.00 2,083.38 Insurance - General 1,300.00 - Printing, Binding and Copying 2,300.00 Clerk's Recording Fees 4,000.00 Advertising 2,000.00 - Other Office and Operating Supplies 2,500.00 3.90 Training and Education 1,100.00 - Total Water Management Administration Operating 245,700.00 3,129.73 Water Management Field Operations Payroll Expense 134,300.00 2,589.47 Engineering Fees 16,381.25 - Flood Control Water Mgmt. 14,000.00 - Flood Control Replanting Program 8,500.00 2,986.00 Interdepartmental Payment 22,600.00 2,047.75 Plan Review Fees 1,500.00 - Other Contractural Services 1,000.00 - Temporary Labor 42,400.00 3,634.87 Telephone 500.00 - Postage and Freight - - Trash and Garbage 8,300.00 72.82 Motor Pool Rental Charge 200.00 - Insurance - General 2,400.00 Insurance - Auto 900.00 Fleet Maintenance and Parts 4,500.00 Fuel and Lubricants 3,200.00 Tree Triming 30,000.00 - Clothing and Uniforms 1,100.00 157.45 Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 - Fertilizer and Herbicides 98,400.00 6,362.65 Page 1 of 3 Variance 725,727.27 1,931,484.29 1,500.00 11,700.00 2,670,411.56 40,436.39 8,800.00 200.00 8,000.00 108,200.00 14,600.00 30,800.00 3,822.95 2,998.21 11,516.62 1,300.00 2,300.00 4,000.00 2,000.00 2,496.10 1,100.00 242,570.27 131,710.53 16,381.25 14,000.00 5,514.00 20,552.25 1,500.00 1,000.00 38,765.13 500.00 8,227.18 200.00 2,400.00 900.00 4,500.00 3,200.00 30,000.00 942.55 500.00 92,037.35 18 21` 0 0 N Other Repairs and Maintenance Other Operating Supplies Total Water Management Field Operations Operating Right of Way Beautification - Operating Payroll Expense White Goods IT Direct Client Support and Capital Other Contractural Services Telephone Postage Rent Buildings and Equipment Insurance - General Storage Rental Printing, Binding and Copying Clerk's Recording Legal Advertising Office Supplies General Training and Education Total Right of Way Beautification Operating Right of Way Beautification - Field Payroll Expense White Goods Flood Control Pest Control Other Contractural Services Temporary Labor Telephone Trash and Garbage Electricity Rent Equipment Motor Pool Rental Charge Insurance - General Insurance- Auto Fleet Maintenance and Parts Fuel and Lubricants Licenses and Permits Tree Triming Clothing and Uniforms Personal Safety Equipment Fertilizer and Herbicides Landscape Maintenance Sprinkler Maintenance Painting Supplies Traffic Signs Minor Operating Equipment Other Operating Supplies Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Operating Total Operating Expenditures Page 2 of 3 42,400.00 161 11 ' B21 7,400.00 November 3, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6,221.09 7,000.00 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 3 of 11 37,500.00 3,900.00 277.05 3,622.95 3,000.00 1.79 0 0 14,000.00 2,144.92 11,855.08 500.00 w 500.00 1,500.00 - 1,500.00 (58.35) 2,600.00 - 2,500.00 383.65 2,116.35 - 4,000.00 2,000.00 394,681.25 18,234.66 376,446.59 3,000.00 7.66 2,992.34 Page 2 of 3 42,400.00 786.75 41,613.25 7,400.00 - 7,400.00 7,000.00 6,221.09 7,000.00 37,500.00 - 37,500.00 3,900.00 277.05 3,622.95 3,000.00 1.79 2,998.21 14,000.00 2,144.92 11,855.08 500.00 - 500.00 - 58.35 (58.35) 2,600.00 - 2,600.00 4,000.00 - 4,000.00 2,000.00 - 2,000.00 3,000.00 7.66 2,992.34 1,500.00 - 1,500.00 128,800.00 3,276.52 125,523.48 827,700.00 12,055.90 815,644.10 3,300.00 - 3,300.00 136,900.00 6,221.09 130,678.91 5,000.00 - 5,000.00 29,500.00 1,882.00 27,618.00 204, 500.00 19, 719.51 184, 780.49 3,200.00 - 3,200.00 24,900.00 218.47 24,681.53 3,400.00 184.46 3,215.54 5,500.00 8.95 5,491.05 700.00 - 700.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,900.00 - 9,900.00 21,200.00 251.37 20,948.63 44,200.00 - 44,200.00 800.00 - 800.00 35,900.00 1,650.00 34,250.00 9,400.00 794.07 8,605.93 3,000.00 - 3,000.00 62,000.00 15,214.97 46,785.03 60,200.00 7,011.90 53,188.10 30, 000.00 1,203.61 28, 796.39 800.00 - 800.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 63.72 2,936.28 11, 500.00 1,199.71 10,300.29 1,548,500.00 67,679.73 1,480,820.27 2,317,681.25 92,320.64 2,225,360.61 Capital Expenditures: Water Management Field Operations Other Machinery and Equipment General Improvements Total Water Management Field Operations Capital Right of Way Beautification - Field Building Improvements Autos and Trucks Other Machinery and Equipmeny Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Capital Total Capital Expenditures Total Expenditures Operating Profit /(Loss) Non- Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 Tax Collector Fees Property Appraiser Fees Reserves (2 1/2 months for Operations) Reserves for Equipment Revenue Reserve Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditures, net Net Profit /(Loss) 16i 1 g21' November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 4 of 11 1,000.00 1,000.00 13,200.00 13,200.00 14,200.00 14,200.00 13,600.00 13,600.00 28,000.00 28,000.00 17,000.00 17,000.00 58,600.00 58,600.00 72,800.00 - 72,800.00 2,390,481.25 92,320.64 2,298,160.61 1,232,818.75 860,567.80 372,250.95 (259,200.00) (259,200.00) (82,500.00) (195.77) (82,304.23) (75,300.00) (42,928.54) (32,371.46) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) (124,875.00) (124,875.00) (140,300.00) (140,300.00) (1,237,200.00) (982,224.31) (254,975.69) Page 3 of 3 (4,381.25) (121,656.51) 117,275.26 0 0 .a r 161 1 1521 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Sessi 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 5 of 11 0 0 Ln Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - October 28, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 446,489.88 Interest Receivable 632.76 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Goods Received /inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance 447,122.64 $ 447,122.64 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (522.50) $ (23,070.00) (423,553.80) 23.66 Page 1 of 1 (23,592.50) (423,530.14) $ (447,122.64) 16114 821 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 6 of 11 0 0 rn Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - October 28, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 (Unaudited) FY 2011 Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Fund 111 Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: Clam Bay Restoration Engineering Fees Flood Control Other Contractural Services Post /Freight Other Equipment Repairs Minor Operating Other Operating Supplies Total Clam Bay Restoration Clam Bay Ecosystem Engineering Fees Other Contractual Services Total Clam Bay Ecosystem Total Clam Bay Operating Expenditures Operating Profit /(Loss) Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.17 $ - 35,000.00 128.93 $ 34,871.07 35,000.00 - $ 35,000.00 1,300.00 - $ 1,300.00 506,519.17 435,348.10 (155,000.00) 71,171.07 $ 102,943.75 $ - $ 102,943.75 137,390.00 - 280,195.51 $ 137,390.00 485.42 150.00 335.42 4,800.00 - 4,800.00 1,000.00 - 1,000.00 246,619.17 150.00 246,469.17 11,300.00 - 11,300.00 25,000.00 - 25,000.00 36,300.00 - 36,300.00 282,919.17 150.00 282,769.17 223,600.00 435,198.10 (211,598.10) Transfer to Fund 322 (65,000.00) (65,000.00) - Tax Collector Fees (1,100.00) (2.59) (1,097.41) Property Appraiser Fees (700.00) - (700.00) Revenue Reserve (1,800.00) - (1,800.00) Reserves (2 1/2 month for Operations) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) - Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditur (223,600.00) (155,002.59) 68,597.41 Net Profit /(loss) $ (0.00) $ 280,195.51 $ (280,195.51) Page 1 of 1 161J B21 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 7 of 11 0 0 V Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - October 28, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 1,957,370.85 Interest Receivable 2,763.54 Due from Tax Collector _ Total Current Assets Total Assets Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Goods Received Inv. Received Total Liabilities 452.36 Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved (1,960,586.75) Excess Revenues (Expenditures) _ Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Page 1 of 1 1,960,134.39 $ 1,960,134.39 452.36 (1,960,586.75) $ (1,960,134.39) Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: Irrigation & Landscaping 161 1 B21 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 8 of 11 0 0 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - October 28, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 (Unaudited) FY 2011 Budget Actual Variance $ 1,943,987.30 $ - $ (1,943,987.30) 121,600.00 - (121,600.00) 7,700.00 - (7,700.00) 2,073,287.30 - (2,073,287.30) Engineering Fees $ 113,628.45 $ - $ 113,628.45 Interdept. Payment - - - Other Contractural Services 2,354,658.85 - 2,354,658.85 Licenses and Permits - - - Total Irrigation & Landscaping Expenditures Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer from Fund 109 General Transfer from Fund 320 Clam Bay Transfer from Fund 778 Street Lighting Tax Collector Fees Property Appraiser Fees Reserve for Contingencies Revenue Reserve Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditures, n Net Profit /(Loss) 2,468,287.30 - 2,468,287.30 $ 259,200.00 $ - $ (259,200.00) 65,000.00 - $ (65,000.00) 83,600.00 - (83,600.00) (3,800.00) - 3,800.00 (2,500.00) - 2,500.00 (100.00) - 100.00 (6,400.00) - 6,400.00 395,000.00 - (395,000.00) (0.00) Page 1 of 1 0.00 161 B 2 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 9 of 11 0 0 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - October 28, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 (Unaudited) Current Assets Cash and Investments Interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenue (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Assets $ 203,776106 310.44 Liabilities and Fund Balance (2,545.10) (208,670.25) 7,128.85 Page 1 of 1 $ 204,086.50 $ 204,086.50 $ (2,545.10) (201,541.40) $ (204,086.50) 16I 1 g21 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 10 of 11 0 r O Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - October 28, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 (Unaudited) FY 2011 Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Ca rryforwa rd Curent Ad Valorem Tax Delinquent Ad Valorem Tax Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: Street Lighting Administration Payroll Expense Indirect Cost Reimbursement Other Contractural Services Telephone Postage and Freight Rent Buildings and Equipment and Storage Insurance - General Storage Rental Reimburse Prior Year Revenue Office Supplies General Other Office and Operating Supplies $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ - 273,200.00 837.59 $ 272,362.41 1,200.00 - $ 1,200.00 444,200.00 170,637.59 273,562.41 $ 41,200.00 $ 763.62 $ 40,436.38 6,300.00 - 6,300.00 20,800.00 - 20,800.00 4,100.00 199.98 3,901.02 2,000.00 1.79 1,998.21 13,600.00 2,029.38 11,570.62 400.00 - 400.00 - 58.35 (58.35) 800.00 - 800.00 1,000.00 - 1,000.00 Total Street Lighting Administration Operating 90,200.00 3,052.12 87,147.88 Street Lighting Field Operations Payroll Expense 62,900.00 1,202.53 61,697.47 White Goods 9,600.00 - 9,600.00 Other Contractual Services 800.00 800.00 Telephone 500.00 - 500.00 Electricity 44,200.00 2,924.99 41,275.01 Insurance - General 800.00 - 800.00 Insurance - Auto 900.00 - 900.00 Fleet Maintenance and Parts 1,100.00 - 1,100.00 Fuel and Lubricants 400.00 - 400.00 Other Equipment Repairs 200.00 - 200.00 Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 - 500.00 Electrical Contractors 7,300.00 - 7,300.00 Page 1 of 2 Light Bulb Ballast Total Street Lighting Field Operations Operatin Total Operating Expenditures Capital Expenditures: Street Lighting Field Operations Other Machinery/Equipment General Improvements Total Capital Expenditures 161 1 B21 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report - Page 11 of 11 0 r 12,400.00 761.67 11,638.33 141,600.00 4,889.19 136,710.81 231,800.00 7,941.31 223,858.69 1,000.00 13,200.00 - 1,000.00 - 13,200.00 14,200.00 - 14,200.00 Total All Expenditures 246,000.00 7,941.31 238,058.69 Operating Profit /(Loss) 198,200.00 162,696.28 35,503.72 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (83,600.00) (83,600.00) - Tax Collector Fees (8,400.00) (25.13) (8,374.87) Property Appraiser Fees (5,500.00) - (5,500.00) Reserves (2 1/2/ months for Operations) (58,800.00) (58,800.00) - Reserves for Equipment (27,500.00) (27,500.00) - Revenue Reserve (14,400.00) - (14,400.00) Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditur (198,200.00) (169,925.13) (28,274.87) Net Profit /(Loss) Page 2 of 2 (7,228.85) 7,228.85 161 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Seslon 821 5c - Administrator's Report - U.S. 41 Berm ResnickL Subject: Removing Exotics along US 41 From: lukasz_k Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 10:54 AM To: Keith Dallas Cc: Neil Dorrill; ResnickL Subject: RE: Removing Exotics along US 41 Mr. Dallas, The exotic removal, which was primarily south of Gulf Park Dr. and consisted mostly of brazilian pepper, was performed by PBSD. This removal was not part of regular maintenance but performed in approximately 2000- 2001 in preparation for the installation of a new irrigation system and berm landscaping. As some of the brazilian pepper removed was very large the landscape materials were not of the same size. Now established, in most areas the buffer hedge is quite thick. An area just north of the south entrance and also near the Ridgewood Park had green buttonwood installed because of the lower elevations and wet areas. Near Ridgewood they have become pretty well established however the area just north of the south entrance is still very thin because of the tree canopy. The removal of the pepper, though it may have created some visibility issues especially initially, I don't think it had a significant impact on noise. I'd like to see what Wilson Millers recommendations for those areas would be and I think we would be able to perform the installation in- house. Though I don't have any pictures to the south where the pepper was removed I attached a couple of pictures on the north berm showing just how open some areas of the berm were prior to the landscaping installation. Kyle From: Keith Dallas [mailto:keithdallas @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 7:09 PM To: lukasz_k Cc: Neil Dorrill; ResnickL Subject: Removing Exotics along US 41 We had meeting today on Wilson Miller developing CIP presentation for Nov 16th & 17th community meetings. Got discussing how part of US 41 sound problems some feel increased when exotics were removed. • Did the PBSD do the removing? What year was that? • Is that just part of our normal maintenance? Did we replace the exotics with any other plantings? • If so, were the new plantings big enough for immediate impact, or did they need time to grow? • Are there still gaps caused by that removals? We also discussed maybe the Foundation paying for plantings as recommended by Wilson Miller. Could we do the planting? I'd like your thoughts on how we would want to approach this. Thanks. Keith 1 of 2 10/28/2010 lb t November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5c - Administrator's Report - U.S. 41 Berm 2 of 2 10/28/2010 1+ 621 . 2 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board 161 Regula Session 6a - Implementation of Community Improvement Plan Community Improvement Plan PBSD Priorities As many of you have read in previous issues, the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) Board and the Pelican Bay Foundation jointly retained the firm of Wilson Miller to assess the long term needs of the community in the areas of safety, security and our natural and built environment. Wilson Miller issued a comprehensive report with numerous recommendations. Recently, PBSD Board members indicated their individual order of priorities of the various components of the Community Improvement Plan (CIP) items recommended by Wilson Miller that are the responsibility of PBSD. This article summarizes the aggregate preliminary priorities and indicates those to be addressed in the short or midterm time frame. Costs were estimated by Wilson Miller and are in 2010 dollars. First Phase I By the end of the year, the PBSD will have capital assets of approximately $2.5 million. The first phase of recommended projects would use approximately $1.43 million of those funds, to be spent in 2011 and 2012, as follows: Cross Walks - Develop consistently finished, signed and marked pedestrian crosswalks at major intersections along Pelican Bay Boulevard (PBB) and Gulf Park Drive (GPD). The use of mud set clay brick pavers was preferred. Such crosswalks were recommended along PBB at Ridgewood Dr., Myra Daniels Blvd., Gulf Park Dr., North Pointe Dr., Hammock Oak Dr., and Oakmont Dr., and along GPD at Ridgewood Dr. and Greentree Dr. Members debated the need for such a crosswalk at PBB and Crayton Rd. Installation would be coordinated with the five midblock Pelican Bay Boulevard crosswalks and the reorientation of the North Tram median being funded by the Foundation. (PBSD responsibility - $817,000) Pathways • Widening Pathways - Widen asphalt pathways to 8 feet along the west side of Pelican Bay Blvd. and the north side Gulf Park Drive and realign pathways where possible for greater separation from trees. The first segment to be completed in the near term should be Pelican Bay Blvd. from the Commons to North Tram station. ($205,700) • Rebuild deteriorating pathway in front of St Williams Church along Myra Daniels Dr. from Seagate Dr. to Bridgeway neighborhood entrance. ($39,500) • Remove pedestrian and auto conflicts at 7 locations by repositioning stop signs, adding mirrors and /or repositioning sidewalks. (To Be Determined) Landscape • To improve visibility at intersections, remove palms and trees in the medians that are greater than 4" caliper and are within 100 feet of median turn lanes on Pelican Bay Blvd. and Gulf Park Drive. Replace removed trees with low draught tolerant undercover and accent trees. (9 intersections for $212,000) • Add 57 canopy trees in gaps along Pelican Bay Blvd. ($34,200) 1 of 2 10/28/2010 1611 del November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Implementation of Community Improvement Plan o Replace portions of sod along lake edges and preserve edges with littoral type plantings to reduce debris /overspray infiltration from maintenance practices, help filter water runoff, and enhance waterfowl habitat. ($122,900) Second Phase Items in this category are thought to be important and should be addressed in the midterm (i.e. 2113 and later). However the PBSD budget has been basically flat for 4 years (2008- 2011), and anticipates only about $100,000 per year for capital projects. Thus the PBSD Board will have to discuss to what extent these needs will be addressed in the PBSD budgets beginning 2012. Items proposed in this category are: • Widening pathways to 8' along remaining segments of the west side of Pelican Bay Blvd. and north side of Gulf Park Drive ($489,700) • Replace single - family neighborhood paths with 5' sidewalks. ($300,500) • Reduce maintenance and irrigation needs throughout Pelican Bay Blvd. medians and rights of way. Replace sod with groundcovers and retrofit irrigation system with low volume emitters. Replace dated shrub and tree materials with layered material with shrub beds integrated into tree and palm canopies. ($1,679,000 although should be much less by integrating over time into normal maintenance functions) • Add 12 canopy trees in gaps along Gulf Park Dr. ($7,200) Street Lighting A final area of concern is the street lighting throughout the community. The current light fixtures are expected to need replacement within 7 to 10 years, and the concrete poles within 15 to 20 years. The current PBSD lighting budget merely covers operating costs, with no provision for any replacements. In the 2012 budget process the PBSD will discuss possible ways to accumulate sufficient funds over future years for replacement of these lights and poles. • LED lighting fixtures on bracket arms for Pelican Bay Blvd. and Gulf Park Drive. ($712,600) • Replacement of poles for Pelican Bay Blvd. and Gulf Park Drive. ($321,400) • LED lighting fixtures on bracket arms and replacement of poles for Ridgewood Drive, Oakmont Parkway, and Greentree Dr. ($646,000) To put the Wilson Miller Study in perspective: if all phase 1 and 2 projects listed above and street lighting were ultimately approved, the total cost is estimated to be $5.6 million in today's dollars. After subtracting the $2.5 million already on hand, the tax increase necessary to raise sufficient funds would total approximately $410 per residential unit. We would expect this amount to be spread over at least a 5 to 10 year period resulting in an average cost somewhere between $41 and $82 per year for each residential unit. Community meetings are scheduled for November 16 and 17. At these meetings the projects listed above will be presented and explained in more detail. After community meetings have been held, each individual project must come before the PBSD Board for a vote. It is anticipated that these projects will come up for approval at regular PBSD monthly meetings in January, February and March when most of our seasonal residents are in Pelican Bay. 2 of 2 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 1611 821 ResnickL Subject: Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update From: Keith Dallas [ mailto:keithdallas @comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2010 2:48 PM To: ResnickL Cc: Neil Dorrill Subject: Fwd: Note PBSD already received. Also discussed by Steve at Aday's Foundation meeting. Keith Begin forwarded message: From: "Feldhaus, Stephen" <sf(a)feldhauslaw.com> Date: October 21, 2010 6:15:51 PM EDT To: Bill Carpenter <wrciksagmail.com> Bob Naegele <ronira.naegelenet.com >, "Bob Uek" <rwuek7(c�gmail.com >, Doug Esson <essondouq(a)msn.com >, Jim Hoppensteadt <iimh(Qpelicanbay.onp, Mike Coyne <mikecovne08(cDgmail.com >, Robert Pendergrass <robpender(a-)comcast.net >, Ronnie Bellone <vbellnpls(a)vahoo.com >, "Feldhaus, Stephen" <sfanfeldhauslaw.com> Cc: Susan Boland <JOHNSU SAN BOLAND(daol.com >, ramsey_m <MarlaRamsey(o)colliergov. net >, McAlpinGary <GarvMcAlpin(o)colliergov.net >, KeyesPamela <PamelaKeves(a)colliergov.net >, "Tomasko, David A" <DATomasko(a)pbsi com >, " Tabar, Jeffrey R" <irtabar(u)pbsi.com >, "Erik J. Olsen (eolseneolsen- associates.com)" < eolsenaolsen- associates.com >, Daniel Hammond <daniel.hammondO- cardno.com >, Fred Coyle <fredcovlea- colliergov.net >, "FrankHalas(a)colliergov.net" <FrankHalasecolliergov.net >, Tom Henning <tomhenning(o)colliergov.net >, Jim Coletta <jimcoletta )colliergov.net >, "Donna Fiala" <don nafiala0coll iergov. net>, "Tim Hall (thalIO)turrell- associates com)" <thall(a)turrell- associates com >, ochsI <LeoOchs(o)colliergov.net >, "Geoffrey Scott Gibson" <iosiegeoff )aol.com >, Hunter Hansen <hunter.hansen _anhilton.com >, "John Baron " <ibaron(a)watersideshops.com >, John Chandler <ipcbac(a)comcast.net >, John Domenie <hobodory aC)-comcast net >, John laizzo <iaizzoacomcast.net >, Keith Dallas <keithdallas(o)comcast.net >, "Mary Anne Womble" <TeeduD1(@Aol.Com >, Mike Levy <mikelevvaaembargmail.com >, Theodore Raia <tedraia a()yahoo.com >, Tom Cravens <nfn 1 6799(a)naDles. net> To the Board of Directors of the Pelican Bay Foundation, Jim Hoppensteadt and I met yesterday with Marla Ramsey, Collier County Public Works Administrator, Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Manager for Collier County, Pamela Keyes, Collier County Environmental Specialist, Mark Hatcher of Collier County Engineering and Environmental Services, Katie Laakkonen, City of Naples Environmental Specialist, Dave Tomasko, an environmental scientist with PBS &J, Jeff Tabar, a coastal engineer with PBS &J, and our consultants, Erik Olsen, a coastal engineer, and Dan Hammond, an environmental scientist. The meeting was quite productive. We had an extensive discussion on the sampling methodology in Clam Bay. Since November of 2009 the County has been taking regular water quality samples from 9 locations in Clam Bay (a map showing those locations is attached). Pamela Keyes collects these samples, which are taking on an outgoing tide. The samples are then tested in the County's lab, where there is then a strict chain of custody in order to ensure that the data from the samples is usable for regulatory purposes. The state's impaired water rule requires samples to be collected at least 20 times a year at least 4 days apart. Our experts suggested that the installation of multiple parameter continuous recording devices would be useful to determine variations in data over the course of a day and over the course of several days. They pointed out that time of day, water temperature, salinity, and other variables all affect the water quality parameters that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is concerned about, and that the more we know about the relationships of these variables to water quality the better positioned we will be to develop and propose site specific alternative criteria to the DEP. Our experts noted that continuous recording devices can be rented by the week, and that they could be installed once a quarter to obtain four days of data. They also recommended that an additional sample be collected from the Gulf itself, to learn what if anything is being introduced into Clam Bay from the Gulf. 1 of 12 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 161 1 B21 s On the assumption that the continuous recording devices can be rented at a reasonable cost, Mr. McAlpin and the County's experts agreed with the recommendation to install them. They also agreed to the regular collection of a sample from the Gulf. Messrs Tomasko, Olsen, and Hammond are going to jointly agree on what data we will be collecting with these new devices. We noted that Clam Bay is classified as a Class II water body by the State of Florida. Florida currently has five designations for Florida water bodies: Class I - Potable Water Supplies Fourteen general areas throughout the state including: impoundments and associated tributaries, certain lakes, rivers, or portions of rivers, used as a drinking water supply. Class II - Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting Generally coastal waters where shellfish harvesting occurs. Class III - Recreation, Propagation and Maintenance of a Healthy, Well- Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife The surface waters of the state are Class III unless described in rule 62- 302.400 F.A.C. Class IV - Agricultural Water Supplies Generally located in agriculture areas around Lake Okeechobee. Class V - Navigation, Utility and Industrial Use. Currently, there are not any designated Class V bodies of water. For reasons that are not entirely clear, Clam Bay is designated as a Class II water body (generally, coastal waters where shellfish harvesting occurs). This means that higher water quality standards are applicable in Clam Bay than would be the case if Clam Bay were classified as a Class III water body, which would appear to be the proper classification. A change in classification status is relatively straightforward unless objections are lodged. We plan to discuss a possible change in classification with the Mangrove Action Group and with local conservation groups. It is our belief that a change in classification would be beneficial for Clam Bay. Not only is a Class II classification the proper classification, the less stringent water quality standards of a Class III classification would make it less likely that future regulatory action would require drastic steps in Clam Bay to address any failure to meet the higher water quality standard of a Class II classification. We spent a great deal of time going over preliminary data that the county has collected. There are some failures to meet Class II standards, but we did not evaluate the data against Class III standards, and thus did not at this meeting attempt to determine the degree to which there would be a failure to meet Class III standards. Furthermore, the additional data that will be collected under the new sampling methodology could impact the conclusions that might be drawn from the data. Accordingly, it is still too early to determine a definitive course of action, although there was general agreement that the overall approach to take with respect to any possible failure to meet applicable water quality standards in Clam Bay will be to show that any change is natural (not the result of human action), and that it does not affect biodiversity in Clam Bay. The DEP is developing what they call a Type III Site Specific Criteria Rule, where water quality levels that might exceed an impairment threshold would be allowed provided they are not being caused by human intervention and do not adversely affect the level of the biodiversity health of the system (the heath of seagrassess, mangroves, fish, etc.). The agreed approach was to start working with the DEP as soon as possible to develop site specific criteria for water quality levels for Clam Bay. The Foundation's experts are getting together with the County's experts to determine what data we need to start gathering regarding desired biodiversity goals (salinity, clarity, ability to support seagrasses, etc.), and any related changes we need to make to our sampling in order to gather that data. We also discussed the Water Body Identification Number (WBID) classification for includes Clam Bay. Ms. Laakkonen of the City of Naples was present because currently Moorings Bay down to Doctor's Pass is included in the same WBIP as Clam Bay. The City of Naples and the County have been coordinating their data collection in order to be able to make 2 of 12 10/28/2010 November at 20A Pelican Bay Services Div' U ar Re r SessioB21 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committe�U�e � consistent submissions with respect to this WBIP. We discussed the possibility of separating Clam Bay into one or more separate WBIDs. The decision to do this will be data dependent, and we simply don't have enough data yet to be able to make a determination if this would be a desirable course of action. Ms. Laakkonen will share the data that the City of Naples has collected with Mr. Tomasko and with Mr. Hammond so we can evaluate whether it makes sense to continue to include Clam Bay within the same WBID as Moorings Bay. We then turned to the subject of the dredging permit. Mr. Olsen had previously provided a memorandum responding to a memorandum from Mr. Tomasko that was discussed at our September 8 meeting with the County on establishing scientific criteria for when dredging might be appropriate. Both of those memos are attached. Mr. Tomasko had indicated that analysis of historical data suggests that when a cross section at either the mouth of Clam Pass or the throat of Clam Pass becomes less than approximately 200 square feet, or when a cross section at the flood shoal becomes less than approximately 300 square feet, the ability of Clam Pass to convey water to maintain adequate flushing is severely diminished and dredging is indicated. I Mr. Olsen' analysis indicated that, based upon the history of the Pass, prior maintenance projects and subsequent annual monitoring of the Clam Pass estuarine system, there would appear to be two (2) types of "triggers" or condition which could warrant the initiation of channel maintenance operations by the County: 1) Conditions documented by annual physical monitoring which depict a diminishing rate of flushing of the Clam Bay system as determined by reduced tidal range and /or increased tidal phase lag. The latter indicators have to date proven to be a reliable indicator of flushing efficiency, and 2) A documented reduction in the minimum equilibrium cross - sectional area of the Clam Pass inlet throat -- as appropriately defined for such a purpose. After a considerable amount of discussion, we agreed to these criteria, with the cross - sectional area expanded to include both the mouth and inlet throat of Clam Pass, and with the understanding that the failure to meet the cross - sectional minimum would have to last for at least 30 days. With respect to the first criteria, the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) has for many years and is still collecting tidal phase lag and range data, and we agreed that we would ask PBSD to continue to collect this data, which we would use to determine whether the first criteria has been met. And since Tim Hall has been active in designing and implementing this data collection, we agreed that we would invite him to our next meeting to discuss in more detail precisely how we would use this data. We also discussed our proposal that the dredging permit application be amended to include a Mitigation Plan as a permit condition for the purpose of protecting the Foundation's property on the north side of Clam Pass. The County agreed to identify the Foundation's property as a potential fill site in the Joint Coastal Permit. The County had some legitimate concerns about their liabilities under an open ended Mitigation Plan, and we agreed that we would provide a written Mitigation Plan for consideration by the County at our next meeting. We had scheduled a portion of the meeting to discuss the possible need for flushing modeling within the Clam Bay system, but ran out of time before we got to that. Modeling, which is quite expensive, could be useful if we believe that changing the flushing of Clam Bay may be necessary to meet water quality standards. At this point it appears to be likely that we will be able to meet any water quality requirements either absolutely or by the introduction of site specific criteria, both of which would be even more attainable if the classification of Clam Bay were to be changed to Class III. In addition, it is not immediately obvious how changing the flushing of Clam Bay might affect in a positive manner any water quality standard that the DEP might deem to be impaired. We agreed that we would put this on the agenda for our next meeting, which is scheduled for November 18. At that meeting we will attempt to reach final agreement on the technical issues associated with the dredging permit application. We will also be ready to sit down and start to hammer out the details of the agreement with the county that would govern the relationship of the County and the Foundation in managing Clam Bay, including implementing the Permit, although that meeting would take place separately from our meeting with our respective experts. 3 of 12 10/28/2010 r November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session /1 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update hV I C 1 1 81 I would like once again to note the high level of cooperation that we have been receiving from everyone on the County's side as we collectively attempt to approach the management of Clam Bay on a technical and scientific basis. The issues are complex, and the stakes are high, and yet everyone, on both sides, has been assiduous in working through each issue professionally in an attempt to find solutions that both protect Clam Bay as well as the respective interests of all the stakeholders involved. We still have an incredible amount of work ahead of us, but unless we are derailed over some unexpected event or issue, or unless our inability to resolve the red and green marker issue impinges in an unhealthy way on these discussions, I definitely see a route to the successful co- management of Clam Bay between the County and the Foundation. Finally, one caveat. This summary was prepared by a layman, and I am sure that experts would say what I have said quite differently, although I don't think that the conclusions reached would be any different. What I have reported above is my understanding of the state of affairs. We have hired some of the most qualified people in Florida to work with us on these matters, and I can assure you that we listen to them and to their advice quite carefully. Best, Steve Feldhaus 4 of 12 10/28/2010 i1 B 21 � November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Refgular SessidT 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update MEMORANDUM DATE: 18 October 2010 TO: Steve Feldhaus, Esquire Jim Hoppensteadt� FROM: Erik J. Olsen, P.E. C `' v RE: Clam Pass — Future Channel Maintenance Dredging Triggers 1 o'sen associates, Inc. Coastal Engineering For purposes of our next meeting scheduled for October 20th in Naples, I would like to re- summarize my opinions and recommendations regarding potential permit terms which would seek to address "triggers" for Clam Pass channel maintenance. Based upon the history of the Pass, prior maintenance projects and subsequent annual monitoring of the Clam Pass estuarine system, there would appear to be two (2) types of "trigger" or condition which could warrant the initiation of channel maintenance operations by the County. Theses would include the following: 1) Conditions documented by annual physical monitoring which depict a diminishing rate of flushing of the Clam Bay system as determined by reduced tidal range and /or increased tidal phase lag. The latter indicators have to date proven to be a reliable indicator of flushing efficiency, and 2) A documented reduction in the minimum equilibrium cross - sectional area of the Clam Pass inlet throat -- as appropriately defined for such a purpose. Pragmatically, one has every reason to believe that absent storm related impacts to the Pass, the above two (2) triggers should be directly related. Conversely, given a documented persistent shoaling of the Pass entrance due to the occurrence of a major storm event, the second trigger would constitute a more reactive measure for addressing rapid and apparent diminishment of estuarine flushing via a permitted channel maintenance program. olsen associates, inc. 1 2618 Herschel Street I Jacksonville, FL 32204 1 904.387.6114 1 FAX 904.384.7368 www.oIsen-associates.com. 5 of 12 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 16111821 Monitoring — Clam Pass Restoration and Management Plan The ongoing tidal analysis monitoring program (Humiston & Moore, 2010, now in its eleventh years) clearly constitutes the best long -term benchmark for the characterization of flushing within the Clam Bay estuarine system. In my opinion it provides the best guide for potential routine scheduled maintenance of the Clam Pass inlet channel. Accordingly, the continued monitoring of this important characterization of the system flushing should be required as a JC Permit Condition. It is assumed that the related mangrove monitoring program should likewise be addressed by permit but I will leave the discussion and justification of such a recommendation to others. Inlet Cross - Sectional Evaluation Presently, the only potential trigger for the initiation of Clam Pass channel maintenance proffered by Collier County is that as described by a PBS &J Memorandum of 7 September 2010 prepared by Jeff Tabor, P.E. Philosophically, I have no objection to the use of the inlet cross - section as a potential indicator of a potential condition which could warrant a maintenance operation — particularly after some form of storm event which induces abnormal shoaling (or even closure) of the pass throat. If an inlet cross - section condition is to be codified by Permit terms as an appropriate trigger (as with tide range as described above) then it should be done in conformance with the accepted "science" related to same. The stability of a tidal inlet such as Clam Pass is dependent upon the existence of a critical minimum cross - sectional area within the inlet throat. The simple, yet amazingly reliable, empirical relationship between the minimum throat area of a tidal inlet and the resultant tidal prism within the bay, lagoon or other waterbody served by the inlet, was discovered by M.P. O'Brien in the 1930's. Based upon both theory and the monitoring work performed principally by Humiston and Moore, the critical cross - sectional area would occur within what is described by them as Channel Segment No. 2. More specifically the segment of inlet throat within which the empirical relationship would be expected to be valid would be from STA. 3 +65, to STA. 6 +10, mol. It would not apply to either Segment `A' (the ebb tidal platform) or Segment `C' (inner tidal channels) as proposed by PBS &J. ' Humiston and Moore Engineers, "Clam Pass Restoration and Management Plan, Tidal Analysis Report No. 11 ", September 2010 - 2 olsen associates, inc. 6 of 12 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update B21 In my judgment and experience, only one channel segment should therefore be considered as a potential "trigger" for future maintenance dredging, i.e., Segment B (STA 3 +65 — STA 6 +10). It would not be appropriate to utilize either Segment A or C as a location for triggering such an event. Barring complete or effectively complete (say 50 %) closure of the inlet throat, it will need to be assured that if the permitted minimum cross - sectional area (of 200 -sf) is experienced within the channel segment of interest, it should be documented that the trigger condition exists for a minimum of 30 -days. This is due to the probability that the minimum cross - sectional area may be re- established naturally during a spring tide — after temporal sh aling to a value below its theoretical minimum "critical" area — probably by a storm event. Once a Notice -To- Proceed has been received (from the FDEP) to perform a maintenance dredging operation pursuant to the permitted design,. the full- length of shoaled channel should (or can) be addressed. Since it was a topic of discussion at the meeting on 8 September 2010, I would note that the historical design dredge depths, as documented by H. &M. Monitoring Report No. 8 are as follows: Location Depth STA 0 — STA 3 +64.5 -5.5 ft NGVD29 STA 3 +65 — STA 6 +60 -4.5 ft NGVD29 STA 6 +65 — STA 35 +37 -4.0 ft NGVD29 In my judgment these depths continue to be reasonable based upon existing conditions in 2010 and the operational limitations of a small dredge to be used for the prescribed work. RECOMMENDATIONS My recommendations for Permit Terms would include the following: • Tidal Range & Phase Lag — A viable planning tool for the justification of scheduled channel maintenance is the documentation of diminishment of tidal range and phase lag in accordance with the continuation of the long -term monitoring program performed for that express purpose over the last eleven (11) years. • Minimum Cross Sectional Area — Only the channel segment — STA 3 +65 through STA 6 +10 (as defined by the H. &M. baseline) should be considered for measurement - 3 - olsen associates, inc. 7 of 12 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update ^ /� 1611 B as a potential trigger for initiating maintenance dredging on a reactive basis. The recommended minimum cross - sectional area of 200 -sf (NGVD29) appears reasonable, however, it should be documented that minor deviations below the critical area persist for a minimum of 30 -days (to include at least one spring tide event). • Channel Segments A and C (as suggested by PBS &J) should not be considered as potential candidates for triggering a maintenance dredging event. • The Permit drawings show varying cross - sections throughout the channel with side slopes of 1:1. I would strongly recommend that the contract specifications not allow the contractor to swing the cutterhead beyond the specified channel bottom dimensional width. This will preclude box - cutting beyond the channel cross - sectional required to achieve a side slope. The latter could be impactive to mangrove. That is to say, the effective dredge width of swing should be tightly constrained. • I would strongly recommend that a "mitigation" element or Mitigation Plan be a Permit Condition for purposes of protecting buildings and infrastructure located on the abutting north shore of the Pass. Of concern would be sediment losses from that beach should a major storm event closely follow maintenance dredging. Inflling of the Pass after maintenance dredging will occur from sand mobilized from along the two (2) flanking gulf -front shorelines. Since the historical meander channel typically lies seaward of the northernmost property, the infilling process (and potential erosion) will be expected to be accentuated at that location. This will necessitate its identification as a potential fill site in the Joint Coastal Permit. • I concur with the proposed design dredging depths which vary between -5.5 ft NGVD29 and -4.0 ft NGVD29, depending upon location along the channel baseline. • Any modification of the Permit (as ultimately issued) should not be considered for any additional excavation of the ebb tidal shoal at this location beyond that presently under consideration. Such a proposition should necessitate a new application and separate permits from both the State and Federal regulatory agencies. 4 - olsen associates, inc. 8 of 12 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee�Updatje 1 161 1821 OTHER • I would suggest that the Foundation be a part of the Notice -to- Proceed process which is expected to be codified as a permit condition by FDEP. If I can provide any further elaboration or clarification regarding these matters, please let me know. Thank you. - 5 - olsen associates, inc. 9 of 12 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay ervices Division Bo� Reg ula Session Y 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 10 of 12 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 161 1 B21 1 4030 Boy Scout Blvd., Suite 700 Tampa, FL 70001 Phone: 800.477.7275 Date: 7 September 2010 ^ a Clam Pass Flushing Efficiency and Cross- Section Me orandum PBS&J performed volume change, cross sectional and di erential contour analysis on Clam Pass utilizing the bathymetric monitoring data collected from 1998 to 2009 by Humiston & Moore and ABB Surveying. The project area was broken into five segments for the analysis as shown in Figure I (north beach, south beach, Pass: A, B and Q. The analysis of the data indicates the beaches north and south of the pass showed small reductions in volume following dredging events and recovery to pre - dredge volumes within 1 -2 years. The timeframe for the segments inside the pass to reach pre- dredge volumes were as follows: • Segment A (mouth of pass) fills in within a year, • Segment B (throat of pass) fills in within 1 -2 years • Segment C (flood shoal) fills in within 3 -5 years. In addition, the ability to convey water to maintain adequate flushing is severely diminished when any of the three segments have reached a critical cross sectional threshold. Indicators or triggers of these critical cross sectional thresholds were determined to be for Segments A & B approximately 200 square feet and Segment C approximately 300 square feet. In summary, the analyses demonstrated that Clam Pass can continue to be dredged at a similar frequency and template designated by the previous permit. The beach compatible sand can be placed on the beach south of the pass with minimal impacts to the stability of the surrounding shorelines. jr. Jeffery R. Tabar, P.E. Project Director 11 of 12 10/28/2010 c 0 .N rn N 3 rn a� "a f6 � O fa CO -O sl O N N E ZU (A m Tm N E m t6 c U U U O CL= o Q N p M fA a � 7 E o w 0 Z (oo r. 1® mc NN, h V— S od Al� 8 Y V v �* i M s x 3 < $ c� U J !! 1611 'g21 vJ N< v 0 U r-i v w Gzr 0 0 N N O cli 0 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 161 1 i B2 From: Theodore Raia To: Resnickl Subject: Fw: Comments on Progress of Clam Bay Negotiations Date: Saturday, October 30, 2010 10:14:54 PM Attachments: Attachments Lisa, Please distribute this email to the PBSD Board and I would like to add it to the agenda. Thanks. Ted - - - -- Forwarded Message - - -- From: "MLMAssocAICP @aol.com" <MLMAssocAICP @aol.com> To: sf @feldhauslaw.com Cc: wrcjks @gmail.com; CoraNaples @aol.com; hprice @price - law.com; jimh @pelicanbay.org; mikecoyne08 @gmail.com; ronjr @naegelenet.com; vbellnpls @yahoo.com; johnsusanboland @aol.com; tedraia @yahoo.com; hobodory@comcast.net; arthur @checkernet.com; goldandrose @mac.com; lor3lor3 @aol.com; Judylenr22 @aol.com; akpotter0l @comcast.net; bunny87 @comcast.net; Ijbruce @msn.com; sheriarnold @msn.com; nfn16799 @naples.net; toddbolen @aol.com; efishbein @jhu.edu; pjbushwork @comcast.net; nannice @comcast.net; ARitas540 @aol.com; calkritas @aol.com; findlater @comcast.net; Gseblatnigg @aol.com; djtrecker @yahoo.com; ianmckeag @gmail.com; kathyw @conservancy.org; dsroellig @naples.net Sent: Sat, October 30, 2010 5:43:53 PM Subject: Comments on Progress of Clam Bay Negotiations Greetings Steve, I asked the MAG Board to review your recent updates on the negotiations with the County and to get back with any comments or questions. As laymen ourselves, we were not up -to -date on the latest developments with respect to water classifications and WBID designations, which are emerging as key issues. After some research, we would like to offer the following comments, which we are sharing by copy of this email with the other members of the Clam Bay Ad Hoc Committee and others from Pelican Bay and the environmental community who have been following this. Water Quality Classification- We were surprised by the report that only Outer and Inner Clam Bays were Class 11 waterways and that Upper Clam Bay was designated Class III. Our understanding had been that all of the Clam Bay waters were Class II. We contacted both Tim Hall and FDEP and received confirmation that the current Class II listing does, in fact, include Upper Clam Bay as a "connecting waterway." As Tim Hall alluded in his email response, the current listings appear outdated in some respects -- referring to geographic connections that no longer exist and unfamiliar place names (e.g., Inner and Outer Doctor's Bay). Nevertheless, at present, Clam Bay is entirely Class II. This could have important ramifications in terms of designating a WBID encompassing the entire preserve area. We also thought that the waters to the south -- Venetian Bay /Moorings Bay - -had been designated Class III at some time in the 1980s, as per a statement in the Collier County 1991 -1992 Coastal Zone Management Plan referencing earlier findings to the effect that "Doctors Pass and its associated back bay system has been totally altered by development and, as such, is considered to be an artificial waterbody. Its previous Class 11 status (Appropriate for Shellfish Harvesting) has been downgraded by FDER to Class 111 (Appropriate for Recreational Activities) in the 1980's, to reflect the lowered water quality of the system (F.A.C. Chapter 17- 310)." We are still researching this question. However, the key point is that while both the Clam Bay and Moorings Bay systems may be facing water quality issues, the issues are much more severe and of longer standing for Venetian /Moorings Bay. They have given rise to proposals to increase flushing with Clam Bay since at least 1981. These proposals have always been rejected because of their likely detrimental impact on Clam Bay (see, for example, the cogent summary from the 1991 -1992 Coastal 1 of 8 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update n 1611 B Zone Management Plan, Attachment A ). The current interest on the part of the City and County in pursuing circulation modeling for enhanced flushing is in the same tradition. Though it is presented in the guise of a need to improve Clam Bay's water quality, the focus has been on opening up the connections to the south. This would do little to improve flushing in the northern reaches of the Clam Bay system - -Upper Clam Bay - -which is where impairment for low levels of dissolved oxygen is of greatest concern. The latest monitoring results show that nitrogen and phosphorus loadings - -other major concerns- -are within the system's capacity to assimilate. Overall, the modest levels of impairment found in Clam Bay can best be addressed by the steps the Foundation is taking to study and control upland run -off, in combination with continued maintenance of the interior drainage channels and maintenance of the tidal prism at Clam Pass. They hardly justify the type of alterations being called for in Naple's Growth Management Plan which -- according to a Naples Daily News article of October 5th -- continues to include finding "a more efficient way to move water between Clam Bay and Venetian Bay to improve water quality" as an explicit element (See link, http: / /www.naplesnews.com/ news / 2010 /oct/05/ city -plan- change - naples- bay - cleanup -lake- pollution/ ) We do not think that reducing Clam Bay's water quality classification from Class II to Class III will address or negate this underlying motivation for the push to increase flushing between Clam Bay and Moorings Bay. In fact, it would probably facilitate it, since there would be less concern for protecting Clam Bay's water quality on the part of regulatory authorities. Also, it's not clear that lowering the designation to Class III would address the problem of dissolved oxygen, since the state standards for DO appear to be the same for Class II and Class III Marine waters (see Attachment B). The major difference between the standards for Class II and Class III apparently is fecal coliform levels, which must be significantly less for Class II since shellfish are filter feeders. This has not been an issue for Clam Bay. Although it might seem advantageous to lower Clam Bay's water quality designation to make it easier to meet regulatory standards - -and the standard of being suitable for shellfish harvesting might seem irrelevant - -the water classifications indicate not only attainable uses, but also the level of protection deemed appropriate. The high quality of Clam Bay's waters has long been recognized, leading local and state officials to recommend a high level of protection. A 1976 planning memo at the time of Pelican Bay's development found as follows: "Recommended for preservation are the 3 Clam bays as Class Il Coastal Waters capable of supporting shellfish and the propagation of birdlife; the mangrove zone on the westem portion of the property ... which is mapped as Selected Coastal Mangroves for use for propagation of marine and bird life, hurricane protection, and aesthetics; and the gulf beach and dune for use in recreation and hurricane protection as well as for aesthetic reasons." (See Attachment C, Memo from Peter A. Stone, Land Planning Division, Resource Planning Department). Oysters are an indicator species of the Southwest Florida coastal system. Oyster reefs form the platforms upon which mangrove forests become established; together they provide the distinct estuarine habitat that constitutes a nursery ground for marine life. Oyster bars were once so prevalent in Clam Bay's tidal creeks that they were reportedly "blasted" through to maintain circulation earlier in Pelican Bay's development. In recent years, oysters have begun to reappear, as documented in Turrell- Hall's final biological monitoring report for the 10 -Year Management and Restoration Plan (January 2009). In addition to attesting to the success of the management plan carried out by PBSD, the significance is that conditions in Clam Bay support shellfish propagation and all that goes with it. This makes Clam Bay a unique estuarine nature preserve and conservation area in the midst of highly urbanized surroundings. Our goal should be to build upon these gains by maintaining the Class II designation for all of Clam Bay's waterways, not to subvert them by adopting a lower standard. For all these reasons, we do not agree that downgrading Clam Bay's waters from Class II to Class III is appropriate or justified at this time. 2 of 8 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 161 l B2 WBID Designation: Our rationale for proposing a distinct WBID for the Clam Bay system, coterminous with NRPA boundaries, is based on the need to recognize and preserve the inte rity of what remains as a remnant mangrove ecosystem. The preserve is already small and needs t be ! managed as a whole to remain viable. It was created in tandem with Pelican Bay's developm t and our storm -water system has been designed to protect it. Essentially, with 14e closing of the connections at Vanderbilt Beach Road and Seagate, Clam Bay became a "managed` tem." Part of protecting it is to figure out how best to manage it. The drainage basin is relatively circu cribed and much of it is within Pelican Bay's ability to manage. It does not make sense to subdivide Clam Bay (one possibility), with Upper Clam Bay belonging to a separate WBID from Inner and Outer Clam Bay, which are lumped in with the rest of Naples Bay to the south. Nor does it make sense to combine Clam Bay with regions to the south that are releasing untreated stormwater runoff, whereas Pelican Bay has invested in a highly efficient and effective stormwater management system. We understand that the WBID designation process has not reached the fine -grain level of Clam Bay and lines are being continually redrawn. There have been disparate representations. At present, our region is designated as part of the "Everglades West Coast Basin" in the FDEP system, which has divided Florida into five basin groups that are being assessed for water quality parameters on a five year cycle, beginning in the early 2000s. A 2001 FDEP "Basin Status Report" identifies a separate WBID for "Outer Clam Bay" (WBID 3259Q), adjoining the Cocohatchee River Estuary (WBID 3259A) and Naples Bay (3259G). The same report identifies the Cocohatchee River Estuary's southern border as Vanderbilt Beach Road. You have been advised by a City of Naples planner that Clam Bay is in the same WBID as Moorings Bay down to Doctor's Pass. What happened to the previously designated Outer Clam Bay WBID? Have Pelican Bay stakeholders been advised or engaged in any way in a process consolidating Clam Bay with the waters to the south? We question whether such a designation has been fully "vetted" and enacted by the appropriate authorities. All indications are that this is an open issue that we need to address so that the integrity of the Clam Bay system is recognized and protected. Dredging "Trigger ": As you know, MAG has gone on record with FDEP and the Army Corps in favor of a restrained approach to dredging Clam Pass that would follow the template set out in the original Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan under the 1998 FDEP and Army Corps permits. The original plan called for dredging to no more than - 4 feet NVGD throughout Cut 4 (the segment from the Clam Pass Inlet to Outer Clam Bay), with bottom widths varying from 20 feet to 40 feet. We recognize that over the course of the subsequent three dredging events, the - 4 foot depth was exceeded, with drawings showing dredge cuts to - 5.5 feet at the mouth of the Pass. Nevertheless, FDEP's only written response to requests for modification of the dredge template is their letter of 12- 15-98 that approved an increase in the width, but not the depth, of the approved dredge cut. The Plan itself states that the segment at the mouth of the Pass was included "as a contingency, to be utilized only in the event that access from the Gulf of Mexico is required for dredge mobilization. If such access is not required then .. [it] . will not be excavated. "(p. 62) Further, in Humiston and Moore's final Bathymetric Monitoring Report No. 9 (November 2008), this understanding was reflected in describing the 2002 dredging event: "To minimize impacts to adjacent beaches, Segment A was not dredged except for a small amount of dredging ... necessary to get the dredge in the inlet." (p.13). Now - -in materials from the County as well as Mr. Olsen's memo of October 18, 2010 - -it seems that dredging to a depth of - 5.5 feet at the mouth of the Pass is considered accepted practice and will be used as a guide for future dredging. We are concerned that this so- called "historical design dredge depth" will be accepted as the dredging standard, along with a maximum authorization of up to 80 feet. We do not have the H &M Monitoring Report No. 8 on hand, but we do have the subsequent report No. 9. It clearly describes the benefits of minimizing the dredge cut at the mouth of the Pass, based on the experience of the three prior dredging events including the most recent 2007 event, which exceeded all previous dredge cuts at the insistence of the CZM. 3 of 8 161 1 2,11 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update Please ask Mr. Olsen to read H &M Report No.9, if he has not done so. It will amplify the information presented in the prior report that he references and provide additional perspective on the value of minimizing the dredge cut at the mouth of Clam Pass. Report No. 9 does not seem to be as widely available as Report No. 8, but I can email a copy if one is needed. The idea of using measurements of cross - sectional areas to determine when to dredge is addressed in Mr. Olsen's memo and you note that a tentative agreement was worked out at the October 20th meeting. However, it is not clear whether Mr. Olsen's recommendation was followed, namely that the cross - sectional measurements should Dl* be taken at the throat of the Pass to be scientifically valid, and not at Segment A (the ebb tidal platform) or Segment C (inner tidal channels) as proposed by PBS &J. In your update, you note that, "After a considerable amount of discussion, we agreed to these criteria, with the cross - sectional area expanded to include both the mouth and inlet throat of Clam Pass .... (emphasis added). We are concerned that using measurements at the mouth of the Pass contradicts the recommendation of the Foundation's expert consultant and will introduce a non - valid indicator for the appropriate timing of dredging. David Roellig, whose memo was distributed at the Foundation Board meeting, referred to the same established measure. Why was there so much discussion about using this scientifically valid criteria, ultimately resulting in a compromise? What accounts for the resistance? Next Stens To sum up, the Mangrove Action Group supports the Foundation's efforts to find common ground with the City and County and to seek a more cooperative and collaborative relationship on matters affecting Clam Bay. But we are wary of compromises that would ultimately sacrifice what we have been striving so hard to protect. The scientific and technical basis for decision- making should be paramount, especially as the proposed framework for the management agreement would supplant the Foundation's protective covenants. We would appreciate an opportunity to discuss the concerns outlined in this letter. Would you and Jim Hoppensteadt be available to meet with the MAG Board, if possible before the next meeting with the County? I am unsure of the date -- the written update mentions November 18th, although November 2nd was mentioned at the PBF meeting. We are also open to a joint meeting with representatives of the PBPOA, as we understand they have been planning a similar meeting. The important thing is to have an opportunity for an open and in -depth discussion. Sincere Regards, Mary Mary McLean Johnson 6573 Marissa Loop #1501 Naples, FL 34108 Tel: 239 - 566 -7515 Cell: 239 - 248 -8546 4 of 8 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update ,11611 stormwater treatment in this area is recommended. However, the development is relatively small compared to the rest of the system and point source pollution is expected to be at a low level. A 1988 study done by the County Pollution Control Department indicated that water quality at the southern end of Clam Say, in the Seagate area, was acceptable, although nitrogen, phosphorus, and bacteria levels found in the canals indicated that there may be minor effects from nearby septic tank -fields. There has been an ongoing controversy regarding the culvert system located under Seagate Drive that connects outer Clam Bay to Doctors Bay to the south. Residents of the Doctors Bay and Moorings Bay area are generally in favor of increasing flushing between the two systems, whereas Pelican Bay residents are generally against the idea. The Doctors Bay area does not have a 1/ stormwater system designed to reduce the amount of pollutant material from entering the bay, as does Clam Bay. Previous rf dredging and filling operations and residential development have also degraded the water quality of this system over time. The N FDER, in a 1981 report, stated that, "...the flow of water from Moorings Bay to Clam Bay could have a significant negative impact on the water quality of Clam Bay. Activities which could significantly degrade the water quality of a Class II waterbody are stringently regulated. In view of the limited benefits expected in terms of flushing of Moorings Bay, the possible adverse consequences for Clam Bay and the sizeable costs, this alternative is not recommended." Further concerns have been addressed regarding the possible effects of connecting two water bodies with different salinities, tidal ranges, and depths. Durbin Tabb, of Tropical Biolndustries, addressed these concerns in a letter to Westinghouse Communities, Inc., in 1983; "...poorly planned major changes in circulation volumes and velocity of flow between bay systems having different salinities, depths, volumes, and inlet configurations can cause widespread and unexpected re- adjustment of bay bottom sediments,.channel location, salinity regimen, and unforeseen behavior of sand deposition or erosion around inlets." At present, there is a minimal culvert connection between the two systems, which approximates the estimated historic level of natural connection between the two bay systems. General Faunal Elements: Many species of invertebrates and vertebrates are represented in the Clam Pass system (Appendix 6). The two dominant pulmonate gastropods around the bays were found to be Melamnus spp. and Cerithidea app. Insects and arachnids are common year round, as are fiddler and mangrove crabs and periwinkles. In Upper and II -286- 5of8 8211 1611 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update SL313/SS525: Water Quality Notes: Dissolved Oxygen A %" Page 8 of 10 �x ,�'��� fir,- c�'as� Merrit, R.W. a6d K.W. Cummins (ads). 1996. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America, Third Edition. Kendall /Hunt Publishing Co., IW. Timmons, M.B., J.M. Ebeling, F.W. Wheaton, S.T. Summerfelt, and B.J. Vinci. 2002. Recirculating Aquaculture Systems, 2nd ad. Cayuga Aqua Ventures, Ithaca, N.Y. Glossary Photosynthesis - The assimilation of carbon dioxide by green plants and by pigmented, photosynthetically active prokaryotes, and its conversion into carbohydrate, using energy from the sun. This conversion can be described by the foikywing equation: 6CO2 + 12 H2O "Y— +C61-11206 + 602 + 61­12O Respiration — Metabolic process in which stored energy is released with the oxidation of reduced organic carbon compounds. The ultimate by- products of respiration are often carbon dioxide (CO2) and water (H20). Vertebrate - Organism possessing a distinct cartilaginous or bony axial endoskeleton, consisting of a skull and vertebral column. Invertebrate - Animals not possessing a distinct cartilaginous or bony axial endoskeleton. Titration — Procedure used to quantitatively analyze the amount of a substance by means of an essentially complete reaction in a solution with a reagent of known concentration (Kotz and Purcell, 1987). Anode — Within the context of oxidation - reduction reactions, electrons are produced at the anode (- terminal) where oxidation occurs. Cathode - Within the context of oxidation - reduction reactions, electrons produced at the anode move toward the cathode (+ terminal) where reduction occurs. Electrolyte — A substance that dissolves in water to form an electrically conducting solution (Kotz and Purcell, 1987). Precipitate — An insoluble salt (Kotz and Purcell, 1987). Cutaneous — of, pertaining to, or affecting the skin. Gills — Respiratory organs present in many aquatic animals. Gills are the structures used to transfer dissolved oxygen from the water into the organism for aerobic metabolism. Hemoglobin — Component of blood responsible for transport of 02 from respiratory gas exchange organs to respiring cells and transport of CO2 from respiring cells to gas exchange organs. Tables Table 5. Designated water -use groups and dissolved oxygen (DO) criteria for surface waters of the state of Florida. Source: Florida Department of Environmental Protection; http: / /www.dep.state.fl.ust water /wgsspiclasses.htm#criteda and http:ltwww.dep. state. fl. us /legaURules/shared/62- 302/302- Table.doc. Surface Water Designated Use(s) Stale Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen Biochemical Oxygen Demand Classification Shall not be less than 5 mg /L. Normal Shall not be increased to exceed Potable water supply. Rivers, lakes, etc. used as a drinking water supply. dairy and seasonal fluctuations above values which would cause dissolved this level shall be maintained_ oxygen to be depressed below the http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss525 10/27/2010 6of8 1611, B21 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update SL313/SS525: Water Quality Notes: Dissolved Oxygen Page 4 of 10 The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunityy Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non - discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more Information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension service. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Millie Ferrer- Chancy, Interim Dean. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss525 7of8 10/27/2010 Shall not average less than 5 mg /L in a Shellfish propagation or harvesting. 24 -hour period and shall never be less II Coastal areas where shellfish than 4 mg/L. Normal daily and seasonal harvesting occurs. fluctuations above this level shall be maintained. Recreation, propagation and maintenance of a healthy, well - balanced population of fish and Shall not be less than 5 mg/L Normal III: Fresh wildlife in predominantly fresh waters. daily and seasonal fluctuations above Most surface waters of the State are this level shall be maintained. Class III, unless otherwise designated. Recreation, propagation and Shall not average less than 5 mg/L in a limit established for each class and, in maintenance of a healthy, well- 24 -tour period and shall never be less no case, shall it be great enough to III: Marine balanced population of fish and than 4 mg/L. Normal daily and seasonal produced nuisance conditions. wildlife in predominantly marine fluctuations above this level shall be waters. maintained. Agricultural water supplies. Primarily Shall not average less than 4 mg/L in a IV agricultural areas located around Lake 24 -hour period and shall never be less Okeechobee. than 3 mg/L. Shall not be less than 0.3 mg /L, 50% of the time on an annual basis for flows Navigation, utility, and industrial use. greater than or equal to 250 cubic feet V No Class IV waters currently in FL. • per second and shall never be less than 0.1 mg /L Normal daily and seasonal fluctuations above this level shall be maintained. Footnotes 1. This document is SL313, one of a series of the Soil and Water Science Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Original publication date January 2010. Visit the EDIS Web Site at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu. 2. P. Chris Wilson, associate professor, Department of Soil and Water Science, Indian River Research and Education Center (REC) —Ft. Pierce FL; Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611. The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunityy Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non - discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more Information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension service. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Millie Ferrer- Chancy, Interim Dean. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss525 7of8 10/27/2010 161 1 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 9 -] 7G August 12, 1976 Al E M0 R A N D U M TO: Susan McCormick. FROM: Pete -Stone SUBJECT: Pelican Bay Two publications of the Florida Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning (listed below) map portions of the Pelican Bay proposed development property as recomtilended for preservation and conservation. Recommended for Dreservation are the 3 Clam bays as Class II Coastal Waters ca ab e o supporting-shell is an the propagation o i t i e; a man ro.Y€_ zone,.. on �. a weA tern portion of the property in`i�lu�ng`tTie area proposed for fill and high density development, which is mapped.as Selected Coastal Mangroves for use for propagation of marine and bird life, hurricane protection an aes �etics; an the u beach and une r use in recreation an hurricane protection as well as Tor aest a is reaso . Approximately the middle third of the property, straddling the longitudinal. axis, is - mapped as a coastal marsh subject to hurricane- flooding and recommended as conservation zoning. An irregular shaped section of land along the eastern side of the property, adjacent to U.S. 41, is shown as above the level of the 100 year hurricane flood zone and suitable for intensive development with corrections. PETER A. STUNE Land Planning Division Resource Planning Department PAS:bIm ' References: Florida Coastal Zone Management Atlas: a preliminary survey and analysis. Dec. 1972. Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas. Region 9: Southwest Florida, including part of Region 7. Sept. 1975. 8 of 8 161 l 1 Bel 'I November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6c - History of Navigation Markers Navigating through Clam Pass In the beginning Gary McAlpin claimed that the US Army Corps of Engineers ( USACOE) required the installation of the red /green lateral navigation signs. This was refuted by the Corps in an email from Susan Blass dated June 25, 2009 "placement of the non - lateral information signs and the canoe trail markers by the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) does satisfy the requirement referred to in the Department of the Army permit." (Appendix 8a) He next stated that it was a requirement of the United States Coast Guard (USCG). An email from Mr. Joseph Embres of the USCG again refutes that claim. The requirement for installing private aids to navigation is "requires a permit from the USCG." (Appendix 8b) Now the County claims that the generic use of navigational signs in the July 8, 1998 USACOE Management Plan Permit (Appendix 1) meant and required the installation of lateral red /green navigation signs. However the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD), who prepared the permit, and the Mangrove Action Group (MAG), who advised in the preparation, claim that the reference is specific to the non - lateral signs. A careful review of the 1998 Permit, the April 9, 1997 Management Plan Application, minutes of the related PBSD meetings and other documents do not support the County's claim. However the position of the Corps is that they must accept the interpretation of the higher authority. Page 9/21 of the 1998 Permit lists only non - lateral signs that are required and their location for placement and does not include lateral navigation signs. Page 9/14 assures the protection of the riparian rights of the Seagate residents and does not include added installation of lateral navigation signs. Section 3.3.1, Current Recreational Component, states that canoeing remains a popular activity but that use of motorized watercraft is not prohibited. Accumulation of sediments and the shoaling physically limits deeper draft boats particularly equipped with engines. While Section 3.3.2, Proposed Recreational Component, states that the plan would not anticipate any changes in the recreational use characteristics of Clam Bay. It continues on page 38 to describe the appropriate notification, signage, policing and placement intended to assure that persons accessing Clam Bay are informed of the unique ecological characteristics. (These are non - lateral information and regulatory signs not lateral navigation signs.) The main channel will be marked in accordance with the requirements imposed by the USCG to insure that those who use the system clearly know where the channel is and the prohibition against operating their watercraft outside the same. Lateral navigation signs do not prohibit you from travelling outside of the signs. They are not regulatory. This sentence does not say motorized watercraft. It refers to all watercraft and the main channel is already marked with canoe trail markers by Permit Number 20 -016 authorized March 24, 2000.(Appendix 7a) Furthermore a letter to the Corps dated March 22, 2000 (Appendix 7d) states, "Marking this dredged channel 1 of 3 10/28/2010 16114 821 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6c - History of Navigation Markers is a commitment of the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan which was authorized by the Corps and DEP (USACOE permit #199602789), and these markers will fulfill that commitment." In 2008 the PBSD paid for new replacement signs because of their deteriorating condition. The county forbade the PBSD from installing them by refusing to fund the installation. This is a violation of paragraph 5, "Collier County must immediately report and correct any discrepancies of any marker to this office by calling 850 - 488 -5600, extension 169." The public landing for canoes is at the southern most part of Outer Clam Bay. Red /green lateral navigation signs will increase the presence of motorized boats in this pristine conservation area, the county's first Natural Resource Protected Area, and will have the right -of -way over the canoes. This is not preserving the status quo. The April 9, 1997 Management Plan Application (Appendix 2), under Section 3.3.1, Current Recreational Component, on page 35 confirms that the use of motorized watercraft are not prohibited. However 3.3.2, Proposed Recreational Component, on page 36 stated that "No motorized craft should be allowed north of the south (the county) boardwalk." Seagate objected to this restriction and this condition in the application was changed in the permit. Minutes of PBSD meetings in preparation of the permit reveal consistency to limit motorized boating. The September 3, 1997 minutes (Appendix 5a) on page 1297 deals with the objection raised by Seagate. "Substitute in the Plan the County Ordinance 96 -16 which essentially allows motorized boat within the system as a whole as it presently exists. In short no change in the navigational parameters." The June 3, 1998 minutes (Appendix 5b) on page 2953 describes the Manatee and Ordinance signs. On page 2954 the agencies view boating as "a very serious, cumulative, secondary impact potential to this estuary. No change in the status of the law only expectation that it be enforced." While on page 2955 it supports the use of canoes "Trim mangroves to enhance navigability for canoes." The July 8, 1998 minutes (Appendix 5c) on page 3029 "Resolved by preservation of the status quo." Page 3049 continues dealing with policing and signs. The minutes of July 21, 1998 (Appendix 5d) on page 3082 Commissioner Hancock states "That is not a navigable pass and the county is not obligated to keep that pass open." There are other documents leading up to permit that reference navigation. A February 14, 1997 AS &E Memo (Appendix 6a) contains the draft to encourage the county to develop strict navigation rules and that "No motorized craft should be allowed north of the south boardwalk." 2 of 3 10/28/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6c - History of Navigation Markers w 0% • A September 9, 1997 letter to the FDEP (Appendix 6b) on page 3 states "suggest rather clearly that boat traffic will not be increased. We do anticipate enhanced channel marking." (This was accomplished in 2000 with the installation of the canoe trail markers.) On page 5 the consultant agrees to remove the restriction on motorized boats north of the south boardwalk and substitute the Ordinance "to preserve the status quo." A Corps "Statement of Findings" dated April 6, 1998 (Appendix 6c) on page 17 covers response to protest against boating restriction. "Recreation: The proposed plan will not change the current recreational use of the bay, however, the Plan does contain a Recreational Component that will address appropriate notification, signage and policing of the bay." In a letter to the Administrator, Jim Ward, and the PBSD Board dated July 2, 1998 (Appendix 6d) again confirms that the "plan exists to accommodate concerns over navigation by preserving status quo." The July 1998 Consolidated Joint Coastal Permit Draft (Appendix 6e) on page 10 clearly states what signs are to be installed and where. There is no mention of red /green lateral navigation signs. Recently Seagate and the City of Naples had the NOAA Navigation chart #11430 designation "Clam Pass Rep non - navigable 1982" removed. This was important information for unsuspecting boaters and the county should have exercised jurisdiction. However the NOAA Coast Pilot still reports the following on Clam Pass: Chart 11429, 11426, 11430 - (Chapter 4) (217) Clam Pass, about 5 miles N of Naples, is a shoal drainage canal to Outer Clam Bay. The pass is used only by outboards in good weather. A fixed pedestrian bridge with a clearance of 7 feet vertically, and 12 feet horizontally crosses Outer Clam Bay. 3 of 3 10/28/2010 161 1 'Be 11, November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6c - History of Navigation Markers From: To: Cc: Richard D. Yovanovich; Robert Diffenderter; Michelle Diltenderrer Subject: Learn about the Navigation Sign Issue! ^ Date: Sunday, October 31, 2010 8:27:05 PM Why is the county claiming that the Pelican Bay Services Division requested the red /green lateral navigation signs be placed in Clam Bay? When the navigation sign issue first arose, Gary McAlpin claimed that the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) required the installation of the red /green lateral navigation signs. This was refuted by the Corps in an email from Susan Blass dated June 25, 2009 "placement of the non - lateral information signs and the canoe trail markers by the Pelican Bay Services Division does satisfy the requirement referred to in the Department of the Army permit." (Appendix 8a) He then stated that it was a requirement of the United States Coast Guard (USCG). An email from Mr. Joseph Embres of the USCG again refutes that claim. The requirement for installing private aids to navigation is that it "requires a permit from the USCG." (Appendix 8b) Now the County claims that the generic use of the term "signs" in the July 8—,1998 USAnE Management Plan Permit (Appendix 1) meant and required the installation of lateral red /green navigation signs. However the actions of the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD), who prepared the permit, and the Mangrove Action Group (MAG), who advised in its preparation, support that the reference is specific to the non - lateral information and regulatory signs. A careful review of the 1998 Permit, the April 9, 1997 Management Plan Application, minutes of the related PBSD meetings and other documents do not support the County's claim. However the position of the Corps is that they are obligated to accept the interpretation of the higher authority, the county. What are we going to do about it? To do nothing will be an act of omission and the signs will go up by default. We have an opportunity to act now. The PBSD, Pelican Bay Foundation, The Pelican Bay Property Owners Association and the Mangrove Action Group must ban together to petition the county that this interpretation is in error. Page 9/21 of the 1998 Permit lists only non - lateral signs that are required and their location for placement and does not include lateral navigation signs. Page 9/14 assures the protection of the riparian rights of the Seagate residents and does not include added installation of lateral navigation signs. Section 3.3.1, Current Recreational Component, states that canoeing remains a popular activity but that use of motorized watercraft is not prohibited. Accumulation of sediments and the shoaling physically limits deeper draft boats particularly equipped with engines. While Section 3.3.2, Proposed Recreational Component, states that the plan would not anticipate any changes in the recreational use characteristics of Clam Bay. It continues on page 38 to describe the appropriate notification, signage, policing and placement intended to assure that persons accessing Clam Bay are informed of the unique ecological characteristics. (These are non - lateral information and regulatory signs not lateral navigation signs.) The main channel will be marked in accordance with the requirements imposed by the USCG to insure that those who use the system clearly know where the channel is and the prohibition against operating their watercraft outside the same. Lateral navigation signs do not prohibit you from travelling outside of the signs. They are not regulatory. This sentence does not refer to only motorized watercraft. It refers to all watercraft and the 1 of 3 1611 iB 21 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6c - History of Navigation Markers main channel has already been marked with canoe trail markers by Permit Number 20 -016 authorized March 24, 2000. (Appendix 7a) Furthermore a letter from our consultant to the Corps dated March 22, 2000 (Appendix 7d) in reference to the canoe markers states, "Marking this dredged channel is a commitment of the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan which was authorized by the Corps and DEP (USACOE permit #199602789), and these markers will fulfill that commitment." In 2008 the PBSD paid for new replacement signs because of their deteriorating condition. The county forbade the PBSD from installing them by refusing to fund the installation. This is a violation of paragraph 5 of the permit, "Collier County must immediately report and correct any discrepancies of any marker to this office by calling 850 -488 -5600, extension 169." The public landing for canoes is at the southern most part of Outer Clam Bay. Red /green lateral navigation signs will increase the presence of motor boats in this pristine first Natural Resource Protection Area, and they will have the right -of -way over the canoes. This is not preserving the status quo. The April 9, 1997 Management Plan Application (Appendix 2), under Section 3.3.1, Current Recreational Component, on page 35 confirms that the use of motorized watercraft are not prohibited. However 3.3.2, Proposed Recreational Component, on page 36 stated that "No motorized craft should be allowed north of the south (the county) boardwalk." Seagate objected to this restriction and this condition in the application was changed in the permit. Minutes of PBSD meetings in preparation of the permit reveal consistency to limit motorized boating. The September 3, 1997 minutes (Appendix 5a) on page 1297 deals with the objection raised by Seagate. "Substitute in the Plan the County Ordinance 96 -16 which essentially allows motorized boat within the system as a whole as it presently exists. In short no change in the navigational parameters." The June 3, 1998 minutes (Appendix 5b) on page 2953 describes the Manatee and Ordinance signs. On page 2954 the agencies view boating as "a very serious, cumulative, secondary impact potential to this estuary. No change in the status of the law only expectation that it be enforced." While on page 2955 it supports the use of canoes "Trim mangroves to enhance navigability for canoes." The July 8, 1998 minutes (Appendix 5c) on page 3029 "Resolved by preservation of the status quo." Page 3049 continues dealing with policing and signs. The minutes of July 21, 1998 (Appendix 5d) on page 3082 Commissioner Hancock states "That is not a navigable pass and the county is not obligated to keep that pass open." There are other documents leading up to the permit that reference navigation. A February 14, 1997 AS &E Memo (Appendix 6a) contains the draft to encourage the county to develop strict navigation rules and that "No motorized craft should be allowed north of the south boardwalk." A September 9, 1997 letter to the FDEP (Appendix 6b) on page 3 states "suggest rather clearly that boat traffic will not be increased. We do anticipate enhanced channel marking." (This was accomplished in 2000 with the installation of the canoe trail markers.) On page 5 the consultant agrees to remove the restriction on motorized boats north of the south boardwalk and substitute the Ordinance "to preserve the status quo." A Corps "Statement of Findings" dated April 6, 1998 (Appendix 6c) on page 17 covers response to protest against boating restriction. "Recreation: The proposed plan will not 2 of 3 1611 821 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6c - History of Navigation Markers change the current recreational use of the bay" however, the Plan does contain a Recreational Component that will address appropriate notification, signage and policing of the bay. In a letter to the Administrator, Jim Ward, and the PBSD Board dated July 2, 1998 (Appendix 6d) again confirms that the "plan exists to accommodate concerns over navigation by preserving status quo." The July 1998 Consolidated Joint Coastal Permit Draft (Appendix 6e) on page 10 clearly states what signs are to be installed and where. There is no mention of red /green lateral navigation signs. Recently Seagate and the City of Naples had the NOAA Navigation chart #11430 designation "Clam Pass Rep non - navigable 1982" removed. This was important information for unsuspecting boaters and the county should have exercised jurisdiction. However the NOAA Coast Pilot still reports the following on Clam Pass: Chart 11429, 11426. 11430 - (Chapter 4) (217) Clam Pass, about 5 miles N of Naples, is a shoal drainage canal to Outer Clam Bay. The pass is used only by outboards in good weather. A fixed pedestrian bridge with a clearance of 7 feet vertically, and 12 feet horizontally crosses Outer Clam Bay. Ted 3of3 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 161 1 B21 Clam Pass Navigation Signs History 1. County claims that the generic wording of navigational signs in the July 8, 1998 USACOE Management Plan Permit required the installation of lateral red /green navigation signs. 2. The PB Services Division, who prepared the permit, the PB Foundation, the PB Property Owners Association and the Mangrove Action Group, who helped prepare the permit, claim that the reference Is specifically to only the non- lateral signs. 3. Navigational references In the permit are as follows: a. Page 9/21, Para 5. States what signs are required and where to be placed. Also Manatee signs are requested. b. Riparian rights must be protected. Page 9/14. c. Role of PBSD: Page 9 and 10. d. 3.3 Recreation: Page 36, Current and 3.3.2 Proposed Page 37 ...would not anticipate any changes in the recreational use.... will not measurably improve navigabigty. e. Page 38 Ordinance 96-16: No Wake and reference to signs again. f. Page 39 navigation signs "where the channel is and the prohlbttions against operating their water craft outside the same." 4. Navigational references in the April 9,1997 Management Plan Application: a. 3.3.1 Current Recreational Conrnponent: Page 35, use of motorized watercraft not prohibited. b. 3.3.2 Proposed Recreational Component: Page 36, "No motorized craft should be apowed north of the south boardwalk." S. Minutes of MD meetings in preparation of the permit. a. September 3, 1997 — Page 1297 "No change In navigational parameters." b. June 3, 1993 — Page 2953 Manatee and Ordinance signs. Page2954 Very serious, cumulative, secondary impact potential to this estuary .... No change... expectation that it be enforced." Page 2955 "Trim mangroves to enhance navigability for canoes." c. July 8, 1998 — Page 3029 'Resolved by preservation of the status quo" Page 3049 — Policing and signs. d. July 21, 1998 — Page 3082 Hancock "That Is not a navigable pass and the county Is not obligated to keep that pass open." 6. Other documents leading up to permit: a. February 14, 1997 AS&E Memo: No changes In recreational use. b. September 9, 1997 paragraph 4 "clearly boat traffic will not be Increased." Page 1 of 22 11/04/2010 16! November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting c. April 6, 1998 Statement of Findings Page 17 Response to protest against boating restriction. d. Memo to Jim Ward July 2, 1998 Page 4 — "plan exists to accommodate concerns over navigation by preserving status quo." e. July 1998 Permit Draft Page 10 — Placement of signs. 7. Other actions approved by county. a. March 24, 2000 Canoe Trial Markers approved. Because of poor condition we requested to replace the signs in 2008. The signs were already purchased. The County instructed us that they would block funding of the installation if we tried to install them. The County is in violation of Paragraph 5. b. NOAA Navigation chart #11430 had designation "Clam Pass Rep non - navigable 1982" removed. Even Wiggins pass on new chart has warning. c. NOAA Coast Pilot still reports the following on Clam Pass: Chart 11429, 11426, 11430 - (Chapter 4) (217) Clam Pass, about 5 miles N of Naples, is a shoal drainage canal to Outer Clam Bay. The pass is used only by outboards in good weather. A fixed pedestrian bridge with a clearance of 7 feet vertically, and 12 feet horizontally crosses Outer Clam Bay. d. Letter date March 22, 2000 from Consultant to Corps that canoe trail markers satisfy requirement for signs. 8. Correspondence from USACOE and USCG refuting county claim. a. USACOE Email stream beginning June 11, 2009 to June 26, 2009. b. USGC Email from Joseph Embres dated September 27, 2010 The County is free to submit an application for the placement of lateral red /green navigation signs. Why are they insisting that Pelican Bay requested them in their permit? The Corps has stated that this is an issue that must be resolved between PBSD and the County. The Corps must accept the word of the County since they are the higher approving authority. Page 2 of 22 11/04/2010 1u21 0 0 N November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting Page 3 of 22 11/04/2010 161 laz November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting I am writing today on the intent by a rep of either Collier County or the city of Naples to request permits for installation of Personal Aids To Navigation (PATN's) in the Clam Pass Natural Resources Protection Area, Clam Bay Conservation Area. I believe Tim Hall has provided a copy of a map indicating proposed placement of 32 PATNs from the Gulf to the south end of Outer Clam Bay to various individuals/agencies. This map is provided below this message. - These huge PATNs (36 x36 for green and 4 R for red) markers would of course be in addition to the already existing and permitted, valuable 32 canoe trail markers. Additionally, there is a requirement of 10 other signs for information/regulatory purposes ( 5 Caution - Shallow Natural Resources ...... Tilt Motor Up...) and (5 Idle Speed - No Wake). There has been a problem with approval of those 10 signs because no statutory provisions exist in Florida for them. But for now, please consider just the sheer number of signs that we are talking about for placement in one section of this waterway. Let's see now, 32 canoe trail marker signs, 10 informational/ regulatory signs - -that makes 42 signs already. Add to that the proposed 32 PATNs, and we have a total of 74 signs, of which the 32 PATNs are HUGE. The PATNs are proposed to have 1 mile visibility. I expect that kind of visibility means that these signs will need to be elevated fairly high above the water line. This would indicate a need for a substantial pole to be installed first, for placement of each PATN. Clearly, the bottom substrate would be greatly impacted by placement of these poles. Mo one in our community desktes to obsbuct the r*sKW#s of Seagate from Moir abAW to come and go on the waterways of be Clam Passk'Am Bay estuary or krVede nature Won from anywhere to haws access and wVoy Me natural resources and scenic waterways in this system. ft Just want to preserve as much as possible the natural scenic beauty and the habdots w/dw this system that are so knpcdtant to survival of many markm species and odd w . THIS IS A COQNiSER"TION( ARZI<A. I believe objections and opposition for approval of the proposed PATNs have merit and will be supported. There are requirements for conservation land or water area to remain predominantly in its natural condition- Obviously, there will be a tremendous adverse impact to the appearance of this natural waterway if the proposed 32 PATNs are allowed. This estuary and its waterways of tidal creeks has great vale in having an almost uninterrupted natural shoreline throughout (with the only exception being a portion of the very south end of Outer Clam Bay). The installation and existence of the poles and PATNs will cause a permanent change to the character of this estuary. The canoe trail markers only minimally impact on the otherwise overwhelmingly unspoiled scenic character of this waterway. The canoe trail is a wonderful asset that is accessible to nature lovers as an escape from the urban environment. The proposed PATNs will adversely affect the safety and property of others. All of these signs and posts are likely to cause a safety hazard by virtue of being significant physical obstructions within this system. These significant physical obstructions placed in areas where none previously existed, will be objects that must then be avoided for collision in areas that previously did not have that potential for collision. Rather than increasing boating safety, these added poles and signs will actually reduce boating safety and are more likely to adversely impact navigation due to increased potentials for collision. Page 4 of 22 11/04/2010 4 1611 B2 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting Sturdy utility type poles will be necessary for placement of the PATNs. The work of installing these poles for the PATNs will greatly disturb the bottom substrate which includes valuable habitat. This will cause adverse impact to the conservation of fish and wildlife, as this is an Essential Fisheries Habitat (EFH) and the Clara Bay estuary is one of few remaining relatively undisturbed wetlandstestuary systems. This is important habitat for fish and other marine life. Many varieties of fish marine life come into Clam Bay estuary for its function as a spawning, nursery, s feeding habitat. The local residents of the Seagate community with waterfmmi property and others from the larger community currently are safely navigating these waters; people in years past have safely navigated these waters for well over 100 years as a SHALLOW, TIDAL INFLUENCED. MANGROVE ESTUARY. The water level within this system varies greatly from low, low tides up to high tides. It would be a mistake for any person or agency to place PATNs from out in the Gulf through the pass and into the interior. Having these PATNs in place will indicate this waterway is a maintained navigable waterway for ANY size boat at ANY time of day or tide. This is a very UNSAFE situation for any passing boater that does not have local knowledge of this waterway. The eX canoe bW rmw*srs have minimat bnped due to Oak amallhnadi im size and boadon cillow to the water kw. The current canoe trail markers are consWently kK*bd to Hm rVN of Nw mafn channel. This serves as a wry useful guide not only to anoem but also to odw boshm I wxMrsfand NW Ow canoe MW does not cwrently exhsnd aN the way to ft CAwn Pon ill' W g would seem to be Mss prcbNmadc for aN to update✓ l npow the cum* canoe f l by extend V N into the pass and pwmftV x for canoe &W mmvkws ftm Clam Pass to Outer Clam Bayy l and many offwM behave Chet the gross addition of PAIN* is not the proper answer lo madwV the drannel of Clam Bay. Mweia Cravens Dwictor of Ooarearh and Networking Mangrove Action Groap Page 5 of 22 11/04/2010 .• w ": a, GOMO TRAIL HAMM" A NCO S7t�1 CAUTION �i = @.t11 Ctrt SST` R€GV_ D .4w ' :4AW MfAWL GKE , t•.�."t Mtwtt'AAL RFiLECITVE TAPE E i �. WMAL TRML MAIM®1 +,tom nrru�crw+e �. , t TAM Page 6 of 22 11/04/2010 a tz O m C .0 cm cu N N a) N U � CD (6 co ca > f6 cz m C U T ma CL m C) E 09 N C N ` N a) C S] a) E E m =1 > U O O Z0 1611 1821 a) rn as CL Y (4 O .6 O) (6 Z 0 Z 0 ti 2 U O 0 O .N N N O 0 O) N of (O O m C O Q1 'y C > N � N N E U N ._ L N c6 T CY m C H @ > U � d a a m o •E o� N � M N � N N C � N E E N 7 > U O O Z 0 161102 8 co 0 N V O N N O 00 ,v rn f6 d November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - HisiTy kJatillarklersB 21 Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 8 r DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY it O RW 001WO OF DIONN M 1= ROYAL PALM SOUARR BLVD., s= 310 FORT MYMS, R MNOA, 3M S -ION aKr TO ATTEnM OF June 9, 2009 Regulatory Division South Permits Branch Fort Myers Section SAJ- 1996- 02789(IP -CC) Mr. Jim Hoppensteadt President, Pelican Bay Foundation, Inc. 6251 Pelican Bay Boulevard Naples., Florida 34108 Dear Mr. Hoppensteadt: This letter refers to a request for clarification of a letter sent May 26, 2009 from the Department of the Army (DA) to Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) on behalf of Pelican Bay Foundation, Inc. The letters all reference DA permit number 1996 -02789 issued on August 11, 1998. The permit authorized replacement of Seagate Drive Culverts, dredging of the Clam Pass main channel for Cuts 1, 2, 3, and 4, and excavation and maintenance of interior tidal creeks. The project is located within Clam Bay and the Gulf of Mexico, in Sections 4, 5, 8, 9, 32, 33, Township 49 south, Range 25 east, Collier County, Florida. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has completed an evaluation of your response and the information provided to us by your letter dated June 2, 2009. You requested we make clear that the navigational signs and markers, referred to in our letter, were the lateral signs that denote safe navigation. The Corps previously stated by letter dated, March 2, 2009, that, "In accordance with Special Condition 2, the Permittee was to comply with the components and timeframes specified within the Clam Bay Restoration Management Plan. It has come to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) attention that the navigational markers have not yet been installed. Installation of these markers is indeed a requirement of the Department of the Army permit. In addition, the markers must meet U.S. Coast Guard standards for signs." To further clarify, the Corps included the regional conditions for Nationwide Permit 1 (NWP -1) in our letter dated, May 26, 2009. Specifically regional condition it states the following: "In Florida, prior to installation of aids to navigation and other Page 9 of 22 11/04/2010 1611 621 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 8 N -2- water dependent - informational signs must have the appropriate authorization required from the U.S. Coast Guard and the EWC. (CZM -FL) ". The NWP -1 allows for placement of "navigation signs" in waters that may have been declared "non - navigable" by the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAH) or other agencies, since the Corps definition of "Navigable waters" is different than NOAA's as it is used to define the authorities of the Corps of Engineers. Secondly, the regional conditions in Florida for NWP -1 includes; "water dependant informational signs" as well as "aids to navigation ". Both types of signage require authorization from the FWC and U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and do not require a pre - construction notification to the Corps. The Corps regulations define navigability for our program in 33CFR 329.4; the general definition is "Navigable waters of- the United States are those waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and /or are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. A determination of navigability, once made, applies laterally over the entire surface of the waterbody, and is not extinguished by later actions or events which impede or destroy navigable capacity." This regulation defines the term "navigable waters of the United States" as it is used to define authorities of the Corps of Engineers. It also prescribes the policy, practice and procedure to be used in determining the extent of the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers and in answering inquiries concerning "Navigable waters of the United States." This definition does not apply to authorities under the Clean Water Act which definitions are described under 33 CFR parts 323 and 328. Sec. 329.5 further discusses the general scope of determination and that several factors must be examined when making a determination whether a waterbody is a navigable water of the United States, such as Past, present, or potential presence of interstate or foreign commerce; Physical capabilities for use by commerce; and Defined geographic limits of the waterbody. Page 10 of 22 11/04/2010 1611-821 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 0 0 W -3- This definition is used to define autl ities '`jtf the Corps of Engineers and does not apply to how other agencies define "navigable waters" including the USCG and NOAA. The Corps evaluated a letter dated May 14, 2009 from the Office of the County Attorney (Collier) stating that the PBSD is a dependent branch of Collier County and as such is not authorized to bind the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) with regard to any issues. The Corps has informed the many forms of Collier County Government and all other interested parties that they are encouraged to work together to resolve any disputes. The Corps' position is that installation of "water dependant informational signs" as well as "aids to navigation" signage that have been proposed thus far, in order to come into compliance with the permit as required by Special Condition 2, would be covered under the NWP1, this includes canoe trail markers and non - lateral navigation signs. No further action is required from the Corps. The decision document for NWP -1 can be found at: http: / /www.usace. army. mil /CECW /Documents /cecwo /reg /nwp /NWP 01 20 07.pdf. The Corps regulations and policy can be found at: http: / /www.saj.usace.army.mil/ Divisions /Regulatory /reguipolicy.h tm We appreciate your comments favorable or otherwise, please complete the customer survey at http : / /regulatory.usacesurvey.com /. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Susan Blass at the letterhead address. Enclosure(s) Copies Furnished: Sincerely, Susan Blass Chief, Fort Myers Section Page 11 of 22 11/04/2010 16114B2 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting -4- Collier County James Mudd, County Manager, Gary McAlpin, Director, Coastal Zone Management Theodore Raia, Director, Pelican Bay Services Division Office of the County Attorney Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Leo Ochs, Jr., Deputy County Manager Colleen M. Greene, Assistant County Attorney Regulatory Division, USACE Tunis McElwain, Chief, South Permits Branch Debroah Wegmann,Chief, Special projects and Enforcement Branch Donnie Kinard, Deputy Chief, Regulatory Division Page 12 of 22 11104/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 1611 021 From: "Alford, Tara" <tara.alford @MyFWC.com> Ube RE: clarification of signage Issues in DEP permit Date - July 14, 2008 11:19:05 AM EDT To: Marcia Cravens <mrlc @mac.com >, Ovdenk Cynthia <cynthia.d.ovdenk@ usace. army. mil>, Eric SAJ Summa P <Eric.P.Summa @usace. army. mil> Cc: KeyesPamela <PamelaKeyes @ coil iergov.net>, Joseph. B. Embres(P uscg. mil, "Keyser, Carol" <carol. keyser@ MyFWC.com> 1 Attachment, 3.6 KB Save Skleshow Good Morning Ms. Ovdenk: If you would like to give me a call about this issue, I can provide you with the information we routinely provide to our stakeholders (Ms. Craven) as well as the same information we provide to the local governments. As I advised Ms. Craven and the county; and as I'm sure Mr. Embres advised the county, channel markers are designed to advise boaters of 'safe passage', nothing more. They are not there to 'make a boater stay in the channel`, many local boaters will know the waters and depending on the tide will take advantage of the channel markers or not. Page 13 of 22 11/04/2010 I November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of av gation a l ers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting Lastly, the county intends to place an informational marker at the entrance to Clam Bay advising boaters that it is shallow (provide the depth) and that local knowledge is required. Please understand that state waters are for everyone's use, and that regulation for anything other than boating safety cannot be considered. The county also requested idle speed no wake markers for this project. We (FWC) are looking at the best way to assist the county with marking to keep from proliferating the area with unnecessary markers; meaning that in many instances the piles (channel markers) can be used to affix other signage (of course with USCG approval). Let me know if you need anything else. I'm in the office Monday through Thursday from 6a to 5p Thanks, Tara Tara Alford, Management Ana!y4! f-, Boating and Waterways Sectio ' Florida Fish & Wildlife Coriservataan C:csrras�iR art Division of Law Enforcement 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399 16,01C;' Patrol, Protect, Preserve 850-.410-0656, ext. 17169 850-251-7220 - Cell Page 14 of 22 11/04/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 161 1 B21 Comments by David Roellig, Member, PBAC on the draft Consolidated Joint Coastal Permit and Sovereign Submerged Lands Authorization which included suggested revisions by Mr. Ted Brown. 1. Project Description, last sentence; assumes negative impacts of the fresh water inflows. Mitigation of any negative impacts should only be implemented only if the negative impacts are significant. I believe.the problem is lack of channel capacity and not the inflow of fresh water which appears to be only a few percent of the volume of water in each tide cycle of more than 30 million gallons (Turrell & Associates, July 1995). 2. Page 6, subparagraph g; Add the following, In the event of sudden and complete closing of the pass, the permittee may reopen the Clam Pass by removing no more than 300 cubic yards of the blockage. Prompt written notification of the Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems is required. 3. Page 6, paragraph 2b; this paragraph is unacceptable due to the requirement that material retained by No. 4 sieve can not be placed on the beach. This would exclude natural material one quarter inch or larger. The existing beach has significant quantities of much larger beach material. Beach fill material should be consistent with the material currently occurring on the beach. Failure to revise the grain size requirement would undoubtedly involve us in a problem similar to the Naples and Collier County "rock problem". 4. Page 16, paragraph d; the data to be collected seems excessive and the need for these items should analyzed and the cost of collecting these data should be determined to insure all these data are warranted. David Roellig June 10, 1998 Page 15 of 22 11/04/2010 161 02- 1 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 0 co Comments on the draft June 6, 1998 letter to Robert Brantley and Rich Bray by David Roellig, Member, PBAC; 1. This letter should only be addressed to the senior state official involved. I believe it is a mistake to continue Mr. Bray's involvement, if he is now working in other areas with a different supervisor. We should not expect adequate support from someone who now has different responsibilities. 2. If you have not already done so in writing, I believe Mr. Brantley should be informed in your letter that the Consolidated Notice of Intent to Issue filed June 1, 1998 contains information that is misleading and in some instances erroneous. For example: A. Page 4, the emphasis on reducing the fresh water discharge is misleading, because the tidal prism, volume of water in each tide cycle, is more than 30 million gallons (Turrell & Associates, July 1995). Any reduction in fresh water discharge would only be a few percent of the tidal flow. B. Page 4, 3rd paragraph, it is estimated that 26 inches of irrigation water is applied per year. To state that 26 inches is discharged into "Clam Bay Resource Protection Area" via treated stormwater discharge from developed uplands is erroneous, because it neglects evaporation and transpiration. C. Page 5, 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence. To state there is an increasing rate of mangrove mortality conflicts with the information provided by our consultants, and reflects a surprising lack of understanding of the problem. 3. Mr. Brantley should be informed in writing that the applicant is extremely frustrated by service we have received to date and the perception of lack of understanding by the State. The applicant has spent hundreds of thousand of dollars and it appears that 14 months after application there still seems to be a major lack of understanding of the problem and the necessary solution. 4. Mr. Brantley should be informed that the proposed draft permit is fatally flawed. I believe a bad permit is far worst than no permit. If necessary, I am ready to involve our elected representatives to resolve this situation in a timely manner. A--� 1 David Roellig June 10,1998 Page 16 of 22 11/04/2010 1611 B2 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 01 Ch. 2000 -M LAW✓p OF FLORIDA Ch. 20OY " on me waters state for any purpose naoswM7 J&jokd IAA the safety of the pubic ts&ererhom such restrictions are deemed necessary based on boatint aori- dents, visIty, hasardous currents or water levels, vessel traffic conges- tion, or other navigational hasanta. 11 CODING: Words swidws are deletions; words madodiNd are additions. Page 17 of 22 11/04/2010 16I 1821 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 0 r O Ch. 9009.86 LAWS OF FLORMA Ch. 200946 19 CODING- Words atwshm are deletions; words Up are additions. Page 18 of 22 11/04/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 1611 iB21 Ch. 2008 -86 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 2008 -86 Each such boating - restricted restricted area shall be developed in consultation and coordination with the governing body of the county or municipality in which the boating- restricted r�estrieted area is located and, with Army Corps QX424 It is unlawful for any person to operate a vessel in a prohibited Tanner or to carry on any prohibited activity, as defined in this chapter, within a boating- restricted area which has been clearly marked by regulatory markers as authorized under this chapter. Lj)(3) Restrictions in a boating - restricted area established pursuant to this section shall not apply in the case of an emergency or to a law enforce- ment, firefighting, or rescue vessel owned or operated by a governmental entity. Section 14. Effective October 1, 2009, section 327.60, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 327.60 Local regulations; limitations.— (1) The provisions of this chanter and chapter 328 328 5-2--328.59, 328-692, and 328.64 shall govern the operation, equipment, and all other matters relating thereto whenever any vessel shall be operated upon the waters of this state waterways or when any activity regulated hereby shall take place thereon. (2) Nothing in this chapter or chapter 328 these seatiens shall be con- strued to prevent the adoption of any ordinance or local regulation last relating to operation and equipment of vessels, except that a county or (b) Relating to the design, manufacture, installation or use of any sanitation device on any vessel: 13 CODING: Words st*ieken are deletions; words underlined are additions. Page 19 of 22 11/04/2010 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigatio:l Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting . o 4„ N Ch. 2009 -®8 LAWS OF FWIWA C6. 200046 (c) gelatins any vessel upon the Florida L racor -*al Waterway. (d) Discriminating against Rersonal watercrrafL: + ja)W Nothing sentaiaed in the prousieas -et this section shall be con- strued to prohibit local governmental authorities *wn the enactment or enforcement of regulations which bit or restrict the mooring or anchor- ing of floating structures or hve-aboard vessels within their jurisdictions or of any vessels within the marked boundaries of mooring fields permitted as provided in s. 327.40. However. local governmental authorities are prohib- ited from regulating the anchoring outside of such maoonng fields of other than live—aboard vessels as dated in s 327 I2 �• Section 15. Paragraph (a) of subsection (2) of section 327.65, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 327.65 Muffling devices.— (2Xa) Any county wishing to impose additional noise pollution and ex- haust regulations on vessels may, pursuant to s. 327.60(2)W, adopt by county ordinance the following regulations: 1. No person shall operate or give permission for the operation of any vessel on the waters of any county or on a spechUd portion of the waters of any county, including the Florida Intracoastal Waterway, which has adopted the provisions of this section in such a manner as to exceed the following sound levels at a distance of 50 loet from the vessel: far all vessels, a maximum sound level of 90 dB A. 14 CODING: words waodwa are deletions; words madmhad are additims. Page 20 of 22 11/04/2010 1611 B21 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting 0 W Ch. 2000-M LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 2000 -t 2. Any person who refuses to submit to a sound level test when requested to do so by a law enforcement offioer is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 778.082 or s. 775.083. Section 16. Section 327.66, Florida Statutes, is created to read: 327.66 Carriaste of tasoline an voaeb.- Ma) A person shall not• 15 CODING: Words sis"m are deletions; words madKkag are additions. Page 21 of 22 11/04/2010 161 1 November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session - 6c - History of Navigation Markers Documents submitted by T. Raia at the meeting Memorandum DATE: Jame 09, 2008 TO: Gary McAlpin FROM: Lainie Edwards Environmental Permitting Section Bureau of Beaches d: Coastal Systems Florida Department of Environmental Protection SUBJECT: Interpretation of Joint Coastal Permit: Clam Bay Restoration and Long Term Management Project (0128463 - 001 -JC) The Clam Bay Restoration and Long Tern Management Project Joint Coastal Permit was written with the intent of environmental went. The permit includes descriptions of authorized activities related to the dredging of Clam Pass and the maintenance of the mangrove community. It should be noted that this type of interior waterway management is not a typically regulated under the JCP program. In the future dredging or filler of the interior waterways will be regulated under the ERP program through the DEP South Dim Office. However, the JCP program will continue to regulate the maintenance of a flushing outlet through Clam Pass, but only when it involves the dredging and placement of beach compatible sand on the adjacent beaches. The Joint Coastal Permit (on page two) authorizes the activities included in the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan. This plan references the marking of the main channel with requirements imposed by the United States Coast Guard (USES). While the JCP permit does authorize this activity through adoption of the Plan, it does not require it, and the Department will not seek compliance action over this issue. As stated in the permit, "the Permittee is authorized to inWewnt the CRRMP as set, forth therein." Note this does not state that the pernittee is required to conduct all activities stated therein. Furthermore, the Joint Coastal Permit does specifically address signage / environmental protection markers that the Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems requires in the Pass area though Specific Condition 5, which discusses 10 signs required to be installed in specific locations, in order to protect the natural communities as well as the boating public. The Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems requires that these signs be installed as protective environmental measures (although the wording on the signs will have to be amended to meet legal requirements of FWC). The required signage intended by the permit is specified within the permit, and it is clear that the intent of the permit was environmental enhancement rather than navigational enhancements. From the Department's standpoint, the installation of the USCG navigation markers are not a specific requirement of this permit, and the signage required in Special Condition 5 of the permit would address the Department's environmental enhancement concerns. Thus, it does not appear that the additional signage would be necessary. Page 22 of 22 11/04/2010 B 21 -1 c ° y N f0 d d' "O l0 m O m m V N L m �OD ., N ad OT oa N � 7 C O d O a c E o z 1611 B21 d d d m d d d a d d d v v d G E U o o U o o U o o o o o O O u u o u 0 U - - - E u o o _ m > o r - _ o ° r au °� vE 9;iy�gcm° zo o> wl woc 2 9 E m r ' 6 ai _ c c R o E - E u 2 E z o oe o m° E E ' y N _ - o m 'o 2 3 _ = E E o$ a m Yo o' - - a A _� m o 3 v 0 I; a- �,°-- z •• a v E o w mBi u a 80. _1 c _- a o w d c E v 8 - o v z E= �- 3 on „ 5 o> z ° a E a3 -_ - - - -- - - - 8. Ewe vE - ol E " oo a` o o y o" o a m $ v 3 o v E o `o m o v\ v° n 11 \E 0 0a E w o E_ m > - iE E m " c nov�io `o ° - - E $ m a u E- E o.2 m - - Wf u o f o o c E c E n 3 c - N 3 E_ E E Y, d= v E E c - m n E o - E m E„ 3« E o„ o > o > 2 a E c =� E m c E a° >o' _ u�.n Jw w mEa > u v E W v� .a w E 3 E '� 2° E v .°. s u o° a; o o a v c E °\ E m° f > o 3 w u „ m .; w m p E a m ° - c m o -w - 2 a -- u of u q 72 u m v E a u m E _2 ¢ o E o E v n `w o 3 o g d E u m u a u con o E d v -° E' ° r c_ u i N `o d E E m i a o Y E a a o E o w V o w LL n ° 3 a w o w '_' o o'= °„ __ E >w o c „ c 9 '� ; 0 2 r a �' ° c; a a o o - o _ ,q o n c u E 3 u 3 c _ o .E E E v° o v 'c z" o o v s v E _ °n ;° F: _ .4 m `o o ` u° _ ° m E ., E_`- « - a u °D m° 9 E y i ' E Z 9 i o; o> '" o q 0_ �+ o '� E x t o v E n u` ti \ o v- i E x' z m „ m o Q o u 3 u _ q= ° � m .o o z Y i z o z z z z z z Qn z g z L E c - _ of u° t E u _ _ zo o m ie y ; m n_ w - E - ° - - �p - ° z E mt� c iQQ 'o o a ' ° c �OT7 u o _ d$ m _ 0 a m > O p 0 O N OD N O RECEIVED JAN 25 23111 PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Fia11 6 2 1�-i Hiller Henning s Coyle Coletta Board c t Cc >unf, Commissioners Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2010 THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET IN REGULAR SESSION, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2010 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, LOCATED AT 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES. AGENDA The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll Call 2. Remarks by Commissioner Georgia Hiller 3. Agenda Approval 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes a. November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session b. November 16, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee C. November 16, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Town Hall d. November 17, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Town Hall 5. Audience Participation 6. Administrator's Report a. Monthly Financial Report b. Status of Permit for Clam Bay Maintenance C. Status of RFP for Environmental Services d. Discussion of Need for Landscaping along U.S. 41 7. Chairman's Report a. Implementation of Community Improvement Plan b. Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update C. Independent District Update d. Canoe Trail Markers J. Domenie e. Announcements 8. Community Issues 9. Committee Reports and /or Requests a. Landscape Committee i. Initial Meeting Update ii. Foundation's Nutrient Management Plan Update 10. Old Business 11. New Business 12. Miscellaneous Correspondence a. Ongoing Projects Status Sheet 13. Audience Comments 14. Adjournment SPEAKERS FROM THE AUDIENCE WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. ADDITIONALLY, THIS NOTICE ADVISES THAT, IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD, WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, THEY WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THAT FOR SU MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TEST��VIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PERSON REQUIRING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS AT THIS MEETING BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY OR PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENT SHOULD CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION OFFICE A PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT (239) 597 -1749. Item #: 11(29/2010 1:16:28 PM Ccrptes 0. 1611 821 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Sessio 4a - Approval of November 3, 2010 Meeting Minutes PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Regular Session on Wednesday, November 3, 2010 at 1:00 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples. The following members present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board Keith J. Dallas, Chairman absent Mary Anne Womble, Vice Chairwoman John P. Chandler Tom Cravens Johan Domenic Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill Kyle Lukasz Geoffrey S. Gibson John Iaizzo Michael Levy Theodore Raia, Jr. John Baron Hunter H. Hansen absent Mary McCaughtry Lisa Resnick Also Present: Susan Boland, President, Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Marcia Cravens, Vice - President, Mangrove Action Group Tim Hall, Senior Biologist & Principal, Turrell, Hall & Associates Jim Hoppensteadt, President, Pelican Bay Foundation Mary Johnson, President, Mangrove Action Group Kathy Worley, Co- Director Environmental Science & Biologist, Conservancy of Southwest Florida AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Agenda Approval 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes a. October 6, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4. Audience Participation 5. Administrator's Report a. Monthly Financial Report b. Status of Permit for Clam Bay Maintenance C. U.S. 41 Berm d. Status of REP for Environmental Services 6. Chairwoman's Report a. Implementation of Community Improvement Plan (J. Chandler) b. Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update (T. Raia) C. History of Navigation Markers (T. Raia) d. Announcements 7. Community Issues 8. Committee Reports and /or Requests 9. Old Business 10. New Business 11. Miscellaneous Correspondence a. Ongoing Projects Status Sheet 12. Audience Comments 13. Adjournment ROLL CALL With the exception of Chairman Dallas and Mr. Hansen, all Board members were present and quorum established. AGENDA APPROVAL Mr. Levy made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to approve the agenda as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. 8408 1611 Be ]a December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4a - Approval of November 3, 2010 Meeting Minutes APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 6, 2010 REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to approve the October 6, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session minutes as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Ms. Marcia Cravens recommended that the Board take action today to approve funding to install the Clam Bay canoe trail markers. She said the Clam Bay system is classified as a Class II water body; there are records in Collier County that the Doctor's Pass water body was downgraded to Class III in the 1980's. This is important because "you cannot have two different classes of water bodies in the same water body identification boundary (WBID). The Mangrove Action Group (MAG) passed a resolution in October affirming the traditional boundaries of Clam Bay estuary that it is delineated on Federal map, FL64P. Secondly, MAG believes the Clam Bay Estuary should have a unique WBID number. She requested that the Board support and endorse MAG. Ms. Mary Johnson reviewed her response to Mr. Feldhaus in item 6b. MAG's supports Clam Bay remaining a Class II water body for water quality standards. Clam Bay should have its own distinct WBID. They are concerned about measures used for dredging triggers at the mouth and throat of Clam Pass. Dr. Raia asked if changing the water classification in Clam Bay to Class V would make navigation an allowed use. Ms. Kathy Worley said Class V navigation is in this instance, not referring to recreational vessels, but large vessels. Ms. Cravens explained the difference between Class II and Class III. Class Il is water that is capable of shellfish propagation and harvesting. Class III water allows swimming and fishing. Class III - Limited is "splashable." ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Mr. Dorrill presented the monthly financial report for October 2010 and beginning of the 2011 Fiscal Year. He anticipates that people will pay their assessment early to receive up to a 4% discount. By November, there will most likely be charges for "service" and distribution from the Tax Collector. Mr. Chandler said at the time the budget was approved he recommended they annualize it. Mr. Dorrill said it was an oversight and staff would correct. Regarding the administrative office lease, staff is seeking a rent reduction and extension of a one -year lease, not three -year renewal. He has discussed with Mr. Hoppensteadt, the possibility of sharing office space with the Foundation. To renovate the existing field office to include an administrative office, they would be required to submit a revised site development plan, and make substantial fire, safety and ADA modifications to the building and parking lot. 'I Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Dr. Raia to accept the monthly financial report into the record asI presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion STAUS OF PERMIT FOR CLAM BAY MAINTENANCE Mr. Hall reported that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) made a site visit, and Request for Additional Information (RAI) concluded and complete. FDEP has 90 days to issue a permit or deny a permit, but he expects FDEP to issue a permit before end of year. Once FDEP issues the permit, the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) will follow. U.S. 41 BERM Mr. Dorrill said there were questions asked regarding the original or recent improvements to the U.S. 41 berm related to exotic removal and whether the project was complete. There are landscaping gaps in some sections. The Chairman is interested in 8409 1611 B21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4a - Approval of November 3, 2010 Meeting Minutes staff developing an inventory of the number of ornamental plants it would take to complete the landscaping and fill in the gaps. He intends for staff to do some surveying and report to this board at the December meeting. STATUS OF RFP FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Mr. Dorrill reported that staff has received a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) for environmental services as they pertain to Clam Bay. Mr. Lukasz said the RFP was posted and there is a pre - proposal meeting on November 15 that will provide an opportunity for companies planning to submit proposals to ask questions about the project. Proposals will be open on November 23 and once received, the Selection Committee (Mr. Dorrill, Mr. Lukasz, and Mr. Cravens) and Purchasing will meet to discuss parameters for the selection committee to come back with three recommendations. The recommendations made by the Selection Committee will go back to the Services Division Board, and eventually the Board of County Commissioners for approval. Ms. Cravens asked for clarification of the RFP. Mr. Lukasz said the RFP is for environmental services in outer, inner, and upper Clam Bay, but does not include the Pass because the Pass is under the purview of Coastal Zone Management. The technical specifications are similar to work done in the Clam Bay System for the past twelve years. Ms. Cravens asked for clarification of the purchasing process. Mr. Dorrill responded that although they have a designated purchasing agent, they are non - voting; the selection committee will determine the short list. CHAIRWOMAN'S REPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN Mr. Chandler said although there are two Community Improvement Plan meetings planned for November 16 and November 17, he is concerned about poor attendance because most people will not be in town until after the holidays. He suggested they hold a meeting in February and move ahead on projects in March. He is concerned about adding five crosswalks on Pelican Bay Boulevard and suggested those in favor of them to get statistical data showing how dangerous they are. He said maintaining the pathways on the west side of Myra Janco Daniels Boulevard are part of the Services Division's normal responsibility. Vice Chairwoman Womble agreed and added that St. Williams is planning to renovate and that the Services Division should take this into consideration and possibly collaborate. Mr. Cravens said the County has begun replacing pathway sections along the east side of Pelican Bay Boulevard, but it is a very patchwork type of situation. Mr. Domenie said that all pathways should be made with pervious material. Mr. Lukasz said pervious asphalt requires more maintenance than impervious surfaces. Mr. Gibson said the new section of I -75 was constructed with pervious material and has heard it is "terrific in the rain." The Board discussed the possibility of holding a Community Improvement Plan meeting in February and how they should provide notice to get maximum turnout. Mr. Gibson suggested sending several email bulletins with the meeting notice solely. Mr. Iaizzo suggested sending letters to each unit owner to participate. Mr. Cravens suggested making a presentation to the President's Council. Someone made a suggestion to post fliers in all condominium buildings to urge people to attend. Mr. Hoppensteadt agreed to make a Community Improvement Plan presentation at the President's Council meeting of December 8 at 3 p.m. Mr. Chandler said they should be sure to take attendance, so they know who did not attend. Mr. Dorrill suggested that this Board compile a "short- list" of public works projects to present to Commissioner -Elect Hiller at the Services Division's December 1 meeting. FOUNDATION AD HOC CLAM BAY COMMITTEE UPDATE Dr. Raia is concerned that the Foundation's Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee efforts to have Pelican Bay "speak with one voice" and actively seeking input of the Services Division, Pelican Bay Property Owners Association, and Mangrove Action Group is misleading. He said there are many issues that he would like the Ad Hoc Committee to elaborate, including the resolution for a 10- year management plan and the 1982 Declarations, and suggested that the Committee be invited to a Services Division Board meeting to answer them. Mr. Hoppensteadt said that many of the parts are in the preliminary stages and that prior to anything becoming 8410 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4a - Approval of November 3, 2010 Meeting Minutes memorialized, they would hold a workshop, but that they cannot "workshop their way through this." Dr. Raia repeated his concerns that the work being done by this committee has the input of the Services Division, Property Owners, and MAG because it does not. Mr. Hoppensteadt said Mr. Feldhaus would attend the January Services Division meeting. Ms. Worley said it is important to know where they are coming from a scientific point of view and if they are going to hold a workshop, background material should be disseminated prior to it and have technical people available to answer questions. Mr. Dorrill asked if they were getting into "unchartered waters by having this Board schedule a public hearing for matters that we are not a party to." The Committee is an Ad Hoc Committee of the Foundation. Dr. Raia disagreed because the Ad Hoc Committee's statement implies that they are involved in the decision - making process. Ms. Cravens agreed with Dr. Raia and said they are eager to make that statement true. She also agreed with Ms. Worley regarding having background material made available prior to the workshop. Mr. Hoppensteadt agreed with Mr. Dorrill that the Foundation should take the lead scheduling a workshop and he would work with the Ad Hoc Committee to schedule a date. HISTORY OF NAVIGATION MARKERS Dr. Raia made a motion, second by Mr. Domenie to send a letter to the Collier County Commissioners stating, "The Pelican Bay Services Division respectfully wishes to call to your attention that the County is mistaken in claiming that the 1998 Clam Bay Restoration and Management Permit requires the installation of lateral red -green navigation signs. The regulatory and information signs required in the permit and the installation of the canoe trail markers by permit number 20016 authorized March 24, 2000 are the only required signs." His research is available for review. Vice Chairwoman Womble said they should provide the information to the Ad Hoc committee, but to be patient and suggested they hold off on sending anything to the Commissioners. Mr. Chandler agreed. Dr. Raia said, "If we fail to do this, the Collier County people in charge of this are going to proceed by default. We are committing an act of omission by not defending what is right." Mr. Hoppensteadt said that the Foundation is challenging the County on the issue of installing red & green navigational markers. The permit to install the red -green markers was denied and the County was appealing to the Board of Trustees. They have since been able to get the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) to reconsider with additional Requests for Additional Information (RAI). The County still needs approval from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and to his knowledge, this has not happened. The Foundation has filed letters of objection and plan to request administrative hearings on many issues. He does not expect any action over the next year. Dr. Raia said they could put an end to this now. Mr. Cravens asked Dr. Raia if Commissioner -Elect Hiller asked him to do this. Dr. Raia said yes. Mr. Dorrill said normally, a Commissioner communicates such instructions for support in writing to the Chairman. He added that she was invited to the December meeting and to bring the issue up at that time. Dr. Raia expressed being frustrated and withdrew his motion. He said it is the Services Division's responsibility to replace the canoe trail markers in disrepair. "Those markers have been in terrible shape. For two years, I have been trying to get that done and people are afraid to tell the Commissioners that they are acting in the wrong way and preventing those markers from being corrected. I have wasted enough time on this Board. I'm leaving." He submitted his research materials for the record and departed. Ms. Cravens suggested that this Board take action to appoint Dr. Raia as this Board's liaison to the Commissioner. She repeated her request that this Board take action to fund the installation of the canoe trail markers. 8411 1611 B21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4a - Approval of November 3, 2010 Meeting Minutes Mr. Dorrill said the signs have been purchased and are in storage. He has the authority within the appropriation unit to spend that money as he sees fit, so no Board action is necessary. Until the Board of County Commissioners says otherwise, they cannot install the signs. Vice Chairwoman Womble congratulated Mr. Cravens for being elected to the Water and Soil Conservation District Board. Georgia Hiller was elected as Commissioner for District 2. At the Community Center, there is a blood drive on November 9, two Community Improvement Plan presentation sessions on November 16 at 7:30 p.m., and November 17 at 3 p.m., and the Foundation Board meets November 19. At their last meeting, she reported that the Strategic Planning committee discussed the need for more Foundation administrative office space and what to do. Regarding the proposed noise assessment study, the Foundation Board voted it down and they will not be doing one. Regarding Board term changes, Ms. McCaughtry said on the second Tuesday in December, the County will put out their public notice that they are accepting applications for people to apply to this Board. If there are more than three applications, there will be a straw vote communitywide election like last year. Mr. Iaizzo, Mr. Levy, and Dr. Raia's terms are expiring. COMMUNITY ISSUES No discussion COMMITTEE REPORTS/REQUESTS In response to Mr. Domenie, Mr. Lukasz said that contractors are working along U.S 41 to remove dodder vine. Mr. Cravens said he would like to schedule a Landscape Committee meeting prior to the December meeting and to include Mr. Lukasz and Mr. Hall to attend. The three committee members are Mr. Cravens, Mr. Domenie, and Mr. Gibson. Mr. Chandler suggested they use more color in the landscaping. OLD BUSINESS No discussion NEW BUSINESS No discussion MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE Mr. Dorrill noted that staff would update the miscellaneous correspondence sheet. 15, 17, 18, 19 are complete. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms. Johnson asked if the RFP for environmental services includes biological monitoring in outer Clam Bay. Mr. Lukasz said yes, with the exception of monitoring the sea grass. Ms. Cravens requested they hold off on using copper sulfate until they get recommendations for alternatives from the Landscape Committee. Mr. Dorrill said they will not be delaying the use of copper sulfate and it is highly effective in killing algae. Regarding developing a best management practices program, Mr. Hoppensteadt said the Foundation approved $250,000 to perform baseline measurements with Turrell Hall as sole source provider. He would provide copy of contract when finalized. ADJOURN Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to adjourn The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion and the meeting ad'ourned at 3:19 PM. Keith J. Dallas, Chairman 8412 Minutes by Lisa Resnick on 11/8/2010 3:54 PM 161 1 Fiala Hiller Henning Coyle so r r C�leHe PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2010 THE LANDSCAPE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2010 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, LOCATED AT 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES. AGENDA The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll Call 2. Audience Participation 3. Seek Ways to Implement Best Management Practices in Pelican Bay 4. Develop Educational Outreach to Members Regarding Best Management Practices 5. Audience Comments 6. Adjournment SPEAKERS FROM THE AUDIENCE WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES ADDITIONALLY, THIS NOTICE ADVISES THAT, IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD, WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, THEY WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THAT FOR SUCH PURPOSE, MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PERSON REQUIRING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS AT THIS MEETING BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY OR PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENT SHOULD CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION OFFICE AT LEAST FIVE CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT (239) 597 -1749. u,isc. Corres: Date: -11/pwM10 2:20:42 PM B21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regi bsiol I B210 4b - Approval of November 16, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee Meeting Minutes LANDSCAPE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Landscape Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Tuesday, November 16, 2010 at 1:00 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples. Landscape Subcommittee Members Tom Cravens, Chairman Johan Domenie Geoffrey S. Gibson Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill Mary McCaughtry Kyle Lukasz Lisa Resnick Also Present AGENDA Keith J. Dallas 1. Roll Call 2. Audience Participation 3. Seek Ways to Implement Best Management Practices in Pelican Bay 4. Develop Educational Outreach to Members Regarding Best Management Practices 5. Audience Comments 6. Adjournment ROLL CALL All Subcommittee members were present and quorum established. Mr. Dallas was also present. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION No audience participation SEEK WAYS TO IMPLEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN PELICAN BAY Mr. Cravens defined Best Management Practices (BMP) as landscape management practices designed to minimize negative environmental impact and the practices vary depending upon the landscape environment, i.e., BMP in an agricultural environment differ considerably from BMP in an urban environment. BMP are designed to minimize non- source pollution, or pollution that does not have a source. Mr. Dorrill said that the University of Florida, Institute for Food and Agricultural Science (IFAS) Extension Service established suggested BMP operating standards and procedures for the State of Florida. Mr. Cravens said he had concerns whether, although they were trained and certified in BMP, employees are not actually engaging in BMP. He showed a photo of fertilizer dropped on a pathway and said there were numerous examples. Mr. Lukasz said he could mandate a training refresher course accompanied with better supervision, but sometimes they are using temporary labor, which makes it harder to comply. Mr. Dallas said in order to be effective, they should give employees a refresher course just prior to application. DEVELOP EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH TO MEMBERS REGARDING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Mr. Cravens said the Services Division could educate the community by having Cathy Feser, the Urban Horticulture Specialist with the IFAS Extension Service could make a presentation before the President's Council or Men's Coffee and perform a site visit. Mr. Lukasz said that Doug Caldwell, Commercial Landscape Extension Agent would join Ms. Feser. 16114 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4b - Approval of November 16, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee Meeting Minutes Mr. Dorrill said they are intending to increase awareness, but in order to be effective, "we, as the advisory body to the community should give them a take -away, at that same meeting. That take -away might be a suggested amendment in their contract language with their landscape contractor" that requires them on those days that they are scheduled to fertilize to advise the client in advance and require them to have a principal of the firm on site because "in my world and Kyle's world, it is a world of lowest common denominator." He suggested that they also have empirical data to back up presentation. Mr. Cravens said duckweed is very small, but one duckweed can produce an offspring in 24 hours and can cover an area within a matter of weeks. It is also extremely effective at removing nitrogen, phosphorus, and heavy metals, however, it disrupts the aquatic environment, preventing sunlight and oxygen from getting to the plants beneath the surface and kills aquatic life. Mr. Lukasz said that copper sulfate is effective in killing algae, not duckweed. The Services Division has been using the chemicals Reward (Diquat) and Sonar (Fluridone) to kill duckweed. Mr. Cravens said they could also introduce a biological agent such as grass carp or tilapia, or use mechanical means, such as skimmers. Mr. Dorrill said that staff would research the options available. They would obtain the latest edition of the IFAS BMP edition. They would prepare or propose a suggested amendment to existing residential or commercial landscaping contracts as they pertain to fertilization. They would obtain the existing Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) guidelines for permitted acquisition of grass carp and tilapia. They would arrange for Ms. Feser to make a presentation to discuss suggested improvements to the plan palette for a demonstration project. Mr. Cravens said regarding median landscaping, there is too much turf and he suggested that Cathy Feser develop a low maintenance median landscaping project. Mr. Dorrill said to check out Colliers Reserve median. It is not colorful, but low maintenance. The Committee discussed performing a pilot project at the lake south of Hyde Park by planting ornamental grasses in front of lake to prevent runoff. Mr. Cravens said it would be good to have the initial readings from Turrell Hall. Mr. Dorrill said that their pilot project could coincide with the Turrell Hall study. The Committee planned to meet again during the second week of December and invite Tim Hall and Jim Hoppensteadt to participate. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No audience comments ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:04 p.m. Tom Cravens, Chairman K Minutes by Lisa Resnick \11/23/2010 2:47:24 PM 11JJ�� December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division BiS�fdgul 1 ar Sessi 1 on B21 4c - Approval of November 16, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Meeting Minutes PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD & PELICAN BAY FOUNDATION STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN TOWN HALL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Servi es Division Board and the Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee held a Community Impro ment Plan Town Hall on Tuesday, November 16, 2010 at 7:30 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive. Pelican Bay Services Division Board Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Mary Anne Womble, Vice Chairwoman John P. Chandler absent Tom Cravens absent Johan Domenie absent Geoffrey S. Gibson Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill John Iaizzo absent Michael Levy Theodore Raia, Jr. absent John Baron absent Hunter H. Hansen absent Lisa Resnick Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee Bob Uek, Chairman Gerald A. Moffatt Ronnie Bellone, Co -Vice Chairwoman Noreen Murray Merlin Lickhalter, Co -Vice Chairman Ralph Ohlers absent Carson Beadle absent Mary Anne Womble Rose Mary Everett Pelican Bay Foundation Staff Jim Hoppensteadt, President Suzanne Minadeo Wilson Miller Stantec Kevin Mangan, Principal & Landscape Architect PRESENTATION Mr. Beadle via videotape, Ms. Bellone, and Mr. Dallas gave a brief introduction. Mr. Hoppensteadt made a Strategic Master Plan presentation to approximately seventy attendees showing the plan improvement areas, proposed conditions for crosswalks, pathways, the Commons, community berm, street lighting, and public art, and probable budgets. PUBLIC SPEAKERS Mr. John Mueller, Pelican Bay resident said there is a noise pollution problem, not only along Oakmont, but also in Pine Woods. Ms. Hoppensteadt responded that the Board is continuing to debate the issue of whether a wall would help with noise. Ms. Murray responded that according to the study, a large earthen berm is the best noise preventer, however they do not have the space or material to construct a large earthen berm along U.S. 41. A wall provides better noise protection than shrubbery and the absence of shrubbery has contributed to noise. She said she objects to spending $65,000 for an additional noise study when they have sufficient information from the Wilson Miller report regarding how a wall would lessen the noise better than shrubbery, however prickly shrubbery filling in the bare 107 1611. December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4c - Approval of November 16, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Meeting Minutes areas would also help with security. The issue is whether they want to build a wall at what cost to address primarily security. Mr. Lickhalter said that the Collier County Sheriff's office does not reflect the true data because many do not report incidents along U.S. 41 to the Sheriff. Mr. Ray O'Connor, Oakmont resident said shrubbery planted by the Services Division many years ago did not diminish noise as much as they had hoped. They need to address the issues of noise and security immediately. Mr. Bob Sanchez, Vice President, Oakmont Association said they should plan for a barrier along U.S. 41 before it is too late. Mr. Rick (inaudible) Oakmont resident said he would like more data regarding a wall before he can make a decision. He suggested reducing the speed limit on U.S. 41 to reduce noise. He said he does not use the pathways because they are either dirty, moldy, being irrigated, or impassable. Bicycle riders are a major problem and enforcement of traffic laws are important and they should work with the Sheriff's office to calm traffic. Mr. Bruce Beauchamp, Oakmont resident said sound on U.S. 41 diminishes property values and the Board should consider a sound barrier and hold a meeting specifically regarding the subject. Mr. Stephen Feldhaus, Pelican Bay Woods resident said the Board should reconsider a sound and security barrier and encouraged another meeting to exclusively discuss this subject. Mr. Hoppensteadt said that there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of crime and vagrants along the U.S. 41 berm, but not official Sheriff reports. Mr. Stan (inaudible) said that a wall could enhance the aesthetic appeal of Pelican Bay. Mr. Dallas said one of the issues is how much would a wall reduce the sound. The Wilson Miller report states that a wall would reduce sound by about three decibels. Mr. Jim Hoban, Oakmont resident said they should build a wall along U.S. 41 because if one part of Pelican Bay is affected, all of Pelican Bay is affected. Mr. Charles (inaudible) asked what it would cost to fund the first three years of projects. Ms. Murray said they have funds for the first three years of projects. Mr. Charles (inaudible) asked how future projects would be vetted. Mr. Hoppensteadt said they would have the same vetting process as they are using now by holding meetings and articles in the Pelican Bay Post, and continue to seek ways to engage the entire community. Mr. Dave Doran, Lugano resident said they need to continue to look at the commercial areas abutting the community for ingress and egress and funnel out non- residents of Pelican Bay to decrease traffic. Regarding pathways, he does not believe that widening the pathways on one side is a solution. Bicyclists ride on both sides and both sides should be widened. Mr. Bob Swart, Oakmont resident said number one on the list they should be addressing security and noise with a wall along U.S. 41. Mr. Tom (inaudible) said pathways should be widened on both sides and one side designated for walking, the other for bicyclists. The stop signs in the roadway at the crosswalk of the North Tram station make a very dangerous situation. The costs being quoted for crosswalks seem unreasonably high. 108 1611821 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4c - Approval of November 16, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Meeting Minutes Ms. Louise Chase, Beauville resident said there should be a four -way stop at Ridgewood and Pelican Bay Boulevard. Mr. Uek said the last thing he wants to do is recommend to the Board that they spend $1.5 million on a wall until they have the information that they need that a wall will be effective in reducing noise. Mr. Moffatt encouraged reporting crime to the Sheriff. The meeting was adjourned. Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick \11/24/2010 9:42:34 AM 109 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 161 16L 4d - Approval of November 17, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Meeting Minutes PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD & PELICAN BAY FOUNDATION STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN TOWN HALL MEETING WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board and the Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee held a Community Improvement Plan Town Hall on Wednesday, November 17, 2010 at 3:00 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive. Pelican Bay Services Division Board Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Mary Anne Womble, Vice Chairwoman John P. Chandler absent Tom Cravens Johan Domenie Geoffrey S. Gibson absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff Mary McCaughtry John Iaizzo Michael Levy Theodore Raia, Jr. absent John Baron absent Hunter H. Hansen absent Lisa Resnick Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee Bob Uek, Chairman Gerald A. Moffatt Ronnie Bellone, Co -Vice Chairwoman absent Noreen Murray Merlin Lickhalter, Co -Vice Chairman Ralph Ohlers absent Carson Beadle absent Mary Anne Womble Rose Mary Everett Pelican Bay Foundation Staff Jim Hoppensteadt, President Suzanne Minadeo Wilson Miller Stantec Kevin Mangan, Principal & Landscape Architect PRESENTATION Mr. Beadle via videotape and Mr. Uek gave a brief introduction. Mr. Hoppensteadt made a Strategic Master Plan presentation to approximately thirty-five attendees showing the plan improvement areas, proposed conditions for crosswalks, pathways, the Commons, community berm, street lighting, and public art, and probable budgets. PUBLIC SPEAKERS Mr. Bill McCormick said there are not any immediate needs for lighting. Mr. Dallas explained that they might want to start putting money aside for lighting for the future. Mr. McCormick asked if pathways were to be widened would they use the concrete or asphalt and if they choose asphalt he suggested they use a different color than black, such as green, or tan, which would be cooler. Mr. Neim Malo, Oakmont resident said building a berm along U.S. 41 should be their first priority. Mr. Uek said they are trying to figure out what type of barrier would best minimize noise and want scientific evidence before spending $2 million. Mr. Charles Sikorski, Oakmont resident said information is available now regarding a need to reduce noise along U.S. 41 and he is in support of a wall. Mr. Uek responded that the Board plans to revisit consideration of a sound study. Ms. Womble said this subject has been discussed for many years amongst both the Services Division and Foundation Boards, they are concerned, and reaffirmed that this is not a "dead issue." 110 16 VIjB 2 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4d - Approval of November 17, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Meeting Minutes Ms. Susan O'Brien asked how soon the Board would be acting to get some of this work done. Mr. Hoppensteadt said they plan to make additional presentation in January when more of the community is here and around February or March the Strategic Planning Committee make recommendations to the Foundation Board. Following that, they would go through a long permitting, and bidding process. Mr. Dallas agreed. Mr. Uek said they are coordinating projects for maximum fiscal responsibility. Mr. Jim Murray, Oakmont resident said there is a tremendous cost benefit in LED lighting. Mr. Doug Kopp, Oakmont resident said there are security considerations in favor of a wall along U.S. 41. He asked if they considered pathways along Oakmont Parkway. Mr. Mangan said there are land issues that prevent an easy pathway along Oakmont Parkway. It is part of the recommendation for consideration, but just not part of Phase One. Mr. Hoppensteadt said although there is anecdotal evidence of vagrancy and crime, there is not official Collier County Sheriff data that exists. It is a complicated issue and one that they need to address. Ms. Murray said regarding security, they could spend $100,000 on landscaping to provide a barrier right away, but it would not affect noise. Mr. Peter Gerbosi, Willowbrook resident suggested they consider a fishing pier off the boardwalk near the Sandpiper. Mr. David Richter said the boardwalk is noisy and they should do something about that. If Pelican Bay were being built today, a wall would be built. He asked they reconsider the cost benefit is of widening the pathways, considering that bicycle paths would be built in the roadway the next time Pelican Bay Boulevard is resurfaced. Ms. Sally Walker asked if they considered widening the berm. Mr. Hoppensteadt said there are too many conservation and environmental permitting issues involved with widening the berm. It would require significant construction and costs that they could not justify. A resident asked if ADA issues would be addressed with slopes of pathways. In addition, would emergency vehicles still have access with all of the proposed projects? Mr. Hoppensteadt said yes, ADA issues would be addressed, and if anything, they have increased accessibility. A resident asked if the sign could be replaced on U.S. 41 denoting Gulf Park Drive. Mr. Hoppensteadt said they would continue to petition FDOT to put the sign identifying Gulf Park Drive. Ms. Marcia Cravens asked if the Foundation could apply for a permit to replace the Canoe Trail Markers as part of the Community Improvement Plan process. Mr. Hoppensteadt said the conservation area was not a part of the scope of the study. The Foundation is in negotiations with the County and they hope to resolve eventually. There was no further discussion and the meeting adjourned. Keith J. Dallas, Chairman 111 Minutes by Lisa Resnick \11/24/2010 2:27:22 PM 1611821 $ December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 1 of 11 $ Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - November 17, 2010 Operating Fund 109 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments 925,226.92 Interest Receivable 1,912.30 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets $ 927,139.22 Total Assets $ 927,139.22 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ (8,044.23) Accrued Wages Payable Goods Received /inventory Recv'd (46,403.03) Total Liabilities $ (54,447.26) Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved (1,173,770.02) Excess Revenues (Expenditures) 301,078.06 Total Fund Balance (872,691.96) Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (927,139.22) Page 1 of 1 N O_ O 1 N 0 1611,821 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 2 of 11 Water Management Field Operations Payroll Expense 134,300.00 19,500.00 16,245.86 N O_ O Engineering Fees Pelican Bay Services 2,700.00 165.00 N Co O v� Flood Control Water Mgmt. Municipal Services Taxing Unit - - ^' O Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 8,500.00 N 2,986.00 Operating Fund 109 - FY2011 Interdepartmental Payment (Water Quality Lab) 22,600.00 3,800.00 2,047.75 (Unaudited) Plan Review Fees 1,500.00 - Annual YTD YTD 200.00 - Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: 35,810.00 Telephone 500.00 100.00 Carryforward $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 - Special Assessment - Water Management Admin 728,400.00 313,212.00 94,244.83 634,155.17 Special Assessment - Right of Way Beautification 1,938,600.00 833,598.00 250,911.57 1,687,688.43 Charges for Services 1,500.00 - - 1,500.00 Surplus Property Sales 675.00 Fleet Maintenance and Parts 4,500.00 - Interest 11,700.00 210.00 37319 11,326.81 Total Operating Revenues 3,623,300.00 2,090,120.00 1,288,629.59 2,334,670.41 Operating Expenditures: 2,496.00 27,504.00 Clothing and Uniforms 1,100.00 Water Management Administration 364.70 735.30 Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 Payroll Expense $ 41,200.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 5,231.83 $ 35,968.17 White Goods 8,800.00 - - 8,800.00 IT Direct Client Support (Capital) 200.00 - 200.00 IT Office Automation 8,000.00 2,000.00 - 8,000.00 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 108,200.00 93,100.00 54,100.00 54,100.00 Interdepartmental Payment 14,600.00 - - 14,600.00 Other Contractural Services 30,800.00 5,100.00 5,709.00 25,091.00 Telephone 4,100.00 700.00 277.05 3,822.95 Postage 3,000.00 100.00 1.79 2,998.21 Rent Buildings and Equipment 13,600.00 2,300.00 2,196.24 11,403.76 Insurance - General 1,300.00 - 325.00 975.00 Printing, Binding and Copying 2,300.00 - 2,300.00 Clerk's Recording Fees 4,000.00 4,000.00 Advertising 2,000.00 - 2,000.00 Other Office and Operating Supplies 2,500.00 400.00 25.46 2,474.54 Training and Education 1,100.00 200.00 25.00 1,075.00 Total Water Management Admin Operating 245,700.00 109,500.00 67,891.37 177,808.63 Water Management Field Operations Payroll Expense 134,300.00 19,500.00 16,245.86 118,054.14 Engineering Fees 16,381.25 2,700.00 165.00 16,216.25 Flood Control Water Mgmt. 14,000.00 - - 14,000.00 Flood Control Replanting Program 8,500.00 3,000.00 2,986.00 5,514.00 Interdepartmental Payment (Water Quality Lab) 22,600.00 3,800.00 2,047.75 20,552.25 Plan Review Fees 1,500.00 - 1,500.00 Other Contractural Services 1,000.00 200.00 - 1,000.00 Temporary Labor 42,400.00 7,100.00 6,590.00 35,810.00 Telephone 500.00 100.00 36.04 463.96 Trash and Garbage 8,300.00 1,600.00 358.64 7,941.36 Motor Pool Rental Charge 200.00 - - 200.00 Insurance - General 2,400.00 600.00 1,800.00 Insurance- Auto 900.00 - 225.00 675.00 Fleet Maintenance and Parts 4,500.00 800.00 83.00 4,417.00 Fuel and Lubricants 3,200.00 500.00 224.85 2,975.15 Tree Triming 30,000.00 5,000.00 2,496.00 27,504.00 Clothing and Uniforms 1,100.00 300.00 364.70 735.30 Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 100.00 - 500.00 Fertilizer and Herbicides 98,400.00 16,300.00 15,211.20 83,188.80 Other Repairs and Maintenance 1,500.00 300.00 - 1,500.00 Page 1 of 3 1611 821 °4 Right of Way Beautification - Field December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 3 of 11 N O_ Other Operating Supplies and Equipment 2,500.00 400.00 742.88 1,757.12 O N co O S9 cn Total Water Management Field Operating 394,681.25 61,700.00 48,376.92 346,304.33 N 0 w Right of Way Beautification - Operating 5,000.00 800.00 - 5,000.00 Other Contractural Services Payroll Expense 42,400.00 5,800.00 5,389.66 37,010.34 204,500.00 White Goods 7,400.00 172,957.14 Telephone 7,400.00 500.00 IT Direct Client Support and Capital 7,000.00 - - 7,000.00 357.20 Other Contracturai Services 37,500.00 6,300.00 5,882.00 31,618.00 24,030.06 Telephone 3,900.00 700.00 277.05 3,622.95 Motor Pool Rental Charge Postage 3,000.00 100.00 1.79 2,998.21 9,000.00 Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage 14,000.00 2,300.00 2,320.08 11,679.92 Insurance - General 500.00 - 125.00 375.00 3,592.15 Printing, Binding and Copying 2,600.00 44,200.00 - 2,600.00 39,639.86 Clerk's Recording 4,000.00 100.00 - 4,000.00 Tree Triming Legal Advertising 2,000.00 9,710.00 - 2,000.00 9,400.00 Office Supplies General 3,000.00 500: 41.95 2,958.05 500.00 Training and Education 1,500.00 300. 25.00 1,475.00 18,082.38 Total Right of Way Beautification Operating 128,800.00 16,000.00 14,062.53 114,737.47 49,348.25 Right of Way Beautification - Field Payroll Expense 827,700.00 115,700.00 97,068.40 730,631.60 White Goods 3,300.00 - - 3,300.00 Flood Control 136,900.00 47,700.00 14,913.04 121,986.96 Pest Control 5,000.00 800.00 - 5,000.00 Other Contractural Services 29,500.00 4,900.00 4,192.00 25,308.00 Temporary Labor 204,500.00 34,100.00 31,542.86 172,957.14 Telephone 3,200.00 500.00 224.73 2,975.27 Electricity 3,400.00 4,200.00 357.20 3,042.80 Trash and Garbage 24,900.00 4,900.00 869.94 24,030.06 Rent Equipment 5,500.00 2,400.00 18.14 5,481.86 Motor Pool Rental Charge 700.00 - - 700.00 Insurance - General 9,000.00 2,250.00 6,750.00 Insurance - Auto 9,900.00 2,475.00 7,425.00 Fleet Maintenance and Parts 21,200.00 3,500.00 3,592.15 17,607.85 Fuel and Lubricants 44,200.00 7,400.00 4,560.14 39,639.86 Licenses and Permits 800.00 100.00 - 800.00 Tree Triming 35,900.00 18,000.00 9,710.00 26,190.00 Clothing and Uniforms 9,400.00 2,500.00 1,498.56 7,901.44 Personal Safety Equipment 3,000.00 500.00 - 3,000.00 Fertilizer and Herbicides 62,000.00 17,100.00 18,082.38 43,917.62 Landscape Maintenance 60,200.00 13,500.00 10,851.75 49,348.25 Sprinkler Maintenance 30,000.00 5,000.00 3,364.43 26,635.57 Painting Supplies 800.00 100.00 - 800.00 Traffic Signs 3,000.00 500.00 - 3,000.00 Minor Operating Equipment 3,000.00 500.00 222.42 2,777.58 Other Operating Supplies 11,500.00 1,900.00 1,452.02 10,047.98 Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Operating 1,548,500.00 285,800.00 207,245.16 1,341,254.84 Total Operating Expenditures 2,317,681.25 473,000.00 337,575.98 1,980,10527 Capital Expenditures: Water Management Field Operations Other Machinery and Equipment 1,000.00 200.00 1,000.00 General improvements 13,200.00 2,200.00 13,200.00 Total Water Management Field Operations Capital 14,200.00 2,400.00 14,200.00 Page 2 of 3 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): 1 6 I 1 B 2'? (259,200.00) (259,200.00) December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session (82,500.00) (23,200.00) 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 4 of 11 N O_ Right of Way Beautification - Field (42,928.54) (32,371.46) Reserves (2 1/2 months for Operations) (555,025.00) O N Co O P 0 Building Improvements 13,600.00 2,300.00 13,600.00 ^) Autos and Trucks 28,000.00 - 28,000.00 0 Other Machinery and Equipmeny 17,000.00 - 17,000.00 Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Capital 58,600.00 2,300.00 58,600.00 Total Capital Expenditures 72,800.00 4,700.00 - 72,800.00 Total Expenditures 2,390,481.25 477,700.00 337,575.98 2,052,905.27 Operating Profit /(Loss) 1,232,818.75 1,612,420.00 951,053.61 281,765.14 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (259,200.00) (259,200.00) (259,200.00) Tax Collector Fees (82,500.00) (23,200.00) (6,903.13) (75,596.87) Property Appraiser Fees (75,300.00) - (42,928.54) (32,371.46) Reserves (2 1/2 months for Operations) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) Reserves for Equipment (124,875.00) (124,875.00) (124,875.00) Revenue Reserve (140,300.00) - (140,300.00) Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditures, net (1,237,200.00) (962,300.00) (988,931.67) (248,268.33) Net Profit /(Loss) (4,381.25) 650,120.00 (37,878.06) 33,496.81 Page 3 of 3 1611 B21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 5 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - November 17, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 (Unaudited) Current Assets Cash and Investments Interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenue (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Assets $ 132,506.63 310.44 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (60.00) (9,317.41) $ 132,817.07 $ 132,817.07 $ (9,377.41) (208,670.25) 85,230.59 (123,439.66) $ (132,817.07) Page 1 of 1 N O_ O N (O O O w 0 M 1 Pelican Bay Services December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6,900.00 $ 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 6 of 11 35,968.15 Operating Expenditures: Street Lighting Administration Payroll Expense $ Pelican Bay Services $ 6,900.00 $ 5,231.85 $ 35,968.15 Municipal Services Taxing Unit 6,300.00 $ 3,200.00 3,150.00 Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 20,800.00 $ 3,500.00 Street Lighting Fund 778 - FY 2011 15,091.00 Telephone 4,100.00 $ (Unaudited) 198.98 3,901.02 Postage and Freight 2,000.00 Annual YTD YTD 1.79 1,998.21 Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage Budget Budget Actual 2,300.00 Variance Operating Revenues: Insurance - General 400.00 $ - Carryforward $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ - Curent Ad Valorem Tax 273,200.00 117,476.00 35,027.33 $ 238,172.67 Delinquent Ad Valorem Tax 200.00 - $ - Interest 1,200.00 20.00 58.19 $ 1,141.81 Total Operating Revenues 444,200.00 287,296.00 204,885.52 1,287.25 239,314.48 Operating Expenditures: Street Lighting Administration Payroll Expense $ 41,200.00 $ 6,900.00 $ 5,231.85 $ 35,968.15 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 6,300.00 $ 3,200.00 3,150.00 3,150.00 Other Contractural Services 20,800.00 $ 3,500.00 5,709.00 15,091.00 Telephone 4,100.00 $ 700.00 198.98 3,901.02 Postage and Freight 2,000.00 $ 100.00 1.79 1,998.21 Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage 13,600.00 $ 2,300.00 2,200.59 11,399.41 Insurance - General 400.00 $ - - 400.00 Office Supplies General 800.00 $ 100.00 100.00 700.00 Other Office and Operating Supplies 1,000.00 $ 200.00 4.90 995.10 Total Street Lighting Admin Operating 90,200.00 7,300.00 17,000.00 16,597.11 73,602.89 Street Lighting Field Operations Payroll Expense 62,900.00 9,100.00 7,553.72 55,346.28 White Goods 9,600.00 - - 9,600.00 Other Contractual Services 800.00 100.00 800.00 Telephone 500.00 100.00 36.04 463.96 Electricity 44,200.00 7,400.00 5,832.69 38,367.31 Insurance - General 800.00 - 200.00 600.00 Insurance- Auto 900.00 - 225.00 675.00 Fleet Maintenance and Parts 1,100.00 200.00 25.00 1,075.00 Fuel and Lubricants 400.00 100.00 84.97 315.03 Other Equipment Repairs 200.00 - - 200.00 Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 100.00 - 500.00 Electrical Contractors 7,300.00 1,200.00 4,147.66 3,152.34 Light Bulb Ballast 12,400.00 1,700.00 1,287.25 11,112.75 Total Street Lighting Field Operating 141,600.00 20,000.00 19,392.33 122,207.67 Page 1 of 2 N O_ O N O O O N W O m 161 1 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 7 of 11 Total Operating Expenditures 231,800.00 37,000.00 35,989.44 195,810.56 Capital Expenditures: Street Lighting Field Operations Other Machinery /Equipment 1,000.00 200.00 - 1,000.00 General Improvements 13,200.00 2,200.00 - 13,200.00 Total Capital Expenditures 14,200.00 2,400.00 - 14,200.00 Total All Expenditures 246,000.00 39,400.00 35,989.44 210,010.56 Operating Profit /(Loss) 198,200.00 247,896.00 168,896.08 29,303.92 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (83,600.00) (83,600.00) (83,600.00) - Tax Collector Fees (8,400.00) (700.00) (726.67) (7,673.33) Property Appraiser Fees (5,500.00) - (5,500.00) Reserves (2 1/2/ months for Operations) (58,800.00) (58,800.00) (58,800.00) Reserves for Equipment (27,500.00) (27,500.00) (27,500.00) - Revenue Reserve (14,400.00) - (14,400.00) Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expi (198,200.00) (170,600.00) (170,626.67) (27,573.33) Net Profit /(Loss) - 77,296.00 (1,730.59) 1,730.59 Page 2 of 2 621 N O_ O N O O O Ut W O C 4 Current Assets Cash and Investments Interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance 16I1 2�- December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay ervices Division Board Regular Session Y 9 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 8 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - November 17, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 (Unaudited) Assets $ 363,386.73 632.76 364,019.49 $ 364,019.49 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (522.50) $ (3,374.50) (423,553.80) Page 1 of 1 (3,897.00) (360,122.49) $ (364,019.49) N O_ O N O O O W °o CO 1611 B21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 9 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Fund 111 Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: Clam Bay Restoration Engineering Fees Other Contractural Services Other Equipment Repairs Minor Operating Other Operating Supplies Total Clam Bay Restoration Clam Bay Ecosystem Engineering Fees Other Contractual Services Total Clam Bay Ecosystem Total Clam Bay Operating Expenditures Variance $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.17 $ - 35,000.00 15,050.00 4,546.14 $ 30,453.86 35,000.00 - - $ 35,000.00 1,300.00 216.00 115.48 $ 1,184.52 506,519.17 450,485.17 439,880.79 243,617.17 66,638.38 $ 102,943.75 $ 1,800.00 $ - $ 102,943.75 137,390.00 4,700.00 2,496.00 134,894.00 485.42 100.00 506.00 (20.58) 4,800.00 800.00 - 4,800.00 1,000.00 200.00 - 1,000.00 246,619.17 7,600.00 3,002.00 243,617.17 11,300.00 - - 11,300.00 25,000.00 68,509.07 - 25,000.00 36,300.00 - - 36,300.00 282,919.17 7,600.00 3,002.00 279,917.17 Operating Profit /(Loss) 223,600.00 442,885.17 436,878.79 (213,278.79) Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (65,000.00) (65,000.00) (65,000.00) - Tax Collector Fees (1,100.00) 297.00 (90.93) (1,009.07) Property Appraiser Fees (700.00) - - (700.00) Revenue Reserve (1,800.00) (1,800.00) Reserves (2 1/2 month for Operations) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) - Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expe (223,600.00) (219,703.00) (155,090.93) 68,509.07 Net Profit /(Loss) $ (0.00) $ 223,182.17 $ 281,787.86 $ (281,787.86) Page 1 of 1 N O_ O N (D O O U� W O 161 11 B 21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 10 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - November 17, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 2,365,726.16 Interest Receivable 2,763.54 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Goods Received Inv. Received Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities and Fund Balance 452.36 Page 1 of 1 (1,960,586.75) (408,355.31) 2,368,489.70 $ 2,368,489.70 452.36 (2,368,942.06) $ (2,368,489.70) N O_ O N O O O 0 0 1611 821 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report - Page 11 of 11 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer from Fund 109 General $ Pelican Bay Services $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ - Municipal Services Taxing Unit 65,000.00 65,000.00 65,000.00 $ Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 Transfer from Fund 778 Street Lighting 83,600.00 83,600.00 Capital Projects Fund 322 - FY 2011 - Tax Collector Fees (3,800.00) (Unaudited) - 3,800.00 Property Appraiser Fees Annual YTD YTD - 2,500.00 Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: 100.00 J (6,400.00) Carry Forward $ 1,943,987.30 $ 1,943,987.30 $ 1 1,943,987.30 $ - Special Assessment 121,600.00 52,288.00 - (121,600.00) Interest 7,700.00 770.00 555.31 (7,144.69) Total Operating Revenues 2,073,287.30 1,997,045.30 1,944,542.61 (128,744.69) Operating Expenditures: Irrigation & Landscaping Engineering Fees $ 113,628.45 $ - $ - $ 113,628.45 Other Contractural Services 2,354,658.85 - - 2,354,658.85 Total Irrigation & Landscaping Expenditures 2,468,287.30 - - 2,468,287.30 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer from Fund 109 General $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ - Transfer from Fund 320 Clam Bay 65,000.00 65,000.00 65,000.00 $ - Transfer from Fund 778 Street Lighting 83,600.00 83,600.00 83,600.00 - Tax Collector Fees (3,800.00) 950.00 - 3,800.00 Property Appraiser Fees (2,500.00) - - 2,500.00 Reserve for Contingencies (100.00) (100.00) - 100.00 Revenue Reserve (6,400.00) - - 6,400.00 Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditure! 395,000.00 408,650.00 407,800.00 12,800.00 Net Profit /(loss) (0.00) 2,405,695.30 2,352,342.61 2,352,342.61 Page 1 of 1 N O_ O N O O Cil A O December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Reg ula 161 r Sen TB 2 1 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - November 17, 2010 Operating Fund 109 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments 925,226.92 Interest Receivable 1,912.30 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets $ 927,139.22 Total Assets $ 927,139.22 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ (8,044.23) Accrued Wages Payable - Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd (46,403.03) Total Liabilities $ (54,447.26) Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved (1,173,770.02) Excess Revenues (Expenditures) 301,078.06 Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Page 1 of 11 (872,691.96) $ (927,139.22) 16I 021 $ 5,600.00 $ 5,231.83 December 1 2010 Pelican Ba Services Division Board Re uTar Ses Y 9 Carryforward $ 943,100.00 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) $ 943,100.00 - Special Assessment - Water Management Admin Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 Operating Fund 109 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: $ 41,200.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 5,231.83 368.17 Carryforward $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 - Special Assessment - Water Management Admin 728,400.00 313,212.00 94,244.83 218,967.17 Special Assessment - Right of Way Beautification 1,938,600.00 833,598.00 250,911.57 582,686.43 Charges for Services 1,500.00 - - - Surplus Property Sales 14,600.00 - - - Interest 11,700.00 210.00 373.19 (163.19) Total Operating Revenues 3,623,300.00 2,090,120.00 1,288,629.59 801,490.41 Operating Expenditures: Water Management Administration Payroll Expense $ 41,200.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 5,231.83 368.17 White Goods 8,800.00 - - - IT Direct Client Support (Capital) 200.00 - - - IT Office Automation 8,000.00 2,000.00 - 2,000.00 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 108,200.00 93,100.00 54,100.00 39,000.00 Interdepartmental Payment 14,600.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 30,800.00 5,100.00 5,709.00 (609.00) Telephone 4,100.00 700.00 277.05 422.95 Postage 3,000.00 100.00 1.79 98.21 Rent Buildings and Equipment 13,600.00 2,300.00 2,196.24 103.76 Insurance - General 1,300.00 - 325.00 (325.00) Printing, Binding and Copying 2,300.00 - (600.00) Clerk's Recording Fees 4,000.00 - 225.00 (225.00) Advertising 2,000.00 - - - Other Office and Operating Supplies 2,500.00 400.00 25.46 374.54 Training and Education 1,100.00 200.00 25.00 175.00 Total Water Management Admin Operating 245,700.00 109,500.00 67,891.37 41,608.63 Water Management Field Operations Payroll Expense 134,300.00 19,500.00 16,245.86 3,254.14 Engineering Fees 16,381.25 2,700.00 165.00 2,535.00 Flood Control Water Mgmt. 14,000.00 - - - Flood Control Replanting Program 8,500.00 3,000.00 2,986.00 14.00 Interdepartmental Payment (Water Quality Lab) 22,600.00 3,800.00 2,047.75 1,752.25 Plan Review Fees 1,500.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 1,000.00 200.00 - 200.00 Temporary Labor 42,400.00 7,100.00 6,590.00 510.00 Telephone 500.00 100.00 36.04 63.96 Trash and Garbage 8,300.00 1,600.00 358.64 1,241.36 Motor Pool Rental Charge 200.00 - - - Insurance - General 2,400.00 600.00 (600.00) Insurance- Auto 900.00 - 225.00 (225.00) Fleet Maintenance and Parts 4,500.00 800.00 83.00 717.00 Fuel and Lubricants 3,200.00 500.00 224.85 275.15 Tree Triming 30,000.00 5,000.00 2,496.00 2,504.00 Clothing and Uniforms 1,100.00 300.00 364.70 (64.70) Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 100.00 - 100.00 Fertilizer and Herbicides 98,400.00 16,300.00 15,211.20 1,088.80 Other Repairs and Maintenance 1,500.00 300.00 - 300.00 Other Operating Supplies and Equipment 2,500.00 400.00 742.88 (342.88) Total Water Management Field Operating 394,681.25 61,700.00 48,376.92 13,323.08 Page 2 of 11 161 1 82 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 Operating Fund 109 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Right of Way Beautification - Operating 827,700.00 115,700.00 97,068.40 18,631.60 Payroll Expense 42,400.00 5,800.00 5,389.66 410.34 White Goods 7,400.00 - - - IT Direct Client Support and Capital 7,000.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 37,500.00 6,300.00 5,882.00 418.00 Telephone 3,900.00 700.00 277.05 422.95 Postage 3,000.00 100.00 1.79 98.21 Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage 14,000.00 2,300.00 2,320.08 (20.08) Insurance - General 500.00 - 125.00 (125.00) Printing, Binding and Copying 2,600.00 2,400.00 - 2,381.86 Clerk's Recording 4,000.00 - - - Legal Advertising 2,000.00 - - - Office Supplies General 3,000.00 500.00 41.95 458.05 Training and Education 1,500.00 300.00 25.00 275.00 Total Right of Way Beautification Operating 128,800.00 16,000.00 14,062.53 1,937.47 Right of Way Beautification - Field Payroll Expense 827,700.00 115,700.00 97,068.40 18,631.60 White Goods 3,300.00 - - - Flood Control 136,900.00 47,700.00 14,913.04 32,786.96 Pest Control 5,000.00 800.00 - 800.00 Other Contractural Services 29,500.00 4,900.00 4,192.00 708.00 Temporary Labor 204,500.00 34,100.00 31,542.86 2,557.14 Telephone 3,200.00 500.00 224.73 275.27 Electricity 3,400.00 4,200.00 357.20 3,842.80 Trash and Garbage 24,900.00 4,900.00 869.94 4,030.06 Rent Equipment 5,500.00 2,400.00 18.14 2,381.86 Motor Pool Rental Charge 700.00 - - - Insurance - General 9,000.00 2,250.00 (2,250.00) Insurance - Auto 9,900.00 - 2,475.00 (2,475.00) Fleet Maintenance and Parts 21,200.00 3,500.00 3,592.15 (92.15) Fuel and Lubricants 44,200.00 7,400.00 4,560.14 2,839.86 Licenses and Permits 800.00 100.00 - 100.00 Tree Triming 35,900.00 18,000.00 9,710.00 8,290.00 Clothing and Uniforms 9,400.00 2,500.00 1,498.56 1,001.44 Personal Safety Equipment 3,000.00 500.00 - 500.00 Fertilizer and Herbicides 62,000.00 17,100.00 18,082.38 (982.38) Landscape Maintenance 60,200.00 13,500.00 10,851.75 2,648.25 Sprinkler Maintenance 30,000.00 5,000.00 3,364.43 1,635.57 Painting Supplies 800.00 100.00 - 100.00 Traffic Signs 3,000.00 500.00 - 500.00 Minor Operating Equipment 3,000.00 500.00 222.42 277.58 Other Operating Supplies 11,500.00 1,900.00 1,452.02 447.98 Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Operating 1,548,500.00 285,800.00 207,245.16 78,554.84 Total Operating Expenditures 2,317,681.25 473,000.00 337,575.98 135,424.02 Page 3 of 11 161 1 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Autos and Trucks Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 Operating Fund 109 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Capital Expenditures: Water Management Field Operations Other Machinery and Equipment 1,000.00 200.00 200.00 General Improvements 13,200.00 2,200.00 2,200.00 Total Water Management Field Operations Capital 14,200.00 2,400.00 2,400.00 Right of Way Beautification - Field Building Improvements 13,600.00 2,300.00 2,300.00 Autos and Trucks 28,000.00 - - Other Machinery and Equipmeny 17,000.00 - - Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Capital 58,600.00 2,300.00 2,300.00 Total Capital Expenditures 72,800.00 4,700.00 - 4,700.00 Total Expenditures 2,390,481.25 477,700.00 337,575.98 140,124.02 Operating Profit /(Loss) 1,232,818.75 1,612,420.00 951,053.61 661,366.39 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (259,200.00) (259,200.00) (259,200.00) Tax Collector Fees (82,500.00) (23,200.00) (6,903.13) (16,296.87) Property Appraiser Fees (75,300.00) (42,928.54) 42,928.54 Reserves (2 1/2 months for Operations) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) - Reserves for Equipment (124,875.00) (124,875.00) (124,875.00) Revenue Reserve (140,300.00) Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditures, net (1,237,200.00) (962,300.00) (988,931.67) 26,631.67 Net Profit /(Loss) (4,381.25) 650,120.00 (37,878.06) 687,998.06 Page 4 of 11 B2: 1611 2 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - November 17, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 363,386.73 Interest Receivable 632.76 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance 364, 019.49 $ 364,019.49 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (522.50) $ (3,374.50) (423,553.80) 63,431.31 (3,897.00) (360,122.49) Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (364,019.49) Page 5 of 11 1611 82 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Fund 111 Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: Clam Bay Restoration Engineering Fees Other Contractural Services Other Equipment Repairs Minor Operating Other Operating Supplies Total Clam Bay Restoration Clam Bay Ecosystem Engineering Fees Other Contractual Services Total Clam Bay Ecosystem Total Clam Bay Operating Expenditures Operating Profit /(Loss) $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.17 $ - 35,000.00 15,050.00 4,546.14 $ 10,503.86 35,000.00 - - $ - 1,300.00 216.00 115.48 $ 100.52 506,519.17 450,485.17 439,880.79 (155,000.00) 10,604.38 $ 102,943.75 $ 1,800.00 $ - $ 1,800.00 137,390.00 4,700.00 2,496.00 $ 2,204.00 485.42 100.00 506.00 $ (406.00) 4,800.00 800.00 - $ 800.00 1,000.00 200.00 - $ 200.00 246,619.17 7,600.00 3,002.00 4,598.00 11,300.00 - - $ - 25,000.00 - - $ - 36,300.00 - - - 282,919.17 7,600.00 3,002.00 4,598.00 223,600.00 442,885.17 436,878.79 6,006.38 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (65,000.00) (65,000.00) (65,000.00) $ - Tax Collector Fees (1,100.00) 297.00 (90.93) $ 387.93 Property Appraiser Fees (700.00) - - $ - Revenue Reserve (1,800.00) - $ - Reserves (2 1/2 month for Operations) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) $ - Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expe (223,600.00) (219,703.00) (220,090.93) 387.93 Net Profit /(Loss) $ (0.00) $ 223,182.17 $ 216,787.86 $ 5,618.45 Page 6 of 11 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay ervices Division I R i;e55fbn B 2 1 Y 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - November 17, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 2,365,726.16 Interest Receivable 2,763.54 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Goods Received Inv. Received Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities and Fund Balance Page 7 of 11 452.36 (1,960,586.75) (408,355.31) 2,368,489.70 $ 2,368,489.70 452.36 (2,368,942.06) $ (2,368,489.70) Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: B z: 1611 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance $ 1,943,987.30 $ 1,943,987.30 $ 1,943,987.30 $ 121,600.00 52,288.00 - $ 7,700.00 770.00 555.31 $ 2, 073, 287.30 1,997,045.30 1,944,542.61 Irrigation & Landscaping Engineering Fees $ 113,628.45 $ Other Contractural Services 2,354,658.85 - Total Irrigation & Landscaping Expenditures 2,468,287.30 - Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer from Fund 109 General Transfer from Fund 320 Clam Bay Transfer from Fund 778 Street Lighting Tax Collector Fees Property Appraiser Fees Reserve for Contingencies Revenue Reserve Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditure! Net Profit /(Loss) $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ 65,000.00 65,000.00 65,000.00 $ 83,600.00 83,600.00 83,600.00 $ (3,800.00) 950.00 - $ (2,500.00) - - $ (100.00) (100.00) - $ (6,400.00) - - $ 395,000.00 408,650.00 407,800.00 (0.00) 2,405,695.30 2,352,342.61 Page 8 of 11 52,288.00 214.69 52,502.69 950.00 (100.00) 850.00 53,352.69 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Boarlg6r SIssiol 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - November 17, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 (Unaudited) Current Assets Cash and Investments Interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenue (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Assets $ 132,506.63 310.44 Liabilities and Fund Balance (60.00) (9,317.41) (208,670.25) 85,230.59 Page 9 of 11 $ 132,817.07 $ 132,817.07 $ (9,377.41) (123,439.66) $ (132,817.07) now 1611 $2 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Report (Revised) Operating Expenditures: Street Lighting Administration Payroll Expense $ Pelican Bay Services $ 6,900.00 $ 5,231.85 $ Municipal Services Taxing Unit Indirect Cost Reimbursement 6,300.00 $ 3,200.00 Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 $ 50.00 Other Contractural Services Street Lighting Fund 778 - FY 2011 $ 3,500.00 5,709.00 $ (Unaudited) Telephone 4,100.00 $ 700.00 Annual YTD YTD 501.02 Postage and Freight 2,000.00 Budget Budget Actual 1.79 Variance Operating Revenues: Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage 13,600.00 $ 2,300.00 Carryforward $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ - Curent Ad Valorem Tax 273,200.00 117,476.00 35,027.33 $ 82,448.67 Delinquent Ad Valorem Tax 800.00 - $ - Interest 1,200.00 20.00 58.19 $ (38.19) Total Operating Revenues 444,200.00 287,296.00 204,885.52 195.10 82,410.48 Operating Expenditures: Street Lighting Administration Payroll Expense $ 41,200.00 $ 6,900.00 $ 5,231.85 $ 1,668.15 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 6,300.00 $ 3,200.00 3,150.00 $ 50.00 Other Contractural Services 20,800.00 $ 3,500.00 5,709.00 $ (2,209.00) Telephone 4,100.00 $ 700.00 198.98 $ 501.02 Postage and Freight 2,000.00 $ 100.00 1.79 $ 98.21 Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage 13,600.00 $ 2,300.00 2,200.59 $ 99.41 Insurance - General 400.00 $ - - $ - Office Supplies General 800.00 $ 100.00 100.00 $ - Other Office and Operating Supplies 1,000.00 $ 200.00 4.90 $ 195.10 Total Street Lighting Admin Operating 90,200.00 100.00 17,000.00 16,597.11 1,200.00 402.89 Street Lighting Field Operations Payroll Expense 62,900.00 9,100.00 7,553.72 $ 1,546.28 White Goods 9,600.00 - - $ - Other Contractual Services 800.00 100.00 $ 100.00 Telephone 500.00 100.00 36.04 $ 63.96 Electricity 44,200.00 7,400.00 5,832.69 $ 1,567.31 Insurance - General 800.00 - 200.00 $ (200.00) Insurance- Auto 900.00 - 225.00 $ (225.00) Fleet Maintenance and Parts 1,100.00 200.00 25.00 $ 175.00 Fuel and Lubricants 400.00 100.00 84.97 $ 15.03 Other Equipment Repairs 200.00 - - $ - Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 100.00 - $ 100.00 Electrical Contractors 7,300.00 1,200.00 4,147.66 $ (2,947.66) Light Bulb Ballast 12,400.00 1,700.00 1,287.25 $ 412.75 Total Street Lighting Field Operating 141,600.00 20,000.00 19,392.33 607.67 Total Operating Expenditures 231,800.00 37,000.00 35,989.44 1,010.56 Page 10 of 11 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division B r�9 r S ion B 2 6a - Administrator's Report - Monthly Financial Rep R€ s,e ) Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - November 17, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Capital Expenditures: Street Lighting Field Operations Other Machinery/Equipment General Improvements Total Capital Expenditures Variance 1,000.00 200.00 - $ 200.00 13, 200.00 2,200.00 - $ 2,200.00 14,200.00 2,400.00 - 2,400.00 Total All Expenditures 246,000.00 Operating Profit /(Loss) 198,200.00 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (83,600.00) Tax Collector Fees (8,400.00) Property Appraiser Fees (5,500.00) Reserves (2 1/2/ months for Operations) (58,800.00) Reserves for Equipment (27,500.00) Revenue Reserve (14,400.00) Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expi (198,200.00) Net Profit /(Loss) - Page 11 of 11 39,400.00 35,989.44 3,410.56 247,896.00 168,896.08 78,999.92 (83,600.00) (83,600.00) $ - (700.00) (726.67) $ 26.67 (58,800.00) (58,800.00) $ - (27,500.00) (27,500.00) $ - (170,600.00) (170,626.67) 26.67 77,296.00 (1,730.59) 75,565.41 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board RebaSesfionl 821 6c - Administrator's Report - Status of RFP For Environmental Services From: Commissioner Georgia Hiller To: Resnick!, Subject: FW: Environmental and Biological Studies Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 6:02:52 PM Commissioner Georgia Hiller District 2 From: ochs_I Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 5:27 PM To: Commissioner Georgia Hiller Subject: FW: Environmental and Biological Studies Commissioner, You inquired yesterday about the change in the selection committee composition for the RFP initiated by Pelican Bay Services Division for environmental and biological studies. A brief summary of events is outlined below. It appears that other County departments were in need of related services so the Purchasing Department broadened the scope to serve the needs of both the PBSD and other County Departments. Two additional employees were added to the selection committee as a result. Based on my understanding of the information below, this modification shouldn't deter PBSD from achieving its objective. VR, Leo From: Markiewicz]oanne Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:02 PM To: ochs_I Cc: carnell_s; carnell_s Subject: Environmental and Biological Studies Leo: In summary: • We received detailed scope of services from Pelican Bay for Clam Pass (Section A of the RFP); we developed generic scope for other departments use in the County (Section B of the RFP). It was reaffirmed in a meeting with various project managers in mid - November that they would use these services under contract; • The Selection Committee consists of three members from Pelican Bay (Tom Cravens, Neil Dorrill and Kyle Lukasz) and two members from the County (Alex Sulecki and Greg Barlow) to remain consistent with a minimum of a five- member selection committee whenever possible; • Consultants can submit for Section A, Section B or both sections; and • The Selection Committee will likely select one consultant for Section A (per Pelican Bay's request); multiple consultants will likely be selected for Section B given the diverse needs of County departments. Please let me know if I can provide additional information. Joanne Collier County Online Bidding System< http: / /www.colliergov .net/bid /profile_add.asp> ****************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Joanne Markiewicz Purchasing Acquisitions Manager Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3327 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Florida 34112 Phone: (239) 252 -8975 FAX: (239) 252-6480 JoanneMarkiewicz @colliergov.net December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board R116d elion B2 7d - Chairman's Report - Canoe Trail Markers - Page 1 of 6 From: Johan Domenie To: Resnickl- Subject: Fw: Markers Date: Friday, November 05, 2010 3:44:43 PM Attachments: FWC.odf Lisa, I would appreciate it if you would forward the following e-mail I received from Tim Hall - plus the attachment - to the members of the Board... Many thanks John - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Tim Hall To: Johan Domenie Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 8:47 AM Subject: RE: Markers Mr. Domenie, Sorry for the doubled e- mails. I sent responses and then saw that Kyle already had. As you can see in the responses I sent earlier, we did do the Canoe Trail marker permitting. Our office located the marker placements and made sure that no seagrass beds or clam beds were affected by them. The permits for the Canoe trail were separate from the 1998 Restoration and Management permit, but the 1998 Restoration and Management permit is a major reason that the Canoe trail permitting was done. The Canoe Trail was permitted in 2000 to meet the condition in the Restoration and Management Plan to mark the channel. We used the canoe trail in lieu of the red and green markers that the County is currently pursuing. I have attached a copy of the FWC permit (20 -016) that authorized the markers. It was issued in March of 2000. We also have a Corps of Engineers nationwide permit which was issued in April 2000. The plan for the new markers was to use thick walled PVC pipes instead of galvanized or other metal poles. The PVC is a bigger pole but it holds up better in the salt water conditions. Regards, Tim Hall Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. Marine & Environmental Consulting 3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL. 34104 -3732 Phone: (239) 643 -0166 Fax: (239) 643 -6632 Web: www_turrell- associates.com ''^� � Inc. q yi ■t om hQ II II, INI�ORMA 'I [ON CONTAINED IN 'I HIS 'TRANSMISSION IS IN'lkNDFD ONLY FOR '1111' USF OI If INDIVIDUAI. OR FN II I '10 %VIIICH II' IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMAI ION 'I1HAl IS PRIVIH. 6FD. CONY IDFNrIIAI_ WORTS PRODUCT 16 !1 B.21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7d - Chairman's Report - Canoe Trail Markers - Page 2 of 6 AND ,'OR VXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. I1= IT IF READER 01: 1111S ML'SSAGF IS No IT I IN i:NDI(D RECIPIENT (OR THE EMP1,0YEE OR AGIXI' RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING I]' TO 11 1E INTENDED RECIPIENT), YOU ARE III :REBY NO'HFIED ]'HAT ANY DISSEMINA'FION, DIS IRIBU LION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICA'11ON IS PRO111BFFED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED 1HIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE; NO "FIFY US BY TELEPHONING US (COT.[,[--.CT) ANT) RETURN I III? ORIGINAL. MESSAGE TO US AT THE ADDRESS ABOVE AT OUR EXPENSE From: Johan Domenie [mai Ito: hobodory@comcast. net] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 5:08 PM To: Tim Hall Subject: Markers Tim: Kyle tells me that you obtained the permit to install the Canoe Trail Markers in 2000. Does this mean that they were not part of the original 1998 permit - as most people appear to imply. What was the permit number and when was it approved. Did you - or some one else - do the survey to determine where each pole is to be placed? Would galvanized pipes still be permissible today? Do these pipes contribute in any way to pollution within the mangroves. I am basically asking when did you get the permit and who decided on the location for each Marker? Thanks for your clarification John December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board I 6I gr S B 21 Reulaessio 7d - Chairman's Report - Canoe Trail Markers - Page 3 of 6 FLORIDA FISH Al* WILDLIFE CONSERVAON COMMISSION JAMES L "JAMIE" ADAMS, JR. BARBARA C. BARSH QUINTON L HEDGEPETH, DDS H.A. "HERKY" HUFFMAN Bushnell Jacksonville Miami Deltona DAVID K. MEEHAN JULIE K. MORRIS TONY MOSS EDWIN P. ROBERTS, DC JOHN D. ROOD St. Petersburg Sarasota Miami Pensacola Jacksonville ALLAN L. EGBERT, Ph.D., Executive Director VICTOR J. HELLER, Assistant Executive Director Ms. Cloe Essex, Biologist Turrell & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B Naples, Florida 34104 RE: File No.: 2003 - 0511 -016BS Location: Clam Bay Canoe Trail Dear Ms. Essex: DIVISION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT COLONEL ROBERT L EDWARDS, DIRECTOR LT. COLONEL RANDY HOPKINS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (850) 488 -62S1 TDD (850) 488 -9542 March 24, 2000 RECEIVED MAR 2 9 2000 USACE - REGULATORY FT. MYERS, FL The Division of Law Enforcement, Office of Enforcement Planning & Policy has approved your request for placement of canoe markers in Clam Bay, within Collier County. Permit number 20 -016 has been issued to Collier County and is subject to the following conditions: Permit number 20 -016 is contingent upon the consent of, and if necessary, the issuance of appropriate permits by the Department of Environmental Protection, Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Program Office, 2295 Victoria Avenue, Suite 165A -D, Fort Myers, Florida 33901; the United States Coast Guard at 909 S. E. 1st Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131; and the United States Department of Army Corps of Engineers, at Post Office Box 19247, Tampa, Florida 33686; authorizing the placement of structures for the support of the canoe markers. 2. This permit requires Collier County to place thirty-two (32) canoe markers exactly as indicated on the attached marker list. Each marker(s) shall be consistent with the Florida Uniform Waterway Marking System format as shown on the attached diagram. All canoe markers must be manufactured in accordance with the Uniform Waterway Marker . system. The markers must be 18" X 18 ", and will be placed along the river(s) at 400' intervals, all makers will be on the same side of the water body unless otherwise noted. This is necessitated due to the trail users being drawn from older surrounding populations groups and the frequent sight of the markers will serve as affirmation that they are proceeding in the correct direction. Permit number 20 -016 must be displayed on each canoe maker at any location where it is readily. visible. These numbers must be displayed in black block characters measuring at least one (1 ") inch in height. 620 South Meridian Street • Tallahassee • FL • 32399 -1600 www.state.fl.state.us/fwc/ 1611 X21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7d - Chairman's Report - Canoe Trail Markers - Page 4 of 6 Ms. Cloe Essex March 24, 2000 Page Two 4. The placement of canoe markers shall be completed within a reasonable time after receipt of this permit. If the information for any marker(s) varies from the originally permitted marker list, the Collier County must immediately provide this office with the corrected information. Such changes will require that this permit be amended. 5. All canoe markers authorized under this permit must be maintained in proper condition at all times. The Collier County must immediately report and correct any discrepancies of any marker to this office by calling 850- 488 -5600, extension 169, or by facsimile at 850- 488 -9284. 6. Permit number 20 -016 does not authorize the invasion of private rights, nor grant any exclusive privileges, nor does it obviate the necessity of complying with any other state, federal, or local laws and regulations. 7. Violation of any provision of this permit shall result in the revocation of the authorization to place uniform waterway markers in, on, or above the waters of this state. If you have any questions, please contact Tara Alford at 850- 488 -5600, extension 169. Sincerely, Ms. Tara Alford, Planner r Captain Alan S. Richard Office of Enforcement Planning & Policy Division of Law Enforcement ASR/tra cc: Mr. Joe Embres, USCG Mr. Joe Bachelor, USCOE Ms. Lucy Blair, DEP Major Mike Long, FWC Captain David Sterman, FWC Captain Denis Grealish, FWC TARA2000\CAN0ETRAI1S \CLAM3.W PD December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7d - Chairman's Report - Canoe Trail Markers - Page 5 of 6 1611 B 21 FILE NO: '2003- 0511- 016 -BS FI.ORIDA'UNIFORM WATERWAY MARKER LIST NO. LAT /LONG SITE LOCATION MOUNTING DIRECTION SYMBOL 1 261238/814845 Bay /Sound Shore 2 261238/814845 Bay /Sound Shore 3 262150/814847 Bay /Sound Shore 4 261254/814848 Bay /Sound Shore 5 261256/814853 Bay /Sound Shore 6 261324/814850 Bay /Sound Shore 7 261331/614649 Inlet Shore 8 261342/814852 Inlet Shore 9 261313/814852 Inlet Shore 10 261311/814855 Inlet Shore 11 261314/814857 Inlet Shore 12 261316/814857 Inlet Shore 13 261317/814856 Inlet Shore 14 261320/814856 Creek Shore 15 261321/814911 Creek Shore 16 261322/814913 Creek Shore 17 261325/814902 Creek Shore 18 261324/814900 Creek Shore 19 261327/814859 Creek Shore 20 261333/814901 Creek Shore 21 261334/814933 Creek Shore 22 261336/814931 Creek Shore 23 261337/814912 Creek Shore 24 261342/814914 Bay /Sound Shore 25 261356/814901 Bay /Sound Shore 26 261413/814856 Bay /Sound Shore 27 261412/814913 Creek Shore 28 261415/814910 Creek Shore 29 261419/814910 Creek Shore 30 261421/814959 Creek Shore 31 261425/814857 Bay /Sound Shore 32 261440/814915 Bay /Sound Shore Piling /Pole Southwest Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole Southeast Piling /Pole West Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole Southeast Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole Southeast Piling /Pole East Circle Piling /Pole Southwest Piling /Pole Southwest Piling /Pole East Piling /Pole West Piling /Pole Southeast Piling /Pole East Piling /Pole Southeast Piling /Pole Southwest Piling /Pole East Piling /Pole Southwest Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole Southwest Piling /Pole Southeast Piling /Pole Southwest Piling /Pole South Piling /Pole South Pending Date: 03/24/2000 WORDAGE CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 1 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 2 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 3 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 4 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 5 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 6 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 7 CLAM SAY CANOE TRAIL - 8 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 9 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 10 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 11 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 12 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 13 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 14 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 15 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 16 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 17 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 18 CLAM SAY CANOE TRAIL - 19 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 20 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 21 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 22 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 23 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 24 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 25 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 26 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 27 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 28 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 29 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 30 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 31 CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL - 32 i 161 JIB 21 December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7d - Chairman's Report - Canoe Trail Markers - Page 6 of 6 � T 11■ -ET L\ ]r / -1 -� CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL Signage Not to Scale 1611 B 2: 11/23/10 Pelican Bay Nutrient Management Plan Proposal (Turrell, Hall & Associates) TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC. MARINE & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B • Naples, Florida 34104 -3732 • (239) 643 -0166 • Fax 643 -6632• lauren @turrell - associates.com November 23, 2010 James Hoppensteadt Pelican Bay Foundation, Inc. 6251 Pelican Bay Blvd. Naples, FL 34108 Re: Proposal for Professional Environmental Services Dear Mr. Hoppensteadt: Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. is pleased to provide you with this amended proposal for environmental services. We appreciate that the Foundation is still interested in creating a nutrient management plan as a means of implementing a proactive approach to managing and improving upland water quality contributor standards. Pelican Bay is a unique planned community, well known for its gulf -front preserve and its overall environmental sensitivity. The approximately 3 square mile location spans between the beach and Tamiami Trail, from Vanderbilt Beach Drive south to Seagate Boulevard. The community consists of single- and multi - family residences, passive and recreational areas, natural preserve areas, and a limited amount of upscale commercial development. Even though the environment was in the forefront of the development of Pelican Bay, concerns have arisen in the last decade throughout the State of Florida that indicate a proactive stance should be taken with respect to improving the management of stormwater and reducing nutrient and other contaminant inputs into the water management system. As discussed briefly in our previous proposal, the nutrient management plan we proposed will be designed to focus on three main aspects: 1. Nutrient Inputs — mapping the flow of water and nutrients throughout the development. Since water is the major mode of transport for nutrients and other contaminants to reach the open waters of Clam Bay, the water flow through these basins will be mapped. While much of this information is likely available in site development plans and permit exhibits, we have not to date been made aware of any available supply of this information. Research into accumulating the plans and compiling the information into a single document /exhibit is included in this work component. Major water collection areas such as swales and pipes, lakes, and connections between the lakes will be mapped. This will allow us to decide on the most advantageous locations for sampling sites, which we will coordinate with the known PBSD collection sites to avoid any duplicate sampling. This task includes several additional components such as: - Differentiating and mapping all of the pervious and impervious surfaces within the community. This is useful in terms of knowing how much of each area (community, neighborhood, condominium, etc.) is able to percolate water through the ground and how much runs directly into the storm water system. - Further breaking down the pervious surfaces between lawn, landscape areas, golf course, and others can also be used to estimate nutrient requirements and applications Page 1 of 4 12102/2010 16I 1 B2: 11/23/10 Pelican Bay Nutrient Management Plan Proposal Jurrell, Hall & Associates) within the system. Identifying points where nutrients enter the system is done as part of the mapping. Figuring out which neighborhood or areas of neighborhoods flow into each detention area and lake can help to track down problems if high nutrient levels are detected during the water quality testing component of the program. 2. Landscape Management — coordinating with associations, landscape companies, golf course, PBSD staff and others with respect to landscaping management and maintenance activities. We feel that coordination with each subdivision or association property manager and landscaping staff will prove to be a vital component of the plan to document fertilizer, herbicide, and pesticide application. Creating a "Before and After" comparison will, in our opinion, go a long way to showing outside agencies and other interested parties that tangible, documented, and quantifiable changes are being made. There are around 90 different associations within the Pelican Bay Community. Documenting the landscape areas of each association (done under Task 1 above), coordinating with each association's landscape company, and tracking each landscaping company's fertilizer and pesticide applications over the course of a year will be time consuming but we believe necessary to fully document the baseline conditions within the communities. Knowing this before we begin will also allow us and the Foundation to quantitatively track improvements and make comparisons between pre and post Program conditions. Additional tasks include: - When fertilization is done. Knowing the timing of fertilization efforts can be used in conjunction with water quality results to determine if nutrient levels are ambient, based on continual trickling inputs, or the result of initial flushes immediately following fertilizer applications. - The type and quantities of fertilizer and pesticides used between the different associations and communities. Identifying types of inputs including fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, silt or other materials that can be suspended in the water column. We feel this is an important component in terms of being able to make recommendations for changes. Identifying the types and brands of applications that work better (more taken up rather than run -off) within the community would be very helpful in arguing changes that can be made to reduce inputs into the water bodies throughout the development. Having practical real -life examples (both good and bad) to show other residents should help to get people to consider alternatives. This would also include whether or not best management practices are used (and if so, which ones). - Coordination and information gathering from all of the landscape companies working within Pelican Bay. Educating them on the reasons for the increased scrutiny, as well as the goals and intents of the Program. Following up to make sure workers are properly trained in the appropriate BMPs and verifying that they are utilizing or applying them correctly. This would be done through face -to -face meeting with the landscapers as well as through site visits and inspections. - Outreach meetings and presentations to all of the associations with respect to the Program. We would propose to present status reports to association boards at their annual meetings as well as a series of presentations to the residents at large. The presentations would be designed to increase resident awareness of nutrient related issues and stress the importance of buying into the Program to improve water quality even further within the development. Page 2 of 4 12/0212010 1611 62 11/23/10 Pelican Bay Nutrient Management Plan Proposal (Turrell, Hall & Associates) 3. Water Quality — sampling of the water at focal points throughout the system. This would be used to: - Identify beneficial and negative components relative to helping improve water quality - Identify potential changes that could be made to improve the cleansing capabilities of the water management system. Collecting water samples at nodal points and having the samples analyzed by certified lab(s) will be part of this task. In addition, we will also sample the irrigation waters being used throughout the community. The goals of this proposed plan are to identify areas where improvements can be made, make recommendations to minimize impacts to the adjacent preserve and water body, and to collect data to evidence improvements or revise annual recommendations accordingly. Our nutrient management plan will include recommendations for water conservation and improved soil and water quality. It will also include training sessions with landscape personnel and interested residents with suggestions for improving fertilizer and pesticide application methods. The overall goal of the Program is to reduce nutrients, suspended solids, and heavy metals from accumulating in the water bodies on -site. The program also includes follow up, inspections, and compliance verification with respect to contractor training and implementation of any recommendations made and adopted by the Foundation. COSTS It was previously estimated that the initial plan preparation, mapping, coordination, and data collection will cost around $250,000.00 for the first year. These costs were based on our anticipated effort to get the mapping, coordination with all of the individual associations and landscape companies, resident educational efforts, creation of a tracking system for application rates and amounts, and water quality testing set up and under way in the initial phases of this plan. The cost breakdown that went into this estimate includes the following: Component 1 — Nutrient Inputs ($40,000 - $50,000) - Aerial mapping, survey, and ground truthing efforts associated with creating GIS shapefiles of pervious and impervious areas in each Basin and community. ($20,000 - $25,000 depending on amount of ground verification needed from aerial work) - Research and compilation of stormwater permits and exhibits to create GIS shapefile of water flows through the development. ($5,000 - $10,000 depending on what is readily available and what would have to be researched more in depth through old permit file reviews and ground truthing) - Data sorting, compilation and manipulation necessary to create maps and exhibits for reporting and presentations ($15,000) Component 2 — Landscape Management ($155,000) - Meetings and coordination with landscape companies, going over BMP requirements, goals, and objectives of the Program. Familiarization with tracking and data logging sheets. Collection of information on what is currently being applied. ($55,000) - Internet portal for information to be collected and disseminated. It will allow companies to enter information via an internet connection and also allow Pelican Bay residents a view of ongoing program results and milestones. ($15,000) Page 3 of 4 12/02/2010 161162 11/23/10 Pelican Bay Nutrient Management Plan Proposal Jurrell, Hall & Associates) Produce short video for the Community television station highlighting the program and explaining how all homeowners can participate. ($40,000) Information and educational meetings with associations. Since we want the entire community to buy into the Program, we feel that individualized presentations specific to each different association will be better able to generate active involvement. We would also provide presentations to larger community meetings such as the PBSD, Foundation, Men's Coffee, and other meeting venues. ($45,000) Component 3 — Water Quality ($45,000) - Collection of water samples (4x /year). ($6,400 /year) - Lab costs for analyzing samples. Initial year's testing will include metals (copper, lead, zinc, arsenic, and cadmium). Subsequent years will not include metals if no problems are seen during the first year. ($27,200/1 s' year, $19,500 /subsequent years) - Compilation and reporting on all components of the Program. ($11,400) Water quality and application data will then be collected for an additional four years and used to track changes within the identified basins to document improvements or identify areas where further suggestions can be implemented for improvements. An annual report will be generated broken down by basin to document the data collected, identify any changes observed, list any recommendations felt necessary, and update the Foundation on the status of the project. Annual data collection and report generation is estimated to cost $37,500 per year (roughly $7,500 per basin). Based on our conversations, I understand that the Foundation may feel that the contractor coordination is not necessary and that the Program can be implemented without the "before and after" comparison proposed. While I still believe that this information will be an important component in any later discussions that might arise with State and County personnel, the Program can be implemented without it. Likewise, the internet and video components can also be eliminated or postponed should the Foundation feel that the individual association meetings are adequate to disseminate the necessary information. I would still be happy to meet with you or the Foundation Board to further discuss this program and answer any questions you or they may have. Please feel free to call me to discuss this further. Sincerely, Tim Hall Page 4 of 4 12/02/2010 c O _ N O f0 m 7 w N �C y � U f0 N O p ma c 0 m O 0 C1 m Q _U N N Ua 000 n. C m f0 � U LO NU CL m O 7 O O N N C cc N � N E U � f0 f� Q. 41 IT+ V tO cri c tm O Im c Lai i r -1 X t tttl .N t_ it \di c V t t� qFm VM N O VM N 1611 B W v a o O 9 vvv 0 E 0 0 0 a 0 0 a us u 0 rE- u u u u u m v mE o7} v y o N o o u c 0 m n 0 C O E :o v a 0 O y 3 v .°. v m 'n m o c W Ul a O E o p ' _ C y YI 10 >c;0 3 o a 3 mo Js m r U v N o c0 m w o ;c '� x c c O 00 Ob C V ° O 0 2 E 'v O L o o c m o N E E J y o ai m u ii v °' L ,f0n E �' 2 - a w m> `o o o p N v 01 E v c c r .� c 3 c o m d v a a o. v lo o a o o 0 3 n v an m E Z m ° M J 9 o y 3 m L Z m '� > o p c o vtni¢ a� a `w J o aJO 'o ° u o7J o v ai.� LL `v v w o Y o —°' ov.m� E ° O N \ q on K m n p N y° N W 00 c C L J C O m a .a p O G Lo u 3 m v m r 'm v °' a$ io o c 3 c v m m v 0 a w c vvr=L =' o m 0 0 c dim ao E c,o °- -a u o f p o M v c v v m w o > N m '� w a s v w a m w 3 o E 0 0 '` > a w m uo 0 � v a c o n m v o mo c m. a o- � a E E � U n O1 \ a O C C W E c W m p 0 QU a `w H Y ,�. 0 N `o LL p c N g .� N c m J a E v `o c a'i >a om 3 n a' O E 2' E 'vL\ c o 10 m a m mm m m c c in O o >`, a c u E °u o °1 c c °° o° a m U y o ,K m o o 0 .a v m w c '� °c a v a 0 o m o a v ° c W m a u E Ou " v E S m w o .± o y c y W o a 7 v c c v o U C N u w C ww "J° Z a 'u n n o L m E o c E °cE N ?+ ° u > D o V, m E '^ y ^' m U u �' o v m '� o a W E v 3 E N a m m p L `W .W. `m_ a N U> °'off c LL o -u v a c J c m o c v c .y"'. v °_ Q a .6 Y o �° ¢` E c m > vi Y o. >'o « w v.3 c> L w a '`-' o' a E -o W E > 3 m >,ot1 E O c' Q o o c m e ° v oa a n o J —'o ° a E a W u a m E o °�° .� s a o a u ;; c p Z o q .'' o ° W a 1 u c 'a W .� -° N u m a o N c u E N O a �`o m c- ° c U c o v m m ,a, u w c i? LL v a o m Q 0 0 o E c .2 :°, Y m e m m cam° oL E E M v ` c t 'o R o l7 y 3 EN,y ti C LL �u z tiz o° o °.. o o R y -°° v E di > a m °- E a m '> a a �°° m M v° y? ` n Y c a v a w a c ° o C L J in u W Z' 0 '^ tg ob c a C W N a 'o �^ O Ti -o v b0 L vi LL A c 3 N v o o W v C W a f0 a v n 3 v W m °'v f0v c y LL �e `m o= .oa 0 ,� o v' o — °1 a v W o o° m° a E m n c :W v V c J .° N y ` v o a `w — m �« V. W y .' .O Y O V N a m `w a v c E E m a O a 0 o 3 b 3 m f0 v w ry v J a E Oi o 06 C m > a v a n v U W C W v E W U C E N '= a°+ y° c x E m c' -0 m E W Y _� v ° o Y E L 'E° «° 3 ,� o 'v'i -i z -° E i 'v o Z t w J E o v 'm L w 0 Z u o W v m a >. V z v p y n m E 0° m �^ C v o LL r` m ° u\ m u �, .c Y\ m z u 3 u v 0 `m Z m v !_^ n oo a 3 Y i p L N a m n 00 .+ _ O Z O O Z Z O Z O 2 O Z p Z Y Y O Y Z N m > m E 00 C .� d a V J VI 0 v 0 v _ c o E o. N a' v m m o m W U m o N m n n o 7 0 m ° 3 W� w 2 L C 'n u N T L -° c v w E C° a O v o Q .> a0 'o c p W > Vr° _ .n O > m O J o- v c m �. O p m" O N c .° °C m n q a o o N W j> y u N y d N j a s vvi in u° w uLi a D a > E rn o \ o 0 N 0 M 0 00 0 ti M 0 tp 0 I� 0 0 m .1 Q. N O O O O O 9 Fial161 211 Hiller Henning Code Coletta PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2010 THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET IN REGULAR SESSION, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2011 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, LOCATED AT 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES. AGENDA The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll Call 2. Agenda Approval 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes a. December 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session b. December 6, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee 4. Audience Participation 5. Administrator's Report a. Monthly Financial Report b. Status of Permit for Clam Bay Maintenance C. Status of RFP for Environmental Services d. Discussion of Resolution to Affirm Operating and Reporting Authority for Clam Bay e. U.S. 41 and Pelican Bay Boulevard North Crosswalk Update (K. Lukasz) 6. Chairman's Report a. Update on Community Improvement Plan b. Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update C. Status of Canoe Trail Markers d. Announcements 7. Community Issues 8. Committee Reports and /or Requests a. Budget Committee b. Landscape Committee 9. Old Business 10. New Business 11. Miscellaneous Correspondence a. Ongoing Projects Status Sheet 12. Audience Comments 13. Adjournment SPEAKERS FROM THE AUDIENCE WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. ADDITIONALLY, THIS NOTICE ADVISES THAT, IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD, WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, THEY WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THAT FOR SUCH PURPOSE, MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PERSON REQUIRING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS AT THIS MEETING BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY OR PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENT SHOULD CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION OFFICE AT LEAST FIVE CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT (239) 597 -1749. Misc. Comes: Date: Item #: 12/20/2010 2:29:05 PM Cries to: RECEIVED JAN 2 5 2 sl ooard of Counl;, C omm scS onom PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit 1611 B21 Fiala L� Hiller Henning Coyle Colette NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2010 THE LANDSCAPE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2010 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, LOCATED AT 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES. AGENDA The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll Call 2. Audience Participation 3. Discuss Institute for Food and Agricultural Science (IFAS) Best Management Practices 4. Discuss Suggested Amendment to Existing Residential and Commercial Landscaping Contracts as they Pertain to Fertilization 5. Discuss Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) Guidelines for Permitted Acquisition of Grass Carp & Tilapia 6. Discuss Turrell, Hall & Associates' Proposal for Environmental Services & Demonstration Project 7. Educational Outreach to Members Regarding Best Management Practices Update 8. Audience Comments 9. Adjournment SPEAKERS FROM THE AUDIENCE WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. ADDITIONALLY, THIS NOTICE ADVISES THAT, IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD, WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, THEY WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THAT FOR SUCH PURPOSE, MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PERSON REQUIRING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS AT THIS MEETING BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY OR PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENT SHOULD CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION OFFICE AT LEAST FLW. NDAR DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT (239) 597 -1749. Date: It010 11 46 4 AM CCnies to: 161 l 2. n 5 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular S Sion January y 9 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 b Page 1 of 11 b A Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit o Balance Sheet - December 29, 2010 Operating Fund 109 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments 2,594,650.48 interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Accrued Wages Payable Goods Received /inventory Recv'd Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 2,594,650.48 $ 2,594,650.48 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (44,236.90) (24,619.49) (1,173,770.02) (1,352,024.07) $ (68,856.39) (2,525,794.09) $ (2,594,650.48) Page 1 of 1 1611 2 �. ,N 1! January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Seances Division Board Regular Sion 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 Page 2 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit income Statement w/ Budget- December 29, 2010 Operating Fund 109 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carryforward Special Assessment - Water Management Admin Special Assessment - Right of Way Beautification Charges for Services Surplus Property Sales Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: Water Management Administration Payroll Expense White Goods IT Direct Client Support (Capital) IT Office Automation Indirect Cost Reimbursement Interdepartmental Payment Other Contractural Services Telephone Postage Rent Buildings and Equipment Insurance - General Printing, Binding and Copying Clerk's Recording Fees Advertising Other Office and Operating Supplies Training and Education Total Water Management Admin Operating Water Management Field Operations $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 728,400.00 619,140.00 614,009.54 29,120.32 5,130.46 1,938,600.00 1,647,810.00 1,634,700.73 165.00 13,109.27 1,500.00 - - - - 11,700.00 425.00 415.41 2,986.00 9.59 3,623,300.00 3,210,475.00 3,192,225.68 2,047.75 18,249.32 $ 41,200.00 $ 8,400.00 $ 9,049.87 $ (649.87) 8,800.00 - - $ 300.00 200.00 50.00 50.00 $ - 8,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 $ - 108,200.00 93,100.00 54,100.00 $ 39,000.00 14,600.00 - - $ - 30,800.00 7,700.00 7,781.40 $ (81.40) 4,100.00 1,000.00 726.50 $ 273.50 3,000.00 100.00 247.79 $ (147.79) 13,600.00 3,400.00 4,026.52 $ (626.52) 1,300.00 300.00 325.00 $ (25.00) 2,300.00 - - $ - 4,000.00 - 100.00 $ - 2,000.00 - 21,700.00 $ - 2,500.00 600.00 38.31 $ 561.69 1,100.00 300.00 25.00 $ 275.00 245,700.00 116,950.00 78,370.39 38,579.61 Payroll Expense 134,300.00 29,200.00 29,120.32 79.68 Engineering Fees 16,381.25 4,100.00 165.00 3,935.00 Flood Control Berm and Swale Mntc. 14,000.00 1,750.00 - 1,750.00 Flood Control Replanting Program 8,500.00 3,000.00 2,986.00 14.00 Interdepartmental Payment (Water Quality Lab) 22,600.00 5,700.00 2,047.75 3,652.25 Plan Review Fees 1,500.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 1,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 Temporary Labor 42,400.00 10,600.00 10,149.00 451.00 Telephone 500.00 100.00 108.12 (8.12) Trash and Garbage 8,300.00 2,500.00 1,400.46 1,099.54 Motor Pool Rental Charge 200.00 100.00 - 100.00 Insurance - General 2,400.00 600.00 600.00 - Insurance - Auto 900.00 200.00 225.00 (25.00) Fleet Maintenance and Parts 4,500.00 1,100.00 166.00 934.00 Fuel and Lubricants 3,200.00 800.00 409.18 390.82 Tree Triming 30,000.00 7,500.00 4,992.00 2,508.00 Clothing and Uniforms 1,100.00 300.00 420.05 (120.05) Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 100.00 - 100.00 Fertilizer and Herbicides 98,400.00 21,700.00 21,944.20 (244.20) Other Repairs and Maintenance 1,500.00 400.00 34.30 365.70 Page 1 of 3 N O O 0 A 0 v 0 0 N Other Operating Supplies and Equipment Total Water Management Field Operating Right of Way Beautification - Operating Payroll Expense White Goods IT Direct Client Support and Capital Other Contractural Services Telephone Postage Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage Insurance - General Printing, Binding and Copying Clerk's Recording Legal Advertising Office Supplies General Training and Education Total Right of Way Beautification Operating Right of Way Beautification - Field Payroll Expense White Goods Flood Control (Water Use & Swale /Berm Mntc.) Pest Control Other Contractural Services Temporary Labor Telephone Electricity Trash and Garbage Rent Equipment Motor Pool Rental Charge Insurance - General Insurance- Auto Fleet Maintenance and Parts Fuel and Lubricants Licenses and Permits Tree Triming Clothing and Uniforms Personal Safety Equipment Fertilizer and Herbicides Landscape Maintenance Sprinkler Maintenance Painting Supplies Traffic Signs Minor Operating Equipment Other Operating Supplies Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Operating Total Operating Expenditures Capital Expenditures: Water Management Field Operations Other Machinery and Equipment General Improvements Total Water Management Field Operations Capital 161.1 B 2 1 CD January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session _ 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 b Page 3 of 11 0 A 2,500.00 600.00 1,286.83 (686.83) o 394,681.25 90,650.00 76,054.21 14,595.79 0 42,400.00 8,700.00 9,323.55 (623.55) 7,400.00 - - - 7,000.00 1,750.00 1,750.00 - 37,500.00 9,400.00 8,017.20 1,382.80 3,900.00 1,000.00 726.50 273.50 3,000.00 100.00 1.79 98.21 14,000.00 3,500.00 4,322.29 (822.29) 500.00 125.00 125.00 2,600.00 - - 4,000.00 - - 2,000.00 - - - 3,000.00 800.00 66.30 733.70 1,500.00 400.00 25.00 375.00 128,800.00 25,775.00 24,357.63 1,417.37 827,700.00 173,600.00 159,834.37 13,765.63 3,300.00 - - 136,900.00 47,700.00 31,400.17 16,299.83 5,000.00 1,300.00 - 1,300.00 29,500.00 7,400.00 6,201.55 1,198.45 204,500.00 51,100.00 45,781.80 5,318.20 3,200.00 800.00 683.14 116.86 3,400.00 900.00 557.67 342.33 24,900.00 7,400.00 2,057.41 5,342.59 5,500.00 2,600.00 127.09 2,472.91 700.00 - - - 9,000.00 2,250.00 2,250.00 9,900.00 2,475.00 2,475.00 21,200.00 5,300.00 8,136.68 (2,836.68) 44,200.00 11,100.00 7,291.58 3,808.42 800.00 200.00 - 200.00 35,900.00 34,100.00 36,377.50 (2,277.50) 9,400.00 2,400.00 1,909.62 490.38 3,000.00 800.00 512.00 288.00 62,000.00 18,900.00 24,296.62 (5,396.62) 60,200.00 22,600.00 29,049.30 (6,449.30) 30,000.00 7,500.00 6,974.11 525.89 800.00 200.00 - 200.00 3,000.00 800.00 - 800.00 3,000.00 800.00 868.34 (68.34) 11,500.00 2,900.00 2,520.38 379.62 1,548,500.00 405,125.00 369,304.33 35,820.67 2,317,681.25 638,500.00 548,086.56 90,413.44 1,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 13,200.00 3,300.00 - 3,300.00 14,200.00 3,600.00 - 3,600.00 Page 2 of 3 0 W 11 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 Page 4 of 11 Right of Way Beautification - Field Building Improvements 13,600.00 3,400.00 - 3,100.00 Autos and Trucks 28,000.00 24,000.00 - 24,000.00 Other Machinery and Equipmeny 17,000.00 - - - Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Capital 58,600.00 27,400.00 - 27,400.00 Total Capital Expenditures 72,800.00 31,000.00 - 31,000.00 Total Expenditures 2,390,481.25 669,500.00 548,086.56 121,413.44 Operating Profit /(Loss) 1,232,818.75 2,540,975.00 2,644,139.12 (103,164.12) Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (259,200.00) (259,200.00) (259,200.00) - Tax Collector Fees (82,500.00) (23,200.00) (44,974.21) 21,774.21 Property Appraiser Fees (75,300.00) - (42,928.54) 42,928.54 Reserves (21/2 months for Operations) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) - Reserves for Equipment (124,875.00) (124,875.00) (124,875.00) Revenue Reserve (140,300.00) - - Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditures, net (1,237,200.00) (962,300.00) (1,027,002.75) 64,702.75 Net Profit /(Loss) (4,381.25) 1,578,675.00 1,617,136.37 (38,461.37) Page 3 of 3 821 0 A 0 ip 0 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services DivisiJ6 Rigullession g 21 N 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 b Page 5 of 11 b A Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit o 0 Balance Sheet - December 29, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 288,379.60 Interest Receivable - Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets $ 288,379.60 Total Assets $ 288,379.60 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable $ (869.67) Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd (3,397.45) Accrued Wages Payable - Total Liabilities $ (4,267.12) Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved (208,670.25) Excess Revenue (Expenditures) (75,442.23) Total Fund Balance (284,112.48) Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (288,379.60) Page 1 of 1 Operating Revenues: Ca rryfo rwa rd Curent Ad Valorem Tax Delinquent Ad Valorem Tax Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board egulaIr Session . 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 Page 6 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - December 29, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ - 273,200.00 232,220.00 216,878.01 $ 15,341.99 1,200.00 72.00 64.31 $ 7.69 Street Lighting Administration Payroll Expense $ Indirect Cost Reimbursement Other Contractura) Services Telephone Postage and Freight Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage Insurance - General Office Supplies General Other Office and Operating Supplies Total Street Lighting Admin Operating Street Lighting Field Operations Payroll Expense White Goods Other Contractual Services Telephone Electricity Insurance - General Insurance - Auto Fleet Maintenance and Parts Fuel and Lubricants Other Equipment Repairs Personal Safety Equipment Electrical Contractors Light Bulb Ballast Total Street Lighting Field Operating 444,200.00 41,200.00 6,300.00 20,800.00 4,100.00 2,000.00 13,600.00 400.00 800.00 1,000.00 90,200.00 62,900.00 9,600.00 800.00 500.00 44,200.00 800.00 900.00 402,092.00 10,300.00 $ 3,200.00 5,200.00 1,000.00 100.00 3,400.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 23,800.00 13,700.00 200.00 100.00 11,100.00 200.00 225.00 386,742.32 9,049.92 3,150.00 7,781.40 523.50 1.79 4,147.57 100.00 4.90 24,759.08 13,629.00 108.12 8,734.89 200.00 225.00 15,349.68 1,250.08 50.00 (2,581.40) 476.50 98.21 (747.57) 200.00 295.10 (959.08) 71.00 200.00 (8.12) 2,365.11 1,100.00 300.00 50.00 250.00 400.00 100.00 84.97 15.03 200.00 100.00 - 100.00 500.00 100.00 - 100.00 7,300.00 1,800.00 4,147.66 (2,347.66) 12,400.00 2,500.00 1,287.25 1,212.75 141,600.00 30,425.00 28,466.89 1,958.11 Page 1 of 2 d 6 0 A O W 0 0 161 B 2 i. January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Reguession j 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 b Page 7 of 11 b A O co Total Operating Expenditures 231,$00.00 54,225.00 53,225.97 999.03 0 Capital Expenditures: Street Lighting Field Operations (83,600.00) (83,600.00) (83,600.00) - Other Machinery/Equipment 1,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 General Improvements 13,200.00 3,300.00 - 3,300.00 Reserves (2 1/2/ months for Operations) (58,800.00) Total Capital Expenditures 14,200.00 3,600.00 - >t 3,600.00 Total All Expenditures 246,000.00 57,825.00 53,225.97 4,599.03 Operating Profit /(Loss) 198,200.00 344,267.00 333,516.35 10,750.65 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (83,600.00) (83,600.00) (83,600.00) - Tax Collector Fees (8,400.00) (4,200.00) (4,363.68) 163.68 Property Appraiser Fees (5,500.00) (1,375.00) - (1,375.00) Reserves (2 1/2/ months for Operations) (58,800.00) (58,800.00) (58,800.00) - Reserves for Equipment (27,500.00) (27,500.00) (27,500.00) - Revenue Reserve (14,400.00) - - Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expi (198,200.00) (175,475.00) (174,263.68) (1,211.32) Net Profit /(Loss) - 168,792.00 159,252.67 9,539.33 Page 2 of 2 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 b Page 8 of 11 b A Pelican Bay Services o Municipal Services Taxing Unit o Balance Sheet - December 29, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 2,365,851.87 Interest Receivable - Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Goods Received Inv. Received Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities and Fund Balance Page 1 of 1 452.36 (1,960,586.75) (405,717.48) 2,365,851.87 $ 2,365,851.87 452.36 (2,366,304.23) $ (2,365,851.87) , Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: lb 1 1 Janua 5 2011 Pelican Ba Services Division Board Re jlar Sessioon �Y Y 9 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 Page 9 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - December 29, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance $ 1,943,987.30 $ 1,943,987.30• $1,943,987.30 $ - 121,600.00 103,360.00 - $ (103,360.00) 7,700.00 770.00 681.02 $ (88.98) 2,073,287.30 2,048,117.30 1,944,668.32 (103,448.98) Irrigation & Landscaping Engineering Fees $ 113,628.45 $ - $ - $ - Other Contractura) Services 2,354,658.85 - - $ - Total Irrigation & Landscaping Expenditures 2,468,287.30 - - Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer from Fund 109 General $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ - Transfer from Fund 320 Clam Bay 65,000.00 65,000.00 65,000.00 $ - Transfer from Fund 778 Street Lighting 83,600.00 83,600.00 83,600.00 $ - Tax Collector Fees (3,800.00) 950.00 - $ (950.00) Property Appraiser Fees (2,500.00) - - $ - Reserve for Contingencies (100.00) (100.00) - $ 100.00 Revenue Reserve (6,400.00) - - $ - Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditure: 395,000.00 408,650.00 407,800.00 A (850.00) Net Profit /(Loss) (0.00) 2,456,767.30 2,352,468.32 (104,298.98) Page 1 of 1 N O 0 0 A O O 0 0 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Ir6egilar lion, BZ1 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 0 Page 10 of 11 0 A Pelican Bay Services o Municipal Services Taxing Unit 0 Balance Sheet - December 29, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 382,652.22 Interest Receivable - Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets 382,652.22 Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts /Trade Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 382,652.22 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (522.50) $ (878.50) (423,553.80) 42,302.58 Page 1 of 1 (1,401.00) (381,251.22) $ (382,652.22) 5 2011 Pelican Bay Services Divisl�T1 Bd�rd lle ulession B 21° PQ I January y 9 5a - Monthly Financial Report, Month Ending December, 2010 b Page 11 of 11 b Li A O O Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - December 29, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Fund 111 Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: Clam Bay Restoration Engineering Fees Other Contractural Services Other Equipment Repairs Minor Operating Other Operating Supplies Total Clam Bay Restoration Clam Bay Ecosystem Engineering Fees Other Contractual Services Total Clam Bay Ecosystem Total Clam Bay Operating Expenditures Operating Profit /(Loss) $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.1f f ' '" - 35,000.00 29,750.00 29,618.28 $ 131.72 35,000.00 - - $ - 1,300.00 200.00 134.67 $ 65.33 506,519.17 465,169.17 464,972.12 (155,000.00) 197.05 $ 102,943.75 $ 2,800.00 $ - $ 2,800.00 137,390.00 7,100.00 5,324.40 $ 1,775.60 485.42 100.00 506.00 $ (406.00) 4,800.00 1,200.00 - $ 1,200.00 1,000.00 300.00 - $ 300.00 246,619.17 11,500.00 5,830.40 5,669.60 11,300.00 - - - 25,000.00 - - - 36,300.00 - - - 282,919.17 11,500.00 5,830.40 5,669.60 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): 223,600.00 453,669.17 459,141.72 (5,472.55) Transfer to Fund 322 (65,000.00) (65,000.00) (65,000.00) - Tax Collector Fees (1,100.00) (275.00) (592.37) 317.37 Property Appraiser Fees (700.00) (175.00) - (175.00) Revenue Reserve (1,800.00) - - Reserves (2 1/2 month for Operations) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) - Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expe (223,600.00) (220,450.00) (155,592.37) (64,857.63) Net Profit /(loss) $ (0.00) $ 233,219.17 $ 303,549.35 $ 59,385.08 Page 1 of 1 Florida Department of Environmental Protection South District Office P.O. Box 2549 Fort Myers, FL 33902 -2549 Environmental Resource Permit State -owned Submerged Lands Authorization - Granted 1611 B2191 Charlie Critit { KOVVI110f ° w fell hottkamp s It (wverncx Mirm A_ 111im Se< retaly U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Authorization - Separate Corps Authorization Required Permit No.: 11-0128463-005 Permit Issuance Date: December 17, 2010 Permit Construction Phase Expiration Date: December 17, 2015 CORRECTED LETTER Permittee/Authorized Entity: Collier County Board of County Commissioners c/o Pelican Bay Services Division Ll i 801 Laurel Oak Drive > Uj Naples, Florida, 34108, Collier _ �V LIJ V-, r- Cn e�'.�+1 i C) ti c Lij � U Clam Bay Restoration and Long Term Management �b c c J @ Authorized Agent: Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 Environmental Resource Permit State -owned Submerged Lands Authorization - Granted 1611 B2191 Charlie Critit { KOVVI110f ° w fell hottkamp s It (wverncx Mirm A_ 111im Se< retaly U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Authorization - Separate Corps Authorization Required Permit No.: 11-0128463-005 Permit Issuance Date: December 17, 2010 Permit Construction Phase Expiration Date: December 17, 2015 CORRECTED LETTER 1611 0 A Consolidated Environmental Resource Permit and State -owned Submerged Lands 8 Authorization Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit No: 11 -0128463 -005 AUTHORIZATIONS Clam Bay Restoration and Long Term Management Project Description The perrnittee is authorized to continue to perform maintenance activities in the Clam Bay system originally permitted by permit number 11 -0128463-001 -JC. The project is to continue to improve the hydrodynamics of the Clam Bay ecosystem by conducting activities specified by the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan (CBRMP) approved in conjunction with the previous permit. Proposed activities include: • Manual cleaning on an as needed basis of the interior flushing channels to maintain design depths; • Maintenance of a created network of small flushing channels within the mangrove forest; and • Periodic mangrove trimming along the canoe trail, berm, and boardwalks to maintain canoe and kayak access, pedestrian access and storm water areas within Clam Bay, a Class Il waters not approved for shellfish harvesting. Authorized activities are depicted on the attached exhibits. The project described above may be conducted only in accordance with the terms, conditions and attachments contained in this permit. The issuance of this permit does not infer, nor guarantee, nor imply that future permits or modifications will be granted by the Department. Please be advised that this permit does not constitute the issuance of a NPDES Stormwater Permit or acceptance of an NPDES Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. For additional information regarding this matter please contact the NPDES Stormwater Notices Center toll free at (866) 336 -6312 or Department personnel in Tallahassee at (850) 245 -7522. State -owned Submerged Lands Authorization The activity is located on submerged lands owned by the State of Florida. It therefore also requires authorization, from the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, pursuant to Article X, Section 11 of the Florida Constitution, and Sections 253.002 Florida Statutes (F.S.) and Chapter 258, F.S. Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11-0128463-005 Page l of 14 , . '4 161 B21- 1 b J t As staff to the Board of Trustees, the Department has determined that the activity 8 qualifies for a letter of Consent, as long as the work performed is located within the boundaries as described herein and is consistent with the terms and conditions herein. Federal Authorization A copy of this permit has been sent to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The USACE may require a separate permit. Failure to obtain any required federal permits prior to construction could subject you to enforcement action by that agency. Coastal Zone Management This permit also constitutes a finding of consistency with Florida's Coastal Zone Management Program, as required by Section 307 of the Coastal Management Act. Water Quality Certification This permit constitutes certification of compliance with state water quality standards under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341. Other Authorizations You are advised that authorizations or permits for this project may be required by other federal, state or local entities including but not limited to local governments and homeowner's associations. This permit does not relieve you from the requirements to obtain all other required permits or authorizations. In addition, you are advised that your project may require additional authorizations or permits from the municipality/county in which the project is located. Please be sure to contact the local county building and environmental department to obtain these required authorizations. PROJECT LOCATION The activities authorized by this Permit and state -owned submerged lands authorization are located in the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area, with on- site management offices located at 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 605, Naples, Florida 34108 (folio 00239480006, Class II Waters not approved for shellfish harvesting, Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, and Sections 4, 5, 8 & 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County. PERMIT STATE -OWNED SUBMERGED LANDS CONDITIONS The activities described herein must be conducted in accordance with: • The Specific Conditions • The General Conditions • The General Consent Conditions • The limits, conditions and locations of work shown in the attached drawings • The term limits of this authorization Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -005 Page 2 of 14 16114 You are advised to read and understand these conditions and drawings prior to commencing the authorized activities, and to ensure the work is conducted in conformance with all the terms, conditions, and drawings. If you are utilizing a contractor, the contractor also should read and understand these conditions and drawings prior to commencing the authorized activities. Failure to comply with these conditions, including any mitigation requirements, shall constitute grounds for revocation of the Permit and appropriate enforcement action by the Department. Operation of the facility is not authorized except when determined to be in conformance with all applicable rules and this permit /certification /authorization and state -owned submerged lands authorization, as specifically described above. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 1. At least 30 day prior to each construction event, the permittee shall identify a qualified biologist/ wetland scientist(s) familiar with the ecosystems of Florida, and submit their qualifications to the Department, to serve as the supervising scientist that oversees the biological components of this restoration project and will halt construction if he/she suspects that violations of the permit have occurred. 2. All required submittals such as certifications, monitoring reports, notifications, etc., shall be submitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, South District Office, P.O. Box 2549, Fort Myers, FL 33902 -2549. All submittals shall include the project name and indicated permit number when referring to this project. Note: In the event of an emergency, the Permittee should contact the Department by calling (804)320-0519. During normal business hours, the permittee should call (239)332 -6975. 3. Construction and operation of the project shall comply with applicable State Water Quality Standards, namely: a. Rule 62- 302.504, F.A.C. - Surface Waters: Minimum Criteria, General Criteria; and b. Rule 62- 342.530, F.A.C. - Table: Surface Water Quality Criteria - Class II Waters; 4. If at any time during construction of the permitted facility, unforeseen construction impacts to adjacent surface waters occur, or complications preventing compliance with the specifications of this permit arise, the Permittee shall immediately cease work and notify the Department's South District Office, SLERP Section, P.O. Box 2549, Fort Myers Florida 33902-2549,2,39--332-6975. The Permittee shall submit an alternate construction plan to the Department to allow construction to proceed without Permittee: Collier County BOCC -Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11- 012&163 -005 Page 3 of 14 BZ1 b J Q 1 s 1611, B 21 b J 1\ additional impact or non - compliance. Work shall not continue until the Department 8 has approved the modification in writing. Substantial changes from the permitted . activities may require formal review and modification of this permit. 5. Turbidity barriers shall be installed and maintained at all locations where the possibility of transferring suspended solids into surface waters exists due to the authorized work. Turbidity barriers shall remain in place at all locations and be properly maintained until construction is completed and soils are stabilized and vegetation has been established. All practices shall be in accordance with the guidelines and specifications described in the State of Florida Erosion and Sediment Control Designer and Rez►ienrr Manual, FDOT, FDEP (2007), available on the Department's website at htty: / /www dep state fl.us/ water /nonpoint /docs /erosion /erosion- insMtors- manual.pdf. Following the completion of construction, the Permittee shall be responsible for the removal of the turbidity barriers and shall correct any erosion or shoaling that has the potential to cause adverse impacts to wetlands or surface waters. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 6. All work is to be conducted by hand. Access to the flushing channels shall be accomplished by a small boat or on foot. Any blockage to the flushing channels shall be cleared by hand with material being broadcast out to the sides of the flushing channels. Any new channels to be dug shall be dug by hand and their location identified on a site plan of the area. At no time shall any blasting occur to create new flushing channels. 7. All mangrove trimming activities are to be supervised by the qualified biologist/ wetlands scientist(s) described in Specific Condition 1 of this permit. All trimming shall be done in accordance with Sections 403.9321403.9333, F.S. 8. All mangrove trimming shall be done on an as needed basis and shall be conducted by hand from the existing boardwalks or from a small boat only in areas that need to be trimmed in order to maintain access through the existing canoe trail or boardwalks. Mangrove trimming procedures must be followed pursuant to Sections 403.9327, F.S. No trimming of mangroves to create or enhance views within this ecosystem is permitted. No alteration, removal or defoliation is permitted. In the event that a tree has fallen and completely blocked the waterway, the tree and all limbs shall be removed to maintain navigational access. All trimmed debris shall be removed from the site and disposed of in uplands. 9. All exotic and invasive vegetation, including Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), punk tree (Melaleuca quinquenemia), Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia), vines, and other exotic and invasive vegetation listed on the latest Category 1 and Category 2 list of the Florida Exotic Pest Plan Council shall be removed from the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area. Maintenance shall be conducted in Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11 -0128463 -005 Page 4 of 14 1611 �g accordance with the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan amended on July 8, 1998 (CBRMP) to ensure that the area is maintained free from Category 1 and Category 2 exotic and invasive vegetation (as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council at the time of permit issuance). Maintenance in perpetuity shall also ensure that the area maintains the species and coverage of native, desirable vegetation specified in the permit. Coverage of exotic and invasive plant species shall not exceed 1 % of total cover between maintenance activities.. 10. Within seven (7) days of completion of the authorized activities within each work area (including the mangrove trimming, interior channel excavations, and removal of nuisance exotic vegetation) throughout the Clam Bay ecosystem, the contracted crews shall return to each work area and remove the trimmed branches and trees (dead trees approved for removal) greater than 1 inch in diameter to appropriate upland locations. The crews shall also side cast spoil material in such a manner as to avoid creation of a berm or pile. The spoil shall be leveled and distributed such that there is no impediment to sheet flow and no created uplands as a result of the project. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - MONITORING 11. Water Quality Monitoring: The permittee shall implement a long -term water quality monitoring program, to be conducted on a quarterly basis, track trends and patterns within the Clam Bay ecosystem. Monitoring stations established by the previous permit throughout Upper, Inner and Outer Clam Bay shall continue to be monitored and record the following parameters. All measurements and analyses for each parameter shall be made using approved methods providing a PQL (Practical Quantification Limit) below the water quality standard for the parameter as listed in Rule 62 -302, F.A.C.: Parameter (a) Dissolved Oxygen -mg /1 (2 samples intervals through a 24 hour period) (b) TKN, NO2-N, NO3 -N, (c) Specific Conductivity (d) Chlorophyll (e) Phosphorus (f) Pheophytin (g) pH (h) Suspended solids taken diel per quarter samples 4 hour Permittee: Collier County BOCC - PeIican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11 -0128463 -005 Page 5 of 14 2 1 b J 1611 B21 Reporting All data shall be submitted with the documents containing the following information: (1) permit application number; (2) dates of sampling; and analysis; (3) a statement describing the methods used in collection, handling, storage and analysis of the samples; (4) a map indicating the sampling locations; (5) a statement by the individual responsible for implementation of the sampling program concerning the authenticity, precision, limits of detection anq accuracy of the data; and (6) documentation that the laboratory performing the sampling and analyses has an approved quality assurance plan on file with DEP. Monitoring reports shall also include the following information for each sample that is taken: (a) time of day samples taken; (b) water temperature ( °C); (c) salinity (ppt); (d) depth of water body; (e) depth of sample; (f) antecedent weather conditions; (g) tidal stage and direction of flow; (h) wind direction and velocity; (i) sedimentation; 0) rainfall; (k) other influential flows, such as groundwater and storm water flows; (1) identification of the sample location which corresponds to the sample location number shown on the sampling location map; (m) the appropriate Rule 62 -302, F.A.C., standard for the parameter being measured; and (n) the detection limit for the parameter being measured. In addition to the above, all data shall be reported in a table (or tables) which clearly list(s) the results of parameters measured at each location, and the information described above. 12. Based on the data previously collected and on going water quality monitoring analyzed in conjunction with the permitted activities, should the data continue to show a correlation between elevated nutrient levels in the Clam Bay ecosystem and the golf course and development fertilization schedule, a remediation plan must be prepared to address this issue within 6 months of submittal of the second monitoring report. This Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -005 Page 6 of 14 b 0 S V plan should include detailed descriptions of the problem and the actions proposed to address the problem, maps, activities to be conducted and the methods used to conduct those activities. The intent of the plan is to reduce discharge of nutrients into the system and avoid the elevated nutrient levels, through modified management techniques, best management practices, etc. In the event that the continued monitoring reveals other water quality concerns, or impacts to the habitat and /or productivity of the preserve area, the Permittee shall submit a plan of remediation along with the required monitoring reports. 13. Biological Monitoring a. The permittee shall provide flight dated aerial photography of the Clam Bay ecosystem annually. The aerials shall be taken during July of each year and submitted to the Department annually for the duration of the permit. The aerials must be color, vertical aerial photographs, controlled and rectified at a scale appropriate for post - production digitalization and a scale sufficient to delineate differing habitat zones and dominant species within each zone. The flight line shall include all of the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area and the nearshore zone to at least 400 feet offshore (from the mean high water line); b. As concurrently as possible with taking the aerial photographs, ground- truthing activities shall be conducted in areas of special concern within the Clam Bay Ecosystem, including areas of widespread dead and dying mangroves, Inner, Upper and Outer Clam Bays, the areas receiving water discharges from the uplands, and areas contiguous with the main pass. The ground- truthing activities shall include the use of the latest accepted scientific methods to survey the types of habitats of concern within the Clam Bay ecosystem, including mangrove and seagrass dominated habitats. These surveys shall include a listing of species present, percent coverage species, size ranges and averages, and overall health/ biological trends for each fixed quadrat, transect, or plot studied. These surveys and any associated drawings/ mapping shall be conducted prior to conducting the maintenance activities once each year (in July) thereafter for the life of the permit. c. Annual biological monitoring reports (BMRs) shall be submitted beginning one year following permit issuance. The first annual BMR shall contain a summary of the result of the monitoring and restoration actions from the previous permit as well as the time -zero conditions of the Clam Bay ecosystem existing prior to commencement of the permitted activities and a progress report of the activities conducted since permit issuance. Thereafter, each BMR shall contain a progress report of the activities completed since the previous BMR and all data collected pursuant to a. and b. above. Each BMR shall include graphical representation and overlays of the collected data on computer generated drawings of the aerials, and ground -level color panoramic photos of each study area at fixed stations. The annual BMRs shall also contain an analysis of the collected data and make Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11 -012846..3 -005 Page 7 of 14 b lYJ A J Q A U 1611 821 e A GT conclusions and recommendations concerning the impacts to permitted activities have had on the Clam Bay ecosystem based on the analysis of the data collected, including the biological monitoring data and the water quality data monitoring data as well as any tidal or hydrological information collected as part of the permitted activities. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - MANATEE AND MARINE TURTLE CONDITIONS 14. All personnel associated with the project shall be instructed about the presence of marine turtles, manatees and manatee speed zones, and the need to avoid collisions with or injury to marine turtles and manatees. The permittee shall advise all construction personnel that there are civil and criminal penalties for harming, harassing, or killing marine turtles or manatees which are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Florida Manatee Sanctuary Act. 15. All vessels associated with the construction project shall operate at "Idle Speed/ No Wake' at all times while in the immediate area and while in water where the draft of the vessel provides less than a four -foot clearance from the bottom. All vessels will follow routes of deep water whenever possible. 16. Siltation or turbidity barriers shall be made of material in which marine turtles or manatees cannot become entangled, shall be properly secured, and shall be regularly monitored to avoid marine turtle or manatee entanglement or entrapment. Barriers must not impede marine turtle or manatee movement. 17. All on -site project personnel are responsible for observing water - related activities for the presence of marine turtles or manatees. All in -water operations, including vessels, must be shutdown if a marine turtle(s) or manatee(s) comes within 50 feet of the operation. Activities will not resume until the marine turtle(s) or manatee(s) has moved beyond the 50 -foot radius of the project operation, or until 30 minutes elapses if the marine turtle(s) or manatee(s) has not reappeared within 50 feet of the operation. Animals must not be herded away or harassed into leaving. 18. Any collision with or injury to a marine turtle or manatee shall be reported immediately to the FWC Hotline at 14888404 -FWCC. Collision and /or injury should also be reported to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Jacksonville (1 -904- 731 -3336) for north Florida or Vero Beach (1- 772 - 562 -3909) for south Florida. 19. Temporary signs concerning marine turtles and manatees shall be posted prior to and during all in -water project activities. All signs are to be removed by the pennittee upon completion of the project. Awareness signs that have already been approved for this use by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) must be Permittee: Collier County BOCC -Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -005 Page 8 of 14 1611 used (see MyFWC.com). One sign which reads Caution: Boaters must be posted. A second sign measuring at least 81/2" by 11" explaining the requirements for "Idle Speed / No Wake" and the shut -down of in -water operations must be posted in a location prominently visible to all personnel engaged in water - related activities. GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. All activities authorized by this permit shall be implemented as set forth in the plans, specifications and performance criteria as approved by this permit. Any deviation from the permitted activity and the conditions for undertaking that activity shall constitute a violation of this permit and a violation of Part IV of Chapter 373, (F.S.). 2. This permit or a copy thereof, complete with all conditions, attachments, exhibits, and modifications shall be kept at the work site of the permitted activity. The complete permit shall be available for review at the work site upon request by the Department staff. The permittee shall require the contractor to review the complete permit prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this permit. 3. Activities approved by this permit shall be conducted in a manner which does not cause violations of state water quality standards. The permittee shall implement best management practices for erosion and pollution control to prevent violations of state water quality standards. Temporary erosion control shall be implemented prior to and during construction and permanent control measures shall be completed within seven (7) days of any construction activity. Turbidity barriers shall be installed and maintained at all locations where the possibility of transferring suspended solids into the receiving water -body exists due to the permitted work. Turbidity barriers shall remain in place at all locations until construction is completed and soils are stabilized and vegetation has been established. All practices shall be in accordance with the guidelines and specifications described in Chapter Six of the Florida Land Development Manual; A Guide to Sound Land and Water Management (Department of Environmental Regulation, 1988), unless a project- specific erosion and sediment control plan is approved as part of the permit. Thereafter, the permittee shall be responsible for the removal of the barriers. The permittee shall correct any erosion or shoaling that causes adverse impacts to the water resources. 4. The permittee shall notify the Department of the anticipated construction start date within thirty (30) days of the date that this permit is issued. At least forty -eight (48) hours prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this permit, the permittee shall submit to the Department an "Environmental Resource Permit Construction Commencement" notice (Form No. 62- 343.900(3), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)) indicating the actual start date and expected completion date. Permittee: Collier County BOCC -Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -005 Page 9 of 14 821a 4 a P 0 O 1611 B21 8-6 J 'rQ ry 5. When the duration of construction will exceed one year, the permittee shall S submit construction status reports to the Department on an annual basis utilizing an "Annual Status Report Form" (Form No. 62- 343.900(4), F.A.C.). Status Report Forms shall be submitted the following June of each year. 6. Within thirty (30) days after completion of construction of the permitted activity, the permittee shall submit a written statement of completion and certification by a registered professional engineer or other appropriate individual as authorized by law utilizing the supplied "Environmental Resource Permit As -Built Certification by a Registered Professional" (Form No. 62- 343.900(5), F.A.C.). The Statement of completion and certification shall be based on on -site observation of construction or review of as- built drawings for the purpose of determining if the work was completed in compliance with permitted plans and specifications. This submittal shall serve to notify the Department that the system is ready for inspection. Additionally, if deviations from the approved drawings are discovered during the certification process, the certification must be accompanied by a copy of the approved permit drawings with deviations note. Both the original and revised specifications must be clearly shown. The plans must be clearly labeled as "as- built" or "record" drawing. All surveyed dimensions and elevations shall be certified by a registered surveyor. 7. The operation phase of this permit shall not become effective, until the permittee has complied with the requirements of condition number six (6) above, has submitted a "Request for Transfer of Environmental Resource Permit Construction Phase to Operation Phase" (Form 62- 343.900(7), F.A.C.); the Department determines the system to be in compliance with the permitted plans and specifications; and the entity approved by the Department in accordance with Sections 9.0 and 10.0 of the Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Permit Applications Within the South Florida Water Management District— August 1995, accepts responsibility for operation and maintenance of the system. The permit shall not be transferred to such approved operation and maintenance entity until the operation phase of the permit becomes effective. Following inspection and approval of the permitted system by the Department, the permittee shall initiate transfer of permit to the approved responsible operation entity if different from the permittee. Until the permit is transferred pursuant to Rule 62- 343110(1) (d), F.A.C., the permittee shall be liable for compliance with the terms of the permit. S. Each phase or independent portion of the permitted system must be completed in accordance with the permitted plans and permit conditions prior to the initiation of the permitted use of site infrastructure located within the area served by that portion or phase of the system. Each phase or independent portion of the system must be completed in accordance with the permitted plans and permit conditions prior to transfer of responsibility for operation and maintenance of the phase or portion of the system to a local government or other responsible entity. Permittee: Collier County BOCC -Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -005 Page 10 of 14 16114 6 J 1J1 1Yv P J Q CT pN O 9. For those systems that will be operated or maintained by an entity that will N require an easement or deed restriction in order to enable that entity to operate or maintain the system in conformance with this permit, such easement or deed restriction must be recorded in the public records and submitted to the Department along with any other final operation and maintenance documents required by Sections 9.0 and 10.0 of the Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Permit Applications Within the South Florida Water Management District— August 1995, prior to lot or unit sales or prior to lot or unit sales or prior to the completion of the system, whichever occurs first. Other documents concerning the establishment and authority of the operation entity must be filed with the Secretary of State where appropriate. For those systems which are proposed to be maintained by the county or municipal entities, final operation and maintenance documents must be received by the Department when maintenance and operation of the system is accepted by the local government entity. Failure to submit the appropriate final documents will result in the permittee remaining liable for carrying out maintenance and operation of the permitted system and any other permit conditions. 10. Should any other regulatory agency require changes to the permitted system, the permittee shall notify the Department in writing of the changes prior to implementation so that a determination can be made whether a permit modification is required. 11. This permit does not eliminate the necessity to obtain any required federal, state, local and special district authorizations prior to the start of any activity approved by this permit. This permit does not convey to the permittee or create in the permittee any property right, or any interest in real property, nor does it authorize any entrance upon or activities on property which is not owned or controlled by the permittee, or convey any rights or privileges other than those specified in the permit and Chapter 40E4 or Chapter 40E -40, F.A.C. 12. The permittee is hereby advised that Section 253.77, F.S. states that a person may not commence any excavation, construction, or other activity involving the use of sovereign or other lands of the state, the title to which is vested in the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund without obtaining the required lease, license, easement, or other form of consent authorizing the proposed use. Therefore, the permittee is responsible for obtaining any necessary authorization from the Board of Trustees prior to commencing activity on sovereignty lands or other state owned lands. 13. The permittee is advised that the rules of the South Florida Water Management District require the permittee to obtain a water use permit from the South Florida Water management District prior to construction dewatering, unless the work qualifies for a general permit pursuant to Rule 40E- 20.302(4), F.A.C., also known as the "No Notice" rule. Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11 -0128463 -005 Page 11 of 14 1611 14. The permittee shall hold and save the Department harmless from any and all damages, claims or liabilities which may arise by reason of the construction, alteration, operation, maintenance, removal, abandonment or use of any system authorized by this permit. 15. Any delineation of the extent of a wetland or other surface water submitted as part of the permit application, including plans or other supporting documentation, shall not be considered binding unless a specific condition of this permit or a formal determination under Section 373.421(2). F.S., provides otherwise. 16. The permittee shall notify the Department in writing within 30 days of any sale, conveyance, or other transfer of ownership or control of a permitted system or the real property on which the permitted system is located. All transfers of ownership or transfers of a permit are subject to the requirements of Rule 62- 343.130, F.A.C. The permittee transferring the permit shall remain liable for corrective actions that may be required as a result of any violations prior to the sale, conveyance or other transfer of the system. 17, Upon reasonable notice to the permittee, Department authorized staff with proper identification shall have permission to enter, inspect, sample and test the system to insure conformity with the plans and specifications approved by the permit. 18. If historical or archaeological artifacts are discovered at any time on the project site, the permittee shall immediately notify the appropriate Department office. The permittee shall immediately notify the Department in writing of and previously submitted information that is later discovered to be inaccurate. GENERAL CONSENT CONDITIONS Chapter 18- 21.004(7), F.A.C., General Conditions for Authorizations: Authorizations are valid only for the specified activity or use. Any unauthorized deviation from the specified activity or use and the conditions for undertaking that activity or use shall constitute a violation. Violation of the authorization shall result in suspension or revocation of the grantee's use of the sovereignty submerged land unless cured to the satisfaction of the Board. 2. Authorizations convey no title to sovereignty submerged land or water column, nor do they constitute recognition or acknowledgment of any other person's title to such land or water. Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11 -0128463-005 Page '12 of 14 621 7 b J (z�T: N 8 1611 3. Authorizations may be modified, suspended or revoked in accordance with their terms or the remedies provided in Sections 253.04 and 258.46, F.S., or Chapter 18- 14, F.A.C. 4. Structures or activities shall be constructed and used to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to sovereignty submerged lands and resources. 5. Construction, use, or operation of the structure or activity shall not adversely affect any species which is endangered, threatened or of special concern, as listed in Rules 68A-27.00,3,68A-27.004, and 68A- 27.005, F.A.C. 6. Structures or activities shall not unreasonably interfere with riparian rights. When a court of competent jurisdiction determines that riparian rights have been unlawfully affected, the structure or activity shall be modified in accordance with the court's decision. 7. Structures or activities shall not create a navigational hazard. 8. Structures shall be maintained in a functional condition and shall be repaired or removed if they become dilapidated to such an extent that they are no longer functional. This shall not be construed to prohibit the repair or replacement subject to the provisions of Rule 18- 21.005, F.A.C., within one year, of a structure damaged in a discrete event such as a storm, flood, accident, or fire. 9. Structures or activities shall be constructed, operated, and maintained solely for water dependent purposes, or for non -water dependent activities authorized under paragraph 18- 21.004(1)(g), F.A.C., or any other applicable law. NOTICE OF RIGHTS This Permit is hereby final unless a sufficient petition for an administrative hearing is timely filed under Sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes (F.S.) as provided below. The procedures for petitioning for a hearing are set forth below. Mediation is not available. A person whose substantial interests are affected by the Department's action may petition for an administrative proceeding (hearing) under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S. The petition must contain the information set forth below and must be filed (received by the clerk) in the Office of General Counsel of the Department at 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3000. Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -005 Page 13 of 14 J tT0 W 1611 B21 6 0 Because the administrative hearing process is designed to re- determine final agency 8 action on the application, the filing of a petition for an administrative hearing may result in a modification of the permit or even a denial of the application. If a sufficient petition for an administrative hearing or request for an extension of time to file a petition is timely filed, this permit automatically becomes only proposed agency action on the application, subject to the result of the administrative review process. Accordingly, the applicant is advised not to commence construction or other activities under this permit until the deadlines noted below for filing a petition for an administrative hearing, or request for an extension of time has expired. Under Rule 62- 110.106(4), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), a person whose substantial interests are affected by the Department's action may also request an extension of time to file a petition for an administrative hearing. The Department may, for good cause shown, grant the request for an extension of time. Requests for extension of time must be filed with the Office of General Counsel of the Department at 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3000, before the applicable deadline. A timely request for extension of time shall toll the running of the time period for filing a petition until the request is acted upon. If a request is filed late, the Department may still grant it upon a motion by the requesting party showing that the failure to file a request for an extension of time before the deadline was the result of excusable neglect. In the event that a timely and sufficient petition for an administrative hearing is filed, other persons whose substantial interests will be affected by the outcome of the administrative process have the right to petition to intervene in the proceeding. Any intervention will be only at the discretion of the presiding officer upon the filing of a motion in compliance with Rule 28- 106.205, F.A.C. In accordance with Rule 62- 110.106(3) F.A.C., petitions for an administrative hearing by the applicant must be filed within 14 days of receipt of this written notice. Petitions filed by any persons other than the applicant, and other than those entitled to written notice under section 120.60(3) of the Florida Statutes must be filed within 14 days of publication of the notice or within 14 days of receipt of the written notice, whichever occurs first. Under section 120.60(3) of the Florida Statutes, however, any person who has asked the Department for notice of agency action may file a petition within 14 days of receipt of such notice, regardless of the date of publication. The petitioner shall mail a copy of the petition to the applicant at the address indicated above at the time of filing. The failure of any person to file a petition for an administrative hearing within the appropriate time period shall constitute a waiver of Permittee: Collier County BOCC -Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11 -0128463 -005 Page 14 of 14 161B2 J 'TQ W that person's right to request an administrative determination (hearing) under sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes. A petition that disputes the material facts on which the Department's action is based must contain the following information: (a) The name and address of each agency affected and each agency's file or identification number, if known; (b) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; the name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner's representative, if any, which shall be the address for service purposes during the course of the proceeding; • - and an explanation of how the petitioner's substantial interests are or will be affected by the agency determination; (c) A statement of when and how the petitioner received notice of the agency decision; (d) A statement of all disputed issues of material fact. If there are none, the petition must so indicate; (e) A concise statement of the ultimate facts alleged, including the specific facts that the petitioner contends warrant reversal or modification of the agency's proposed action; and (f) A statement of the specific rules or statutes that the petitioner contends require reversal or modification of the agency's proposed action; (g) A statement of the relief sought by the petitioner, stating precisely the action that the petitioner wishes the agency to take with respect to the agency's proposed action. A petition that does not dispute the material facts on which the Department's action is based shall state that no such facts are in dispute and otherwise shall contain the same information as set forth above, as required by Rule 28- 106.301, F.A.C. Under Sections 120.569(2)(c) and (d), F.S., a petition for administrative hearing must be dismissed by the agency if the petition does not substantially comply with the above requirements or is untimely filed. This action is final and effective on the d.ate filed with the Clerk of the Department unless a petition is filed in accordance with the above. Upon the timely filing of a petition this order will not be effective until further order of the Department. This permit constitutes an order of the Department. The applicant has the right to seek judicial review of the order under Section 120.68, F.S., by the filing of a notice of appeal under Rule 9.110 of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure with the Clerk of the Department in the Office of General Counsel, 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399 -3000; and by filing a copy of the notice of appeal accompanied by the applicable filing fees with the appropriate district court of appeal. The notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days from the date when the final order is Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11-0128463-005 Page 15 of 14 1611 filed with the Clerk of the Department. The applicant, or any party within the meaning of Section 373.114(1)(a), F.S., may also seek appellate review of this order before the Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission under Section 373.114(1), F.S. Requests for review before the Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission and served on the Department within 20 days from the date when the final order is filed with the Clerk of the Department. Executed in Lee County, Florida. JMI /ap Attachments: Project Drawings and Design Specs., 10 pages Commencement notice /62- 343.900(3) Annual status report /62- 343.900(4) As -built certification /62- 343.900(5) Transfer construction to operation phase/ 62- 343.900(7) Copies furnished to: DEP, Office of General Counsel U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Log ii 12534 FWC, Imperiled Species Management Section Collier County Property Appraiser Turrell, Hall k Associates, Inc. File STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION -1-'-7 J Jon A Iglehart District Director South District Office CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that this permit and authorization to use sovereignty submerged lands, including all copies, were mailed before the close of business on 5'ft&_em :) J, tL c' i L) - to the above listed persons. FILING AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT FILED, on this date, under 120.52(7) of the Florida Statutes, with the designated Department Clerk, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged. AAk1:CC_ 19 —Clerk Date — - -- Permittee: Collier County BOCC -Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2015 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -005 Page 16 of 14 fa 8 0 Florida Department of Environmental Protection South Oisirict Office P.O. Box 2549 Furl Myers. FL 33902 -2549 Permittee/Authorized Entity: Collier County Board of County Commissioners c/o Pelican Bay Services Division 801 Laurel Oak Drive Naples, Florida, :14108, Collier 161 1 B21 P 1 N it fi kolikaml, %i'l t (1,41 y RECEIVED DEC 2 0 2M MiJW MY 3ffma Wax Clam Bay Restoration and Long Term Management Authorized Agent: Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 Environmental Resource Permit State -owned Submerged Lands Authorization - Granted U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Authorization - Separate Carps Authorization Required Permit No.: 11- 0128463 -005 Permit Issuance Date: December 17, 2010 Permit Construction Phase Expiration Date: December 17, 2015 Pagel of 32 16114214 P N N O O Consolidated Environmental Resource Permit and State -owned Submerged Lands 8 Authorization Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit No: 11 -0128463 -005 AUTHORIZATIONS Clam Bay Restoration and Long Term Management Project Description The permittee is authorized to continue to perform maintenance activities in the Clam Bay system originally permitted by permit number 11- 0128463- 001 -JC. The project is to continue to improve the hydrodynamics of the Clam Bay ecosystem by conducting activities specified by the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan (CBRMP) approved in conjunction with the previous permit. Proposed activities include: • Manual cleaning on an as needed basis of the interior flushing channels to maintain design depths; • Maintenance of a created network of small flushing channels within the mangrove forest; and • Periodic mangrove trimming along the canoe trail, berm, and boardwalks to maintain canoe and kayak access, pedestrian access and storm water areas within Clam Bay, a Class II waters not approved for shellfish harvesting. Authorized activities are depicted on the attached exhibits. The project described above may be conducted only in accordance with the terms, conditions and attachments contained in this permit. The issuance of this permit does not infer, nor guarantee, nor imply that future permits or modifications will be, granted by the Department. Please be advised that this permit hoes not constitute the issuance of a NPDES Stormwater Permit or acceptance of an NPDES Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. For additional information regarding this matter please contact the NPDES Stormwater Notices Center toll free at (866) 336 -6312 or Department personnel in Tallahassee at (850) 245 -7522. State -owned Submereed Lands Authorization The activity is located on submerged lands owned by the State of Florida. It therefore also requires authorization, from the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, pursuant to Article X, Section 11 of the Florida Constitution, and Sections 253.002 Florida Statutes (F.S.) and Chapter 258, F.S. Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: December 17, 2010 Permit No: 1 1 -01 28463 -005 Page 1 of 14 Page 2 of 32 1611 BZ1 J 4 NN O J t As staff to the Board of Trustees, the Department has determined that the activity 8 qualifies for a Letter of Consent, as long as the work performed is located within the boundaries as described herein and is consistent with the terms and conditions herein. Federal Authorization A copy of this permit has been sent to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The USACE may require a separate permit. Failure to obtain any required federal ,permits prior to construction could subject you to enforcement action by that agency. Coastal Zone Management This permit also constitutes a finding of consistency with Florida's Coastal Zone Management Program, as required by Section 307 of the Coastal Management Act. Water Quality Certification This permit constitutes certification of compliance with state water quality standards under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341, Other Authorizations You are advised that authorizations or permits for this project may be required by other federal, state or local entities including but not limited to local governments and homeowner's associations. This permit does not relieve you from the requirements to obtain all other required permits or authorizations. In addition, you are advised that your project may require additional authorizations or permits from the municipality/ county in which the project is located. Please be sure to contact the local county building and environmental department to obtain these required authorizations. PROJECT LOCATION The activities authorized by this Permit and state -owned submerged lands authorization are located in the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area, with on- site management offices located at 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 605, Naples, Florida 34108 (folio 00239480006, Class 11 Waters not approved for shellfish harvesting, Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 Fast, and Sections 4, 5, 8 & 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County. PERMIT STATE -OWNED SUBMERGED LANDS CONDITIONS The activities described herein must be conducted in accordance with: • The Specific Conditions • The General Conditions • The General Consent Conditions • The limits, conditions and locations of work shown in the attached drawings • The term limits of this authorization Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay S*rvices Division Permit l,xpiration: Decemlxr 17, 2010 Permit No: 11- 0128,463 -005 Page 2 of 14 Page 3 of 32 1611 B,21 8 Q NN AO O You are advised to read and understand these conditions and drawings prior to commencing the authorized activities, and to ensure the work is conducted in conformance with all the terms, conditions, and drawings. If y,ou are utilizing a contractor, the contractor also should read and understand these conditions and drawings prior to commencing the authorized activities. Failure to comply with these conditions, including any mitigation requirements, shall constitute grounds for revocation of the Permit and appropriate enforcement action by the Department. Operation of the facility is not authorized except when determined to be in conformance with all applicable rules and this permit /certification /authorization and state - owned submerged lands authorization, as specifically described above. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 1. At least 30 day prior to each construction event, the permittee shall identify a qualified biologist/ wetland scientist(s) familiar with the ecosystems of Florida, and submit their qualifications to the Department, to serve as the supervising scientist that oversees the biological components of this restoration project and will halt construction if he /she suspects that violations of the permit have occurred. 2. All required submittals such as certifications, monitoring reports, notifications, etc., shall be submitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, South District Office, P.O. Box 2549, Fort Myers, FL 33902 -2549. All submittals shall include the project name and indicated permit number when referring to this project. Note: In the event of an emergency, the Permittee should contact the Department by calling (800)320 -0519. During normal business hours, the Permittee should call (239)332 -6975. 3. Construction and operation of the project shall comply with applicable State Water Quality Standards, namely: a. Rule 62-3025A F.A.C. - Surface Waters: Minimum Criteria, General Criteria; and b. Rule 62- 302.530, F.A.C. - Table: Surface Water Quality Criteria - Class II Waters; 4. If at anv time during construction of the permitted facility, unforeseen construction impacts to adjacent surface waters occur, or complications preventing compliance with the specifications of this permit arise, the Permittee shall immediately cease work and notify the Department's South District Office, SLERP Section, P.O. Box 2549, Fort Myers Florida 33902 -2549, 239 - 332 -6975. The Permittee shall submit an alternate construction plan to the Department to allow construction to proceed without Permittee: Collier County BOU - Pelican Bay S*rvic:es Division Permit Expiration: Decernivr 17, 2010 Permit No: 1 1- 01 28463 -005 Page 3 of 14 Page 4 of 32 1611 8 21 8 9 O O additional impact or non-compliance, Work shall not continue until the Department has approved the modification in writing. Substantial changes from the permitted activities may require formal review and modification of this permit. 5. Turbidity barriers shall be installed and maintained at all locations he , the possibility of transferring suspended solids into surface waters exists due -t authorized work. Turbidity barriers shall remain in place at all locations a properly maintained until construction is completed and soils are stabilized and vegetation has been established. All practices shall be in accordance with the guidelines and specifications described in the State of Florida Erosion and Sediwnt Control Designer 1111d ReNeiver Manual, FDOT, FDEP (2007), available on the Department's website at httD:/ /www.det).state.fl.us/ water/ nonpoint/ docs/erosionlerosion-inspectors- manuALVdf. Following the completion of construction, the Permittee shall be responsible for the removal of the turbidity barriers and shall correct any erosion or shoaling that has the potential to cause adverse impacts to wetlands or surface waters SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 6. All work is to be conducted by hand. Access to the flushing channels shall be accomplished by a small boat or on foot. Any blockage to the flushing channels shall be cleared by hand with material being broadcast out to the sides of the flushing channels. Any new channels to be dug shall be dug by hand and their location identified on a site plan of the area. At no time shall any blasting occur to create new flushing channels. 7. All mangrove trimming activities are to be supervised by the qualified biologist/ wetlands scientist(s) described in Specific Condition I of this permit. All trimming shall be done in accordance with Sections 403,9321-403.9333, F.S. 8. All mangrove trimming shall be done on an as needed basis and shall be conducted by hand from the existing boardwalks or from a small boat only in areas that need to be trimmed in order to maintain access through tilt, existing canoe trail or boardwalks. Mangrove trimming procedures must be followed pursuant to Sections 403.9327,F.S. No trimming of mangroves to create or enhance views within this ecosystem is permitted. No alteration, removal or defoliation is permitted. In the event that a tree has fallen and completely blocked the waterway, the tree and all limbs shall be removed to maintain navigational access. All trimmed debris shall be removed from the site and disposed of in uplands. 9. All exotic and invasive vegetation, including Brazilian pepper (Sciiinus terebinthifolius), punk tree (Mel ale aca quinquenemia), Australian pine (Casuaritla equisetifolia), vines, and other exotic and invasive vegetation listed on the latest Category 1 and Category 2 list of the Florida Exotic Pest Plan Council shall be removed from the Clam Bav Natural Resource Protection Area. Maintenance shall be conducted in Perniittee: Collier County B()CC- Pelican flay '*rvices Division Permit F\piration- Decenil:uer 17, 2010 Permit No: 11-01284630)5 Page 4 of 14 Page 5 of 32 1611.621a accordance with the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan amended on July 8, 1998 (CBRMP) to ensure that the area is maintained free from Category 1 and Category 2 exotic and invasive vegetation (as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council at the time of permit issuance). Maintenance in perpetuity shall also ensure that the area maintains the species and coverage of native, desirable vegetation specified in the permit. Coverage of exotic and invasive plant species shall not exceed 1 % of total cover between maintenance activities. 10. Within seven (7) days of completion of the authorized activities within each work area (including the mangrove trimming, interior channel excavations, and removal of nuisance exotic vegetation) throughout the Clam Bav ecosystem, the contracted crews shall return to each work area and remove the trimmed branches and trees (dead trees approved for removal) greater than 1 inch in diameter to appropriate upland locations. The crews shall also side cast spoil material in such a manner as to avoid creation of a berm or pile. The spoil shall be leveled and distributed such that there is no impediment to sheet flow and no created uplands as a result of the project. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - MONITORING 11. Water Quality Monitoring: The permittee shall implement a long -term water quality monitoring program, to be conducted on a quarterly basis, track trends and patterns within the Clam Bay ecosystem. Monitoring stations established by the previous permit throughout Upper, Inner and Outer Clam Bay shall continue to be monitored and record the following parameters. All measurements and analyses for each parameter shall be made using approved methods providing a PQL (Practical Quantification Limit) below the water quality standard for the parameter as listed in Rule 62 -302, F.A.C.: Parameter (a) Dissolved Oxygen-mg/1 (2 samples intervals through a 24 hour period) (b) TKN, NO2 -N, NOi -N, (c) Specific Conductivity (d) Chlorophyll (e) Phosphorus (f) Pheophytin (g) pH (h) Suspended solids taken diet per quarter samples 4 hour Permittee: Collier County 1500 C - Pelican Bay Services Division Permit Expiration: C.kscemlx r 17, 2010 Permit No: 11- 0128463-005 Page 5 of 14 Page 6 of 32 It J 4 N N O H 1611 Reporting All data shall be submitted with the documents containing the following information: (1) permit application number; (2) dates of sampling; and analysis; (3) a statement describing the methods used in collection, handling, storage and analysis of the samples; (4) a map indicating the sampling locations; (5) a statement by the individual responsible for implementation of the sampling program concerning the authenticity, precision, limits of detection and accuracy of the data; and (6) documentation that the laboratory performing the sampling and analyses has an approved quality assurance plan on file with DEP. Monitoring reports shall also include the following information for each sample that is taken: (a) time of day samples taken; (b) water temperature (OC); (c) salinity (ppt); (d) depth of water body; (e) depth of sample; (0 antecedent weather conditions; (g) tidal stage and direction of flow; (h) wind direction and velocity!; W sedimentation; (1) rainfall; (k) other influential flows, such as groundwater and storm water flows; (1) identification of the sample location which corresponds to the sample location number shown on the sampling location rnap, (m) the appropriate Rule 62-302, F.A.C., standard for the parameter being measured; and (11) the detection limit for the parameter being measured. In addition to the above, all data shall be reported in a table (()r tables) which clearly list(s) the results of parameters measured at each location, and the information described above. 12. Based on the data previously collected and on going water quality monitoring analyzed in conjunction with the permitted activities, should the data continue to show a Correlation between elevated nutrient levels in the Clam Bay ecosystem and the golf course and development fertilization schedule, a remediation plan must be prepared to address this issue within 6 months of submittal of the second monitoring report. This Pertnittm Collier County B()C( Pelican Bay Sw"'ft es Division Permit F\piratiow DecenAm 17, 2010 Permit No: 11-0128463-005 Page 6 of 14 Page 7 of 32 B21 NN O i61 plan should include detailed descriptions of the problem and the actions proposed to address the problem, maps, activities to be conducted and the methods used to conduct those activities. The intent of the plan is to reduce discharge of nutrients into the system and avoid the elevated nutrient levels, through modified management techniques, best management practices, etc. In the event that the continued monitoring reveals other water duality concerns, or impacts to the habitat anti /or productivity of the preserve area, the Permittee shall submit a plan of remediatio 1 along with the required monitoring reports. 13. Biological Monitoring a. The permittee shall provide flight dated aerial photography of the Clam Bav ecosystem annually. The aerials shall be taken during July of each vear and submitted to the Department annually for the duration of the permit. The aerials must be color, vertical aerial photographs, controlled and rectified at a scale appropriate for post - production digitalization and a scale sufficient to delineate differing habitat zones and dominant species within each zone. Tile flight line shall include all of the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area and the nearshore zone to at least 4W feet offshore (from the mean high water line); b. As concurrently as possible with taking the aerial photographs, ground- truthing activities shall be conducted in areas of special concern within the Clam Bay Ecosystem, including areas of widespread dead and dying mangroves, Inner, Upper and Muter Clam Bays, the areas receiving ,vater discharges from the uplands, and areas contiguous with the main pass. The (;round- truthing activities shall include the use of the latest accepted scientific methods to survey the types of habitats of concern within the Clam Bay ecosystem, including mangrove and seagrass dominated habitats. These surveys shall include a listing of species present, percent coverage species, size ranges and averages, and overall health/ biological trends for each fixed quadrat, transect, or plot studied. These surveys and any associated drawings /mapping shall be conducted prior to conducting the maintenance activities once each Year (in July) thereafter for the life of the permit. c. Annual biological monitoring reports (BMRs) shall be submitted beginning one vear following permit issuanre. Fhe first annual BMR shall contain a summary of the result of the monitoring and restoration actions from the previous permit as well as the time -zero conditions of the Clain Bav ecosystem existing prior to commencement of the permitted activities and a progress report of the activities conducted since permit issuance. Thereafter, each BMR shall contain a progress report of the activities completed since the previous BMR and all data collected pursuant to a. and b. above. Each BMR shall include graphical representation and overlays of the collected data on computer generated drawings of the aerials, and ground -level color panoramic photos of each study area at fixed stations. The annual BMRs shall also contain an analvsis of the collected data and make Permittee: Collier County BO CC - Pelican Hay Lwrvic" Division Permit t-\Iiration: December 17, 2010 Permit No: l l- 0128463 -1105 Page 7 of 14 Page 8 of 32 103214 Q NN O conclusions and recommendations concerning the impacts bm permitted activities have had oil the Clam Bay ecosystem based oil tile analysis of the data collected, including the biological monitoring data und the water quality data monitoring data as well as any tidal or hydrological information collected as part of the permitted activities. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS -MANATEE AND MARINE TURTLE CONDITIONS 14. All personnel associated with the project shaUheinstrucbedabouithepceycnce of marine turtles, manatees and manatee speed zones, and the need to avoid collisions with nr'ury to marine turtles and nmnetees.UepermiLtee shall advise all construction personnel that there are civil and crbnjna| penalties for harm' harassing, urkilling marine turtles or manatees which are protected under the Marine Mamnial Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Florida Manatee Sanctuary/\«t. 15. All vessels associated with the construction p ' tsbu!i"porabent"b]bc Speed/ NnWake" at all dniusvvhUe in the irnnowjimte area and while in v/ahar where the draft *f the vessel provides less than a four-foot clearance from the bottom. All vessels will 6nDovv routes nfdeep water whenever possible. 16. Siltation nrturhidity barriers shall hu made *f material in which marine turtles or manatees cannot become entangled, shall be properly secu red, and shall be regularly monitored h` avoid marine turtle or manatee entanglement or entrapment, Barriers must not impede marine turtle mr manatee movement. 17 All on-site project personoe|omcrespnusiWefovnb*errinHwater-related activities for the presence o( marine turtles mr manatees. All in-water operations, including vessels, must be shutdown ifa marine turde(s) ormanabc(s)conics within 50 feet of the operation. Activities will out mesornc until the marine horUc(a)urrnanatuu(s) has moved beyond tile 5O-fnot radius o[the project operation, ur until :1Onoinutc* elapses ifthe marine turtle(s) or manatee(s) has not reappeared within 30 feet of the operation. Animals must not ho herded away mr harassed into leaving. 18. Any collision whhm'injury too marine turtle or manatee shall lx� reported immediately to tbcFVV[ Hotline at l'80H-&U4-FN/[l�. Collision and/or injury should also be reported to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Jacksonville (1-904-711-3336) for north Florida or Vero Beach (1-772-562-3909) for south Florida. 19. Temporary signs ' concerning un»dne turtles and manatees shall hmposted prior to and during all in-water project activities. All signs are b` be. removed hr the permjthee upon completion uf the project. &warruesss' that haroa|nuJy been approved for this use bV the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) must be P,nnutorCoKie,( "v tit y MCC -ydkvnn^ys,, ices |)ivisk" Permit |,pir u"n [eaxnhn77,2Nn Permit No: 11-0128461V05 Page 8 (if 14 Page nm32 � � � � 16I 8 Q N N O a used (see MyFWC.com). One sign which reeds Caution: Bottlers must be posted. A o second sign measuring at least 81/2" by 11" explaining the requirements for" Idle Speed/ No Wake" and the shut -dawn of in -eater operations must be posted in a location prominently visible to all personnel engaged in -water-related activities. GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. All activities authorized by this permit shall be implemented as set forth in the plans, specifications and performance criteria as approved by this permit. Any deviation from the permitted activity and the conditions for undertaking that activity shall constitute a violation of this permit and a violation of Part IV of Chapter 373, (F.S.). 2. This permit or a copy thereof, complete with all conditions, attachments, exhibits, and modifications shall be kept at the work site of the permitted activity. Tile complete permit shall be available for review= at the work site upon request by the Department staff. The permittee shall require the contractor to review the complete permit prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this permit. 3. Activities approved by this permit shall be conducted in a manner which does not cause violations of state water duality standards. The permittee shall implement best management practices for erosion and pollution control to prevent violations of state water quality standards. Temporary erosion control shall be implemented prior to and during construction and permanent control measures shall be completed within seven (7) days of any construction activity. Turbidity barriers shall be installed and maintained at all locations where the possibility of transferring suspended solids into the receiving water -body exists due to the permitted work. `I urbidity barriers shall remain in place at all locations until construction is completed and soils are stabilized and vegetation has been established. All practices shall be in accordance with the guidelines and specifications described in Chapter Six of the Florida Land Development Manual; A Guide to Sound Land and Water Management (Department of Environmental Regulation, 1988), unless a project - specific erosion and sediment control plan is approved as part of the permit. Thereafter, the pertittee shall be responsible for the removal of the barriers. The permittee shall correct any erosion or shoaling that causes adverse impacts to the water resources. 4. Fhe permittee shall notify the Department of the anticipated construction start date within thirty (30) days of the elate that this pert-nit is issued. At least forty -eight (48) hours prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this pertnit, the permittee shall Submit to the Department an "I.:nvironmental Resource Permit Construction Commencement" notice (Form No. 62- 343.9t10(3), I'lorida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)) indicating the actual start Mate and expected completion date. Permittee: Collier County BOCC - Pelican Bay I`xrvices Division P+�rmit 11y11iratiow I)ecenlber 17, 2010 Permit No: 11-012846105 5 Page 9 of 14 Page 10 of 32 1611 5. When the duration of construction will exceed one year, the permittee shall submit construction status reports to the Department can an annual basis utilizing an „Annual Status Report Form" (Form No. 62- 33.900(4), F.A.C.). Status Report Forms shall be submitted the following June of each year. 6. Within thirty (30) days after completion of construction of the permitted activity, the permittee shall submit a written statement of completion and certification by a registered professional engineer or other appropriate individual as authorized by law utilizing the supplied "Environmental Resource Permit As -Built Certification by a Registered Professional" (Form No. 62- 343.900(5), F.A.C), The Statement of completion and certification shall be based on on -site observation of construction or review of as- built drawings for the purpose of determining if the work was completed in compliance with permitted plans and specifications. This submittal shall serve to notify the Department that the system is ready for inspection. Additionally, if deviations from the approved drawings are discovered during the certification process, the certification must be accompanied by a copy of the approved permit drawings with deviations note. Both the original and revised specifications must ti clearly shown. The plans must be clearly labeled as "as- built" or "record" drawing. All surveyed dimensions and elevations shall be certified by a registered surveyor. 7. The operation phase of this permit shall not become effective; until the permittee has complied with the requirements of condition number six (6) above, has submitted a "Request for Transfer of Environmental. Resource Permit Construction Phase to Operation Phase " (Farm 62- 343.900(7), F.A.C.); the Department determines the system to be in compliance with the permitted plans and specifications; and the entity approved by the Department in accordance with Sections 9.0 and 10.0 of the Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Permit Applications Within the South Florida Water Management District — August 1995, accepts responsibility for operation and maintenance of the system. -I °lae permit shall not be transferred to such approved operation and maintenance entity until the operation phase of the permit becomes effective. Following inspection and approval cif the permitted system by the Department, the permittee shall initiate transfer of permit to the approved responsible operation entity if different from the permittee. Until the permit is transferred pursuant to Rule 62- 343.110(1) (d), F.A.C„ the permittee shall be liable for compliance with the terms of the permit. B. Each phase or independent portion of the permitted system trust be completed in accordance with the permitted plans and permit conditions prior to the initiation of the permitted use of site infrastructure located within the area served by that portion or phase of the system. Each phase or independent portion of the system must be completed in accordance with the permitted plans and permit conditions prior to transfer of responsibility for operation and maintenance of the phase or portion of the system to a local government or other responsible entity. Permittee: Collier County BOC°C - Pelican Flay S+e rvices Division Permit F- xpiratiow Decrvntier 17, 2010 Permit No: 11-0128463-005 Page 10 of 1.1 Page 11 of 32 B21 Q NN O 0 O ~ N �� 8 N �L ���� � � 9. For those systems that will be operated m maintained bvanen6tv that will require an easement *rdeed restriction in order hoenable that entity bn operate m« maintain the systern in conformance with this permit, such easement or deed restriction must be recorded in the public records and submitted to the Department along with any other final operation and maintenance documents required by Sections 9.0 and 10.0 of the Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Pcrnmit Applications Within the South Florida Water Management District —August 1995, prior h` lot or unit sales nr prior io lot or unit sales oxprior to the completion of the system, whichever occurs first. (]thczdocumncnbsconcerniugdheeotaWiyhrnentandautbndLyoftbeupesationentity must be filed with the Secretary of State where appropriate. For those systems which are proposed to be maintained by the county or municipal entities, final operation and maintenance documents must be received by the Department when maintenance and operation of tile system is accepted by the local government entity. Failure to submit the appropriate final documents will result in the pmconideecennainin0 liable for carrying out maintenance and operation of the permitted system and any other permit lK Should any other regulatory agency require changes to the permitted systern, the permittee shall n��tile Department iowriting of the changes prior toimplementation so that a determination can be made whethera permit modification is required. 11. This permit does not eliminate the necessity to obtain any required federal, state, local and special district authorizations prior h, the start mfany activity approved by this permit. This pecrnitdnea not convey tm the prnniLbe ov create in the permmid**any property right, o«mny interest in real po,pczty,nnrJ^eait authorize any entrance upon or activities on property which is not owned or controlled by the per-mittee, or convev any rights or privileges other than those specified in the permit and Chapter 40E4 or Chapter 40E40, F.A.C. 12. Tile permittee is hereby advised that Section 253.77,F� states that aperson ma% not commehce any excavation, construction, or other activity involving tile use of sovereign or other lands nf the state, the ddc to which is vested in the MonnJ of Trustees of the lnbornm| Improvement Trust Fund without obtaining tile required lease, license, easement, ur other form o| consent authorizing the proposed use. Therefore, the peromiLteeisresponsible for obtaining any necessary authorization from the Board of Trustees prior to commencing activity oil sovereignty lands or other state owned lands. l3. The permittee is advised that the rules of the South Florida Water Management District roquire the permittee to obtain o water use permit from the South Florida Water management District prior to construction d,wahzinA, unless the vvu,kquali8re for u general permit pursuant toRule 4OE-2U.3O2(4),F.A.[, also known as tile "No Notice" 9ermiuoc('ol|kr County [KV%.-RelkmnV^>Sw,,kr` Division Permit Vxpim/km: December l7, 2010 Permit No: 11-012846345 Page I I (if 14 Page /om32 B,2 14"4- 8 IP � � � � m C? � 1611 Bz1 J T NN O J a N O W 14. The permittee shall hold and save the Department harmless from anv and all damages, claims or liabilities which mar arise by reason of the construction, alteration, operation, maintenance, removal, abandonment or use of anv system authorized by this permit. 15. Any^ delineation of the extent of a wetland or other surface water submitted as part of the permit application, including plans or other supporting documentation, shall not be considered binding unless a specific condition of this permit or a formal determination under Section 373.421(2). F.S., provides otherwise. 16, The permittee shall notify the Department in writing within :fit) days of any sale, conveyance, or other transfer of ownership or control of a permitted system or the real property on which the permitted system is located. All transfers of ownership or transfers of a permit are subject to the recluirements of Rule 62- 343.130, F.A.C. The permittee transferring the permit shall remain liable for corrective actions that may be required as a result of any, violations prior to the sale, conveyance or other transfer of the systern. 17. Upon reasonable notice to the permitte , Department authorized staff with proper identification shall have permission to enter, inspect, sample and test the system to insure conformity with the plans and specifications approved by the permit. 18. If historical or archaeological artifacts are discovered at any time on the project site, the permittee shall immediately notifv the appropriate Department office. 'The perinittee shall immediately notify the Department in writing of and previously submitted information that is later discovered to be inaccurate. GENERAL CONSENT CONDITIONS Chapter 18- 21.004(7), F.A.C., General Conditions for Authorizations: 1. Authorizations are valid only for the specified activity or use. Any unauthorized deviation from the specified activity or use and the conditions for undertaking that activity or use Shall constitute a violation. Violation of the authorization shall result in suspension or revocation of the grantee's use of the sovereignty submerged land unless cured to the satisfaction of the Board. 2. Authorizations convey no title to sovereignty Submerged lanai or water column, nor do then, constitute re'ognition or acknowledgment of any other person's title to such land or water. Ve rmittee: Collier County Bo( - Petit an Bay lx>ry ice% I)ivi, ion Permit 1`\piratirxm: t)ecenitier 17, 2010 Ilermit No: I 1- 012F3463 -005 Page 12 of 14 Page 13 of 32 16 11 , 82 14 Q N N O A 3. Authorizations may be modified, suspended or revoked in accordance with their terms or the remedies provided in Sections 253.04 and 258.46, F.S., or Chapter 18- A 14, F.A.C. 4. Structures or activities shall he constructed and used to avoid or minimize adverse: impacts to sovereignty submerged lands and resources. 5. Construction, use, or operation of the structure or activity shall not adversely affect any species which is endangeaecl, threatened or of special concern, as fisted in Rules 68A- 27.003, 68A- 27.004, and 68A- 27.003, F.A.C. 6. Structures or activities shall not unreasonably interfere with riparian rights. When a court of competent jurisdiction determines that riparian rights have been unlawfully affected, the structure or activity shall be modified in accordance with the court's decision. 7. Structures or activities shall not create a navigational hazard. 8. Structures shall be maintained in a functional condition and shall be repaired or removed if they become dilapidated to such an extant that they are no longer functional. this shall not be construed to prohibit the repair or replacement subject to the provisions of Rule 18- 21.0(15, F.A.C., within one year, of a structure damaged in a discrete, event such as a storm, flood, accident, or fire. 9. Structures or activities shall be constructed, operated, and maintained solely for water dependent purposes, or for nun -water dependent activities authorized under paragraph 18- 21.004(1)(g), F.A.C., or any other applicable law. NOTICE OF RIGHTS This Permit is hereby final unless; a sufficient petition for an administrative hearing is tirnely filed under Sections 120.569 and '120.57 of the I'lorida Statutes (F.S.) as provided below. The procedures for petitionijig for a hearing are set forth below. Mediation is not available. A person whose substantial interests are affected by tlae Department's action may petition for an administrative proceeding (hearing) under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S. The petition must contain the information set forth below and must be filed (received by the clerk) in the Office of General Counsel of the Department at 390X1 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3000. Permittee: Collier (ounty BO C( - Pelican Ray 1+ervices Division Permit Eyhiratioly Deremly r 17, 2010 Permit No: 11-0128463-M3 Page 13 of 14 Page 14 of 32 � 1611 � ^� Because the administrative hearing process isdesigned to re-determine final agenc% action oil the application, the filing nfa petition for all administrative hearing may result in a modification *f the permit or even denial of thaapp(icadou. Ka sufficient petition for an administrative hearing nr request for an extension m/ time bm file a petition is d/ncly filed, this permit automatically becomes only proposed agency action on tile application, subject to the result nf tile administrative review process. Accordingly, the applicant is advised not to cornmence construction or other activities under this permit until the deadlines noted hc\mw for filing petition for an administrative hearing, ur request for all extension mf time has expired. Under Rule 62-1lO.1U6(4). Florida Administrative Code (F.A��)'a person whose substantial interests are affected by the Department's action may also request all extension of time to file petition for an administrative heahng.'[hc Department mmay, for good cause shown, grant the request for all extension of time. Requests for extension *f time must be filed with the Office of General Counsel o| the Department at 39(X] Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35iTallahassee, Florida 32999-3(XX), before the applicable deadline. A timely request for extension (if time shall toll the running of the time period for filing petition onb| the request is acted upon. ]fa request is filed |mhc, the Department rnaysti)l grant it upon a motion b the requesting partk showing that the failure to file a request for an extension of time before the deadline was the result (if excusable neglect. In the event that a6mcN� and sufficient petition knao administrative hearing is filed, other persons whose*u[istantia|interestswiUbeahected�t�oub�u�[� administrative process have the right to petition to iotcrvoncin the proceeding. Any intervention will heon|ymt the discretion uf the presiding officer upon the filing nfo motion in compliance with Rule 28-106.205, F.A.C. In accordance with Rule 62-110.106(3) F.A.C., petitions for an administrative hearing by the applicant must be filed within ]4da�a of receipt mmth\swdMen notice. PwbdonsG|ed bv anV persons other than the applicant, and other than those entitled to written notice under section 120.60(l) of the Florida Statutes must he filed within 14 days of publication of the notice or within 11 days *( receipt uf the writbcn notice, whichever occurs first. Under section 120.60(3) n( tile Florida Statutes, however, any person who has asked the Department for notice wf agency action may tile a petition within l4Jaysuf receipt o( such notice, regardless of the date of publication. The petitioner shall mail acopy of tile petition h` the applicant attile address indicated above at the time wf filing. Dmfailore*/onypmmwtoUlee petition for an administrative hearing within tile appropriate time period shall constitutea ivaiver of pcnnbuee: Col |kv County xVX[-ndkonDaySw,v ices |x*isim Prrwk[^pmh^u:lx=,ohrl7,2m0 n,,wit No Uu|Z84u3-0V.5 Pap 14 of 14 Page mm32 � � � � ^ � � 9 � 1611 214 Q N a that person's right to request an administrative determination (hearing) under sections '120,569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes. A petition that disputes the material facts on which the Department's action is based must contain the following information: (a) The name and address of each agency affected and each agency's file or identification number, if known; (b) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; the name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner's representative, if any-, which shall be the address for service purposes during the course of the proceeding; and an explanation of haw the petitioner's substantial interests are or will be affected by the agency determination; (c) A statement of when and how the petitioner rexeived notice of the agency decision; (d) A statement of all disputed issues of material tact. If there are none, the petition must so indicate.; (e) A concise statement of the ultimate facts alleged, including the specific facts that the petitioner contends warrant reversal or modification of the agency's proposed action; and (f) A statement of the specific rules or statutes that the petitioner contends require reversal or modification of the agency's proposed action; (g) A statement of the relief sought by the petitioner, stating precisely the action that the petitioner wishes the agency= to take with respect to the agency's proposed action. A petition that does not dispute the material facts on which the Department's action is based shall state that no such facts are in dispute and otherwise shall contain the same information as set forth above, as required by Rule 28- 106.3111, F.A.C. Under Sections 120.569(2)(c) and (d), F.S., a petition for administrative hearing must be dismissed by the agency if the petition does not substantially comply with the above requirements or is untimely filed. This action is final and effective oil the date filed with the Clerk of the Department unless a petition is filed in accordance with the above. Upon the timely filing of a petition this order will not be effective until further order of the Department. This permit constitutes an order cif the Department. 1lie applicant has the right to seek judicial review of tine order under Section 120,68, F.S., by the filing; of a notice of appeal under Rule 9.110 of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure with the Clerk of the Department in the Office of General Counsel, 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399- 3(XH); and by filing a copy of the notice of appeal accompanied by the applicable filing fees with the appropriate district court of appeal. The notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days from the agate when the final order is Pennittee: Collier County HO( C - Pelican Ho i)ivision Permit FypiraI it, ir Dote:mbet 17, 2 010 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -W5 Page 15 of 14 Page 16 of 32 1611 filed with the Clerk of the Department. T -he applicant, or any party within the meaning of Section 373.114(1)(a), F.S., may also seek appellate review of this order before the Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission under Section 373.114(l), F.S. Requests for review before the Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission and served on the Department within 20 days from the date when the final order is filed with the Clerk of the Department. Executed in Lee Countv, Florida JMI /ap Attachments: Project Drawings and Design tipecs., 10 page% Commencement notice /62- 343.900(3) Annual status report/62-141,900(4) As -guilt certification/62-343.900(5) Fransfer construction to operation phase/ 62 -343.900(7) Copies furnished to: DER Office of General Counsel U.S- Army Corps of Engineers, Log # 1251.1 FWC, Imperiled Species Management Section Collier County Property Appraiser Furrell, Nall & Associates, Inc. File 51 AFF:OF FLORIDA DEF)ARTMENT 01: FNVIRONMENTAL PROTEcriON Jon M. lgichart District Director South District Office (- TRIIFK.A11 -Of SI:I<Vl( 1'. The undersigned hereby certifies that this permit and authori /atiem to list- sovvre:ignth submerged lands, including all copies, %%cre mailed 1vtore the close of business oil to the above* listed 1vr%ons 111 IN(, ANO A( KNO M 1:1 X,%WN I 1,11 E1), on this state, under 120,52 (7) ot thtr Florida Statutes, evith the designated Department (. lerk, receipt of hich is hereby acknov% ledged C Jerk I)ate Permittere: Collier County BO('(- - Pelican 13ay'- wrvice4 Di%ision I'erinit 1 xpiratiow Decemtx-r 17, 2010 Permit No: 11- 0128463 -11115 Page 16 of 14 Page 17 of 32 B21 4 N N O A N O_ V Collier Countv Board of CountN Commissioners c/o Pelican Bav Services Division 801 Laurel Oak Drive Naples, Florida, 34108 Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 COLLIER CO Property Appraiser Building "C" Government Complex 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Ft., 33962-4902 MAILING LIST I FFWCC Attention: Mary Ann Poole 620 South Meridian Street - MS 6A Tallahassee, FL 12399-1600 fcrnpmail(,a,,mvf%yc.com DEPT OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES Attention: Frederick l" GaskL' 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, FI- 32399-0250 MAILING LIST 11- Charlotte ACOE - Fort Myers (weekiv mailbox) Page 18 of 32 1611 821 - i N O C? CD 1611 821+ 2010 -12 -20 11:43 019 PA"O Clue DAYM10 PoMf7NMg5t910 CHANNEL NAUkiEHnHCEtltiQ N M O N c f6 CL 1611 ,621 2010 -12 -20 11;43 020 N O O N N m a Ifs " p 2010-12-20 11:43 021 0 Iv w LU z o z Z Ly 0 TY 0. .6 "t 0 Z lu =Oooz�- 0 9 a- CL 0- Cj LU U) z IL rL , > < z 0) cry o 0 en -c ZZJ W z 2 uJ 0 z < 0 z 0 -j zz IL wmo�z uj w W ig !i 0 IL zoo, m 9) 1 IL 0 CD w 0 0 Ir w 0 � Z 0 = 0 x w Z m'Xo a 0 W LU IX M L, 0 09 O w -Z z Z 0 U) in 0 w U) u X 0 x w w cr a_ w z 2 Z 0 z 4 z ui ui W a_ F- C=) A d ZF ZF w Ui m 00 o CG to f to te W P 19345 cl— BSy'2010 N ce) O 16114 821 2010 -12 -20 11:43 022 w � � N lL uai WM O 2� i z {OJy: LL 0 NaD� 0 : P z o 3 cn r L? b p w z w w mar m �' u < w F °a mw w z Fez QrJzd s 0 .cUVzF u, av aomz v.LL `taaaaam�m mw m 8 P H - g 0- p v J 00 zCCCCC C w RW 09 M= Z w 0 CD ul w. C9 W O Z U) F t O W C~13 0.• v tip X O _! CL 2 �y LU v J a Z m Z Z ui O z 4 CV U r U r Q w N Z is Q � ccf Li ,J N • G.n `r" Z e0 Lul Tsr $ issll IL � ran 8 I a I-- W Y iq N i� m O T _ m y� PASM C1 0"1"10 Pa VMngkMt CNANNEi„MAWTENMCEdwg N M 0 N N N c 0- a 2010 -12 -20 11:44 023 0 0 U � N iit � ui ut 6 ry 0 O � W3 0 �r fl � !q qqii J J ii > LL. El' dx L:S: QF- m q ii <o sv o a r o 'R "S u� w gxxxox F a y�d�mw W o z z Wa u ~ V ° 0 ZW n LLI uj r �Zz wz � zz > y 2 z Z02;e W u4= ZZ 9 �j 4V0 ZDor=�tu O.V ui ate° z w0 ww� CL zcnamr mw o a v v! � ia�wG� r Cr?to w az F (nau aw Z w cc W. 0 0 E= 0 C `' O Z U) (t 7 O w C() Ll W w ; O fr c W .`. 2�.� Z Ui•'r v° 4z Z z z z Q Q {) C) � to m Q C) W M ZF- _ w y n z 4e az to x u 00 °w u _ U) o� (� F � i11 3 �ssaes e,am saqua,u rermmmpau,V _cnnHnE:L_nwm,enP.nck.A,� N M O CO N N CD a 1611 821! OM n_4 Qn 14,AA MA P fleas cum 9a y% 2010 Panei0Wq =1e„CHAMNEI_iAAINTENANCE." N M O v N N c6 d n n N � Q 0 W � W r ti N�<G� Q op -OIR pi C $ N ` m JvmJU_ EW�JW2 {IC C7 W Z r T e a3 � 8 4 QVg 7Z Np 51 �` t. yntg� izp U A l >ll tytl ay w2 r 4 co P, 0 p�t!l mZ0 0SU t�q re ul W LU �V) F zOC4Q0 aU aW Q � toy t c = w zr J Z w C3 Z Q � � U •''�' Q (� n W� o J to LL A Z ni cl UA YI Wo W M V pp N u W Q 7 wy y A yy��GCyyi z E- Zq, [W W LL } ♦ i OrG i I ma it ' f ww w t yy / ti P fleas cum 9a y% 2010 Panei0Wq =1e„CHAMNEI_iAAINTENANCE." N M O v N N c6 d 1611 B21 2010 -12 -20 11:44 025 � � o M 0 C w 0 ui + uj n ryr'ao�j p a Hun 0 nm w 0 Z W m ��tlzV2 C9 z Ed x vZ m F w " S a eo zO��CC 3 aW cl LU o °a w W 2 G am Z, ..� 4S w z Z W ©�qj w 0 Z U) � V Z 0 a O O z ALL. Z D ti N iV w v W o m o IL w ° EL �- cr a lz N O 0Q + ` 00 o P:i9fl4 Clsm BayYM/0 Permf81MS391Q_CNAN186� :�IARitENANCE,mvQ N M O Ln N coN a1 - d 1611 2010-12 -20 11:44 026 g21 N M O 04 N N m (0 a °m � 4 m N W � U, pJp n°sm�z p p 3xpxx x4 F � � a a v FO 2 Z �t 20 t`3 uI * ~ y p $ 8 2 j z iF x OU� u 000 y�j7 N 6 V � o 4000a LU w a 04 V U) W do 0- F T UA a Y w V1 IL W Z W a a 'a m= v © xU W Z }— 0 GJ ~ J 20 N ry U) � iD v 0 X lt! ° <e, w° CL O IQI n. N r C tom- N u0- Z 5 k' tom, M H M LL 00 F W St T in O S F ui }r i FIAS i Clam eaMll) Pwmmtn2 W2DW- CNANftEl_IMiNTEMANCEAW9 N M O 04 N N m (0 a 2010-12-20 11:44 027 0 z W x w CO w C) LL) 0 z K < z < 0 -!2 Z 0 < 0 Z LU )$ LU C3 0 cn LU SaV,2010 MAINTENANCE 0� x 0 tn (n z F 0 uj LU z th Ix Lu \\ z < LU 0 > 0 0: n 00 Z w U) 0 O � CL P: (Mtn) U) U C) w 0 C) B 2 t < { !!) Z Z z 9 0 LU U z Z LU z (1) cn LLJ w 0 z 9A � / ƒ/ ~ \Z�\ 04 04 1611 821 2010 -12 -20 11:45 028 N M O co N N a t 1611 B203 j 4 N N O Form a62- 341900(3) PAC -� Form'titic Commrcrion Commencemem Notice R WYeetrve Date, October 3 1995 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT Construction Commencement Notice Project: Phase: I hereby notify the Department of Environmental Protection that the construction of the surface water management system authorized by Environmental Resource Permit Number has commenced I is expected to commence on and will require a duration of approximately months weeks days to complete It is understood that should the construction term extend beyond one year, 1 am obligated to submit the Annual Status Report for surface Water Management System Construction, PLEASE NQTF:: if the actual construction commencement date is not known, Department staff should be so notified in writing in order to satisfy permit conditions Permittee or Authorized Agent Title and Company Date Phone Address 62- 343,400(3) On -Line Document Fom+atted 12101/97 kag Page 29 of 32 1611 41OZ 14 J 4 N N O J A N Form # 62- 343 900(4) Form Tide Annual Status Report Effective Datw, October 3, 1995 Environmental Resource Permit Annual Status Report Florida Department of Environmental Protection PERMIT NUMBEW COUNTY- PROJECT NAME PHASt7 The following activity has occurred at the above referenced porojco during the past year, between June 1, and May 30, Permit Cand►tiontActivity " %ofComgicbon Date of Ansciaated Comnlation (else Additional Sheets As Nccessary) Benchmark Description (one per major control structure) Print Name Phone Pcrmittee's or Aurthorized Agent's Signature Title and Company Date Date of Completion This form shall be submitted to the abovc referenced Department Office during June of each year for activities whose duration of construction exceeds one year 62- 343 900(4) On•Linc Document Formatted 12/01/97 kag Page 30 of 32 1611 Form #62.34) 900(5). F &C Form Title As -$uik Certification by a Registered Professional Effective /)ate October 3, 1995 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT AS -BUILT CERTIFICATION BY A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL. Permit Number Project Name I hereby certify that all components of this surface water management system have been built substantially in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and are ready for inspection. Any substantial deviations (noted below) from the approved plans and specifications will not prevent the system from functioning as designed when properly maintained and operated These &terminations are based upon on -site observation of the system conducted by me or by my designee under my direct supervision and/or my review of as -built plans certified by a registered professional or Land Surveyor licensed in the State of Florida. Name (please print) Signature of Professional Company Name Florida Registration Number Company Address Date City, State, Zip Code Telephone Number (Affix Sea[) Substantial deviations from the approved plans and specifications (Note: attach two copies of as -built plans when there are substantial deviations) Within 30 days of completion of the system, submit two copies of the fotnr to. 62- 343.900(5) Ondrne Document Formatred 12/01/97 kag Page 31 of 32 B 1 J 4 N N O U 1611 Forn+ N 62.353,900(7)F A C Form Title Request for Transfer to Operation Phase Effective Date: September 25 1995 Request for Transfer of Environmental Resource Permit Construction Phase to Operation Phase (To be completed and submitted by the operating entity) Protection It is requested that Department Permit Number authorizing the construction and operation of a surface water management system for the below mention project be transferred from the construction phase permittec to the operation phase operating entity. Project: From: Name: Address City State: Zip. To: Name: Address:. City: State: Zip The surface water management facilities are hereby accepted for operation and maintenance in accordance with the engineers certification and as outlined in the restrictive covenants and articles of incorporation for the operating entity. Enclosed is a copy of the document transferring title of the operating entity for the common areas on which the surface water management system is located. Note that if the operating entity has not been previously approved, the applicant should contact the Department staff prior to Sling for a permit transfer. The undersigned hereby agrees that all terns and conditions of the permit and subsequent modifications, if any, have been reviewed, are understood and are hereby accepted. Any proposed modifications shall be applied for and obtained prior to such modification. Operating Entity: Title: Name Telephone: Enclosure ❑ copy of recorded transfer of title surface water management system ❑ Coy of plat(s) ❑ Copy of rccordcd restrictive covenants, articles of incorporation, and certificate of incorporation. 62- 343.900(7) On-line Document Formatted 12/01/97 kag Page 32 of 32 B21 4 N N 0 Pa N 1611 821x ..EPI.Y TO ATTENTION OF DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS 9620 ROYAL PALM SQUARE BOULEVARD. SURE 390 FORT MYERS, FL 3369! December 17, 2010 South Permits Branch /Fort Myers Section SAJ- 1996 -02789 (IP -LAE) Collier County /Pelican Bay Services Division 801 Laurel Oak Drive Naples, FL 34108 Attention Collier County /Pelican Bay Services Division: .EIVED DEC 2 3 2010 PELICAN BAY 51ERACES DIVISION DEC 17 2010 We have completed our review of your Department of the Army permit application SAJ- 1996 -02789 (IP -LAE) The proposed work is for ecological restoration involving periodic ecological maintenance activities over a 10 -year timeframe within the tidal Clam Bay estuary. The proposed work would continue ecological restoration work that has been conducted as part of the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan (1998) and has resulted in successful restoration of mangrove habitat. The volume of material to be removed is -20 cubic yards per year on an as- needed basis; the annual work has historically been conducted in May /June for a 1 -2 week duration. Site access is by foot from upland areas, or via small vessels; the work area is generally at or above the Mean High Water (MHW) line in waters that are characterized as having a maximum water depth of 18 inches. The applicant has agreed to comply with the Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions and Standard Manatee Conditions for In -Water Work. The proposed work is located within tidal Clam Bay in Sections 32 -33, Township 48S, Range 25E and Sections 4 -5, 8 -9, 32 -33, Township 49S, Range 25E, Naples, Collier County, Florida. The site coordinates (NAD83) are from: Northern limit: Latitude 26.247024N; Longitude 81.818878W; Southern limit: Latitude 26.214063N; Longitude 81.814505W. Although the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is prepared to take final action on the application, by Federal law no final action can be taken until a State Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) has been issued or waived and the State has concurred with an applicant's Coastal Zone Management (CZM) consistency determination or concurrence has been presumed. We have no written indication that the State has issued certification for the work. Once the State has issued or waived the required Section 401 WQC and /or concurred with your Page 1 of 2 b J pN t0 8 J 1611 4 -2- CZM consistency determination, you must provide a complete copy of the State permit to the Corps. Upon receipt of State approval or waiver, final action on the Corps permit application will be taken, providing there have been no significant changes in the Corps' evaluation policies during that period or any significant project modifications. Conditions of the State Section 401 WQC and /or the State CZM concurrence will become conditions to any final Department of the Army permit. Should the State's action on the required certification or concurrence approve a project that is different from that shown on the current application, a modification to the application may be required; please notify the Corps of any such changes when you submit copies of the State certification. Substantial changes may require a new permit evaluation process, including issuance of a new public notice. If the State denies the required Section 401 WQC and /or does not concur with your CZM consistency determination, then the permit could be denied without prejudice. If you should subsequently obtain Section 401 WQC and /or a CZM consistency determination concurrence, you should contact this office to determine how to proceed with your permit application. You are cautioned that work commencement prior to Department of the Army authorization constitutes violation of Federal laws and subjects you to further enforcement action. Receipt of a Department of Environmental Protection or Water Management District permit does not obviate the requirement for obtaining a Department of the Army permit prior to work commencement. Any questions concerning the application should be directed to Linda A. Elligott at the letterhead address or by telephone at 239- 334 -1975, Ext. 32. Copy: agent Sincerely, 'JA- Donald . j►/ l� Kin . W. iard Chief, Regulatory Division Page 2 of 2 82164 N r O 8 N 161 1 B21 December 2, 2010 Ms. Arieue Poulos RECEIVED Florida Fish Department of Environmental Protection DEC 2 0 2610 and Wildlife South District Conservation P.O. Box 2549 PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Commission Ft. Myers, Florida 33902-2549 C.onimissioners awleto bf*fw Subject: Wildlife Impact Review, Clam Bay Maintenance permit renewal, Maim A.Owbeet File No. 11 -0128463 -005, Clam Bay, Collier County Vloe Chal"nan Tama va0v aereo jackwnvw Dear Ms. Poulos: a«t Fbrt The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation. Commission has reviewed this application, and provides the following comma its. A copy of this letter will be seat to the U.S. Army ayae.a Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, in compliance with the Fish and Wildlife K.aa - w.11htw Coordination Act. wnterf'ark Bmn s. Yablaatd The applicant requests to continue maintenance activities in the Clam Bay Preserve Tslfahassee Talw system as previously authorized horized by DEP permit number 11 -0128463 -001. The proposed work includes cleaning interior Channels and maintaining channel design depths, E eecutive staff maintaining flushing channels, periodically trimming mangroves to maintain canoe trails, "mo` t berms, boardwalks, pedestrian access, and storrawater areas, as previously described in Exaoulh!e OlreoLOr Q+s the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan (CBRMP). The spoil removed from the lwistwa Executive Director canoe trail and drainage channels are proposed to be manually shoveled and dispersed Kom VentkW ra among the mangroves. All cut branches and trimming debris will be removed No 0WjW Chief or staff mechanical dredging will be used in the maintenance of the canoe trail or drainage channels. No spoil material is proposed to be placed on the beaches. No wading bird colonies are located within the proposed trimming areas. Imperiled species Management Secton Kipp F~ The Florida Manatee (Trichechus manaeus ladrastris) use of this area is documented by (85o 92� aerial survey and mortality data An average of one manatee per aerial survey flight has (850) 922 -4338 fez been observed within a five -mile radius of the project location. Between January 1974 and February 2010, fourteen (14) manatees have died within a five -mile radius of the project location, none of which were from watercraft - related causes. mans" Ash and oil Oft resources for theirlorg arm weNbelns and Mebenefft Collier County was one of the counties specified in Florida Statute as required to develop of pegofe. a Manatee Protection Plan (MPP), and it received local, state and federal approval for its 820 souat marathon street plan in 1995. The project, as proposed, appears to be consistent with the Tallahassee, f=toride recommendations provided in the MPP. 3239 IGW Voice (850) 488.4876 It is our recommendation that the Standard Manatee and Marine Turtle Construction H 00195 -877 impaired, {$p0) 955-87 71 (T) Conditions for In -water work (rev. 2009, attached), if they are made conditions of the (800) 95"770 {v) pemit, will satisfy the requirements of 373.414(lxa) 2, and 379.2431(2) Florida Statutes. WFwco«n These conditions are considered necessary in order for this project to not significantly affect the conservation of wildlife. Please notify this office of the results of this wildlife rig N O O C" 8 J Ms. Arielle Poulos December 2, 2010 Page 2 161.1 B21 g impact review by copy of the intent to Issue or Deny, and the final agency action. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (850) 922 -4330 or Chris.Bolandtd MvFWC_com if you have any questions. Sincerely, C . P�� 4—K Christopher Boland, Environmental Specialist Imperiled Species Management Section /a& hVHpwW. fwc.stato.A.us/WVDivisio=ESC4u*lod Species Management &Impu ledSpedeemmetes/Clam Bay Msiatannce 2536/FWC C"apuaduicO 0101202 CbmBayM4oWwaa FC.do= cc: Mr. Stuart Santos, USAGE, Jacksonville Ms. Delta Harris, USFWS, Vero Beach Pelican Bay Services Division Mr. Jeff Rogers, Turrell, Hall 8t Associates, Inc. Mr. Stephen Lenberger, Collier County Environmental Services Ms. Pamela Keyes, Collier County Coeval Zone Management Mr. JeffTabar, PBSW Mr. Eric Seckinger, FWC — ISM, Marine Turtle Management N N 0 a o� S 1611 821 N N O O STANDARD MANATEE and MARINE TURTLE CONDITIONS FOR IN -WATER WORK 2009 The pernnktee shall comply with the following conditions Intended to protect manatees and marine turtles from dlrect project effects: a. AN personnel associated with the project shall be instructed about the presence of marine turtles, manatees and manatee speed zones. and the need to avoid collisions with or injury to marine turtles and manatees. The permittee shall advise all construction pemonnel that there are civil and criminal penalties for hamming, harassing, or killing marine turtles or manatees which are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Florida Manatee Sanctuary Act. b. AN vessels associated with the construction project shall operate at "Idle SpeedMo Wake" at all times while in the immediate area and while in water where the draft of the vessel provides less than a four -foot clearance from the bottom. AN vessels will follow routes of deep water whenever possible. C. Siltation or turbidity bangers shah be made of material to which marine turtles or manatees cannot become entangled, shall be properly secured, and shall be regularly monitored to avoid marine turtle or manatee entanglement or entrapment. Bangers must not impede marine turtle or manatee movement. d. AN on-ske project personnel are responsible for observing water - related activities for the presence of marine turtles or manatees. AN In -water operations, kxdirnq vessels, must be shutdown V a marine turtle(s) or manatee(:) comes within 50 feet of the operation. Activities will not resume until the marine turtle(s) or manatee(s) has moved beyond the 50-foot radius of the project operation, or until 30 minutes elapses N the marine turties) or manatees) has not reappeared within 50 feet of the operation. Animals must not be herded away or harassed into leaving. e. Any collision with or k*xy to a marine turtle or manatee shall be reported immediately to the FWC Hotline at 14HO- 401 -FWCC. Collision and/or injury should also be reported to the U.S. Fish and wildlife Service in Jacksonville (1 904- 731 -3336) for north Florida or Vero Beach (1- 772 -562 -3909) for south Florida. f. Temporary suns concerning marine turtles and manatees shall be posted prior to and during all In- water project activities. AN signs are to be removed by the penmktee upon completion of the project. Awareness signs that have already been approved for this use by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) must be used (see MyFWC.com). One sign which reads Caution: Boaf m must be posted. A second sign measuring at least 61/2" by 11" e)plahi ng the requirements for 9dle Speedo Wake and the shut -down of In -water operations must be posted in a location prominently visible to all personnel engaged In water - related activities. 2010-12 -20 ot;1s ooa 1611 B 4? ...� i tti O i 3: -W ° N 3 ' .0 N W C) 4- E to � ....% Z •- a i- V lam "�; O W •N � �" ;S '�3 Q CL W ' • -- IL 0 U — co W �� January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5c - Status of RFP for Environmental Services From: Tom Cravens 1611 8 To: Neil Dorrill Cc: DMaht Brock: Georoia Hiller: Resnic(Lisa Subject: PBSD" s Role re: RFP Date: Friday, December 10, 2010 12:35:50 PM Greetings Neil, I have a number of concerns regarding the role of the PBSD and what is currently occurring with our RFP. After hearing Georgia Hiler speak at our last Board meeting I would like to communicate the following: 1) PBSD Board agreed they wanted to continue environmental monitoring of the mangroves estuary in Pelican Bay. 2) PB MSTBU non ad valorem fees have funded monitoring for well over a decade - specifically to evaluate the health of the Clam Bay mangroves estuary as directly related to our PBSD / MSTBU responsibility and benefit in restoring the mangroves estuary within the Pelican Bay PUD boundaries. 3) PBSD Board created a committee (with myself as the PBSD Board member) to oversee the RFP, which would be understood to create the Scope Of Work (SOW), review responses and select an appropriate consultant to contract to continue their environmental monitoring. 4) Purchasing Department has completely left the PBSD Board out of the loop for decisions about the PBSD's RFP, SOW, dollar amount limits, or any proposed changes to the composition of the PBSD created committee overseeing our RFP . 5) There's no need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the PBSD to continue activities which were previously approved by regulatory agencies because an EIS is only necessary to evaluate potential impacts to listed species for NEW activities not previously approved. The PBSD does not seek to do any NEW activities in the Clam Bay mangroves estuary preserve. 6) An EIS is an unnecessary expense which was added into our RFP without myself or the full PBSD Board having any discussion on it. 7) It has been reported that an EIS is required by the USCG to be included with any new County application for USCG approval of red /green markers. 8) The PBSD /MSTBU Board objects to installation of the red /green markers. It's a Coastal Zone Management project which now requires an EIS before the USCG accepts another permit application. 9) Action by the PBSD for their RFP is being converted by the Purchasing Department into a convoluted two part RFP /SOW for "Environmental and Biological Studies" which now includes an EIS which is not needed by the PBSD, but is needed by the Coastal Zone Management Department (McAlpin) to pursue permit(s) for red /green markers in Clam Bay which the PBSD objects to.. This situation needs to be remedied whereby other County Departments cannot impose their desired SOW an to PBSD- IMSTBU contract Additionally I would like to request that Lisa Resnick distribute this as a one -way communication to the PBSD Board. Tom Cravens Page 1 of 1 _Scan Z c ll 1 Statement of the Mangrove Action Group Board 1611 B To PBSD Board at the Meeting of January 5, 2010 Re: Scope of Work for Environmental Monitoring Relative to the current RFP under consideration, the Mangrove Action Group Board does not support an expansion of the scope of work for the PBSD's environmental monitoring contract, which was originally intended as a simple continuation of the biological monitoring required to maintain the mangrove ecosystem. 8 b 8 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 161 1 621 5d - Discussion of Resolution to Affirm Operating & Reporting Authority for Clam Bay - Page 1 of 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to adopt a resolution that returns and affirms the Pelican Bay Services Division's authority for Clam Bay OBJECTIVE: To adopt a resolution that returns and affirms the Pelican Bay Services Division's authority for Clam Bay. CONSIDERATIONS: During the regular meeting of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board of December 1, 2010, a review of the recent history surrounding Clam Bay was held with Commissioner Hiller. The goal of the discussion was to determine if a resolution of several policy matters between the community and county are attainable. In 2008, as the result of a disagreement over the closeout of the 19 Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan Joint Coastal Permit, the former County Ma r proposed a change in responsibility for several Clam Bay matters. Ordinance 200 adopted without amending the Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2006 -05 to crea e Cla Advisory Committee to review issues affecting the entire Clam Bay estuary sys , including irection, management, health and long -term viability of the entire estuary a o ma ecomme dations directly to the Coastal Advisory Committee. This changed the prim gement responsibility of Clam Bay, which had previously been under the Pelican Servic ivision since 1990 (Ordinance 1990- 111 as amended). Over the twenty years following the c n of lican ay Services Division MSTBU, numerous improvements at Clam P we nde en that included: • The restoration of 568 acre ngr rest damaged by stormwater runoff • Implementation of r r quality monitoring program • Development o assive oe ak trail marker system • Successful dre of the Pass inlet on two occasions In 2008, countywide beach ?Nkuffhment and inlet management responsibilities were assigned to the new Coastal Zone Manage nt (CZM) department. The Pelican Bay Services Division desires to reaffirm its role for the remaining activities, i.e., mangrove maintenance, water quality monitoring, and recreational canoe /kayak trails responsibility, and have CZM continue its role for inlet and beach re- nourishment activities. Approval of this request would result in the elimination of several conflicts between the community and Collier County. In addition, this would complete the closing of the 1998 Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan Joint Coastal Permit. Secondly, the matter of the navigational markers currently under appeal by direction of the former Commission would end and the county would avoid the future expense and responsibility associated with navigational markers that are considered by many to be unnecessary and dangerous. Finally, in review of the Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002 -27, and Ordinance 2006 -05 as amended, it appears that the intent of the Board of County Commissioners was to allow the 4 161 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5d - Discussion of Resolution to Affirm Operating & Reporting Authority for Clam Bay - Page 2 of 4 Pelican Bay Services Division Board to serve in an administrative, not advisory role. This would more closely resemble the CRA and Airport Authority organizations that ultimately report to the County Commission for budget appropriation but otherwise address their needs. Attached are copies of the Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinances and correspondence in support of the conclusions and requests mentioned above. FISCAL IMPACT: The current appeal of the navigational marker issue pending before the Division of Administrative Hearings is estimated to cost $ . Other costs involved with current mangrove maintenance and operations are included in the Services Division's FY 2011 budget. Costs associated with the inlet management plan and navigational markers for Clam Bay to date are $ and are not required by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection or U.S. Coast Guard. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This recommend ' is consistent with the County's Growth Management Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has bee iewed by County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board approval. RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County operating and administrative role of the Pelic 1 Prepared by: Neil Dorrill, Pelican B Attachments: 1. ColAResolut <20 1990- 2. Col3. Col 2006 -05 4. Col2008 -48 5. Pro - of County Commissioners affirm the Division. January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5d - Discussion of Resolution to Affirm Operating & Reporting Authority for Clam Bay - Page 3 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2011 - 161 l 441 A RESOLUTION THAT RETURNS AND AFFIRMS THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION'S AUTHORITY FOR CLAM BAY WHEREAS, during the regular meeting of the Pelican Bay Sery ces Division Board of December 1, 2010, review of the recent history surrounding Clam Bay was held with Commissioner Hiller; and WHEREAS, the goal of the discussion was to determine if a resolution of several policy matters between the community and county are attainable; and WHEREAS, in 2008, as the result of a disagreement over the Restoration and Management Plan Joint Coastal Permit, the fg� change in responsibility for several Clam Bay matters; and A WHEREAS, Ordinance 2008 -48 was adopted Division Ordinance 2006 -05 to create the Clai affecting the entire Clam Bay estuary system, it long -term viability of the entire estuary and to Advisory Committee; and *% WHEREAS, this changed the previously been under the PeN amended); and WHEREAS, over the MSTBU, numerous irry seout of the 1998 Clam Bay County Manager proposed a iendin Pelican Bay Services �sory CoiRffiittee to review issues direction, management, health and mendations directly to the Coastal REnt r9ponsibility of Clam Bay, which had Division since 1990 (Ordinance 1990 -111 as ,ing the creation of the Pelican Bay Services Division Pass were undertaken that included: • The res ion of 5 acres of mangrove forest damaged by stormwater runoff • Implement ten year water quality monitoring program • Development passive canoe /kayak trail marker system • Successful dredging of the Clam Pass inlet on two occasions; and WHEREAS, in 2008, countywide beach re- nourishment and inlet management responsibilities were assigned to the new Coastal Zone Management (CZM) department; and WHEREAS, the Pelican Bay Services Division desires to reaffirm its role for the remaining activities, i.e., mangrove maintenance, water quality monitoring, and recreational canoe/kayak trails responsibility, and have CZM continue its role for inlet and beach re- nourishment activities; and WHEREAS, approval of this request would result in the elimination of several conflicts between the community and Collier County; and WHEREAS, approval of this request would allow the 1998 Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan Joint Coastal Permit to be closed; and t - "' Av 16 1, 10 8 "L1 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5d - Discussion of Resolution to Affirm Operating & Reporting Authority for Clam Bay - Page 4 of 4 WHEREAS, approval of this request would allow the matter of the navigational markers currently under appeal by direction of the former Commission to end and the county would avoid the future expense and responsibility associated with navigational markers that many consider to be unnecessary and dangerous; and WHEREAS, in review of the Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002 -27, and Ordinance 2006 -05 as amended, it appears that the intent of the Board of County Commissioners was to allow the Pelican Bay Services Division Board to serve in an administrative, not advisory role that would more closely resemble the CRA and Airport Authority organizations that ultimately report to the County Commission for budget appropriation but otherwise address their needs; and WHEREAS, the Pelican Bay Services Division desires to serve in an administrative, not advisory role. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLOI3L The Pelican Bay Services Division not advisory capacity. The Pelican Bay Services Divisiot maintenance, water qualit responsibility in the Clam Ba st and beach re- nourishn�activ THIS RESOLUTION ADO favorable vote. ( - Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Pelican Bay Services Division Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY in an administrative, its authoritative role for mangrove J recreational canoe/kayak trails Eive CZM continue its role for inlet January, 2011, after motion, second and W. Neil Dorrill, Administrator Pelican Bay Services Division r 1'(3ST��,, 161 . 10 Statement of the Mangrove Action Group Board 1 g To PBSD Board at their Meeting of January 5, 2010 Re: PBSD's Authority for Clam Bay At the present time, the PBSD's authority includes the maintenance of the conservation and preserve areas in Pelican Bay and the PBSD remains actively involved in a variety of activities to that end. The Mangrove Action Group Board supports and endorses this involvement. However, we have come to the conclusion that the time is not right to revisit the PBSD's authority in the wide - ranging manner implied by the proposed resolution. We feel it could have unintended consequences. We respectfully request that the PBSD Board withdraw this resolution from further consideration. January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Divisil6d 1gul1essi821A 5e - U.S. 41 & Pelican Bay Boulevard North Crosswalk Update ResnickLisa Subject: FW: Phase IV Plans for US 41 and Pelican Bay Blvd N (FPID 427410 -1) From: Kevin Mangan [mailto:kevin.mangan @stantec.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 1:56 PM To: Carson Beadle; jimh @pelicanbay.org Cc: Bob Uek; vbellnpls @yahoo.com; mlickhalter.hsfa @comcast.net; Rose Mary Everett; Noreen Murray; gamoffatt@msn.com; Mary Ann Womble; keithdallas @comcast.net; ResnickLisa; Neil Dorrill; LukaszKyle; flaney @pelicanbay.org; Steve Sammons; Jeff Perry Subject: RE: FW: Phase IV Plans for US 41 and Pelican Bay Blvd N (FPID 427410 -1) Carson, et. al., As you may or may not know, the FDOT is preparing plans to provide sidewalks from the Market Place to extend south in the US 41 roadway corridor to a new set of cross walks at the Pelican Bay Blvd North and US 41 intersection including sidewalk connections to the ends of both pathways in Pelican Bay Boulevard immediately west of this intersection. Jim and I spoke about this on Tuesday in light of these new drawings you have received and we are preparing another round of comments for the FDOT. The FDOT project manager is well aware of the CIP efforts, the design intentions of the Pelican Bay crosswalks and the coordinated efforts between the Foundation and the PBSD to acheive these standards for the community. We have distributed in past meetings and provided by email with our previous comments CIP sketches depicting the intent of the brick crosswalks. We have also directly provided reference and location to the brick used in the Bay Colony private streets as a built example of the community goals all within 1/3 of a mile of the FDOT project site. I believe that FDOT has reviewed this application. Currently, the FDOT drawings have evolved from Thermoplastic paint lines when we first reviewed and commented on to be more in line with our requests of herringbone pattern (a CIP recommendation) and a concrete paver product with a red coloring like the brick at Bay Colony ( a product that was not the first choice of the committee nor our first recommendation in the CIP plans). While this is migrating in a direction that is in alignment with the CIP, we are preparing another set of comments in an effort to further align the special paving materials of the cross walk to be brick in the FDOT project at Pelican Bay North and US 41. In doing so, we are providing this information along with empiracle characteristic data of the brick in an effort to offset any contention of FDOT standards, etc. The FDOT will be the final say of qualified material products that they use in their roadways and intersections however as we collect this data over the next day or two, we intend to first review this with Jim as well as Kyle to garner consensus support of the brick in lieu of the concrete paver in the cross walk across Pelican Bay Boulevard and forward the same back to FDOT as part of our review. Kevin G. Mangan, ASLA WilsonMiller Stantec Ph: 239.649 -4040 ext. 7031 Fx: 239.643 -5716 Cl: 239.595.0401 kevin.mangan @stantec.com kevinmangan @wilsonmiller.com stantec.com The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately. u Please consider the environment before printing this email Page 1 of 16 16 11& 11 -• January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5e - U.S. 41 & Pelican Bay Boulevard North Crosswalk Update From: CarsonEB @aol.com [mailto:CarsonEB @ aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 1:15 PM To: jimh @pelicanbay.org; Kevin Mangan Cc: Bob Uek; vbellnpls @yahoo.com; mlickhalter.hsfa @comcast.net; Rose Mary Everett; Noreen Murray; gamoffatt@msn.com; Mary Ann Womble; keithdallas @comcast.net; Lresnick @colliergov.net; Neil Dorrill; Kyle Lukasz; Haney @pelicanbay.org Subject: Re: FW: Phase IV Plans for US 41 and Pelican Bay Blvd N (FPID 427410 -1) Jim, Kevin: Not being an engineer or architect, I assume it's OK that I have no idea what these are showing. Carson In a message dated 12/7/2010 10:16:52 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jimh @pelicanbay.org writes: Kevin, To confirm, is this crosswalk consistent with what we want throughout the community? To the rest of the group ... this is a State DOT project that WilsonMiller has been bird - dogging for us. Sincerely, J *w i}foppe Uteadt President Pelican Bay Foundation 6251 Pelican Bay Blvd. Naples, FL 34108 239 - 596 -6180 ext.223 239 - 597 -6927 fax 239 - 398 -7074 cell From: Spurgeon, Kellie [mai Ito: Kell ie. Spurgeon@dot. state.fl. us] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 9:43 AM To: ' nickcasalanguida @ colliergov.net'; 'michaelgreene @colliergov.net'; Anthony Khawaja; James Hoppensteadt Cc: Alison Bradford; dalebathon @colliergov.net; Kyle Lukasz; Faramarzifar, Mohammad R; Pearre, Pamela J; 'Carlos Ramirez (CRamirez @fallerdavis.com)'; Kevin Mangan; JeffPerry@wilsonmiller.com Subject: Phase IV Plans for US 41 and Pelican Bay Blvd N (FPID 427410 -1) Attached are a set of Phase IV Plans for the pedestrian safety improvement project on US 41 and Pelican Bay Blvd N (FPID 427410 -1). This project will add pedestrian features to the intersection. Please review the plans and submit your comments by December 23, 2010. If you have any questions or need a hard copy of the plans, please let me know. Thank you, Kellie Spurgeon, P.E. Florida Department of Transportation - District One (863) 519 -2654 kel lie.spurgeongdot. state.fl.us Page 2 of 16 1611 B21 - '7V'3'f00'f3 -SION 37OH H3ONO a-:nvm ONM 03k91S 31/3 .7lwylo3/3 3Hl SI 133HS Simi 30 3Hl x3 -lJON y w W= 05 ` ti E N - � 3 •• ¢ w i m t? Q ¢ e H? rd �Wp��OO Vhf � 3ti YN�POW •..W '-R ~ ~W OM U Sm 2 trpj 3] ��QMO2�;m W� W W 2 N � �y W ` J p¢ pW W > W tiZ'j OJT' �O � Y p = pp W W O Q 0 P P � ix1 N p a LO J OOOpO :ZE ( ~� 1�� ��`1 Q W - ^� W 00000 2 LIj `�1 Q ` i y p ' �QI V bI,� ia$ ///0��� �l tp p tp p tp w CL Lj- L �T �d :a mm ��� J M Lli Lij LLJ W Q ?E E W J p 2 W w ° g x a Z 3 -SZ -iI 3 -SZ -FI �- v1 2 Q IL Lo v h 01 1o. m tl8 �2�m ti0 �uN +l �Q�� Wp ��yT,Mo W, V N }^ml =W I� Y z � mv1'i3 v1=v2iQ W�2 �W F. 2 Uto L7 2 W 0za 2 W¢ Q a U p¢ 2 G �¢¢¢�i a �l Q Y �HOUZln ¢ ¢ ¢ S gg $.F, 2 � p p�n k 3 W W �NMtvl .n r� b q O NMP ¢�9,^Q M04 m m a 161 1 w '7Y3'f00'£d -5129 31/W U3UN/1 031V35 ONV 03NJIS 3113 J/MOH10313 311 5/ 13315 5 1H1 JO Ob'0.'13H M171330 311 /3.711ON v � 8 == N U o � E 'm a w a � � vi 1z '0 a W 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 _ _ 1 1__________ c 0 � O C o 1 ti N H 10 10 O O O 1N 10 O O O 1Or I t I I t 1 1 1N 1 1 ? P I 1p I 4 I 1 1 z W 1 X10 O iW�N gy1 __1 -------- _ i P I1�i1 U H N g 1 _ 24 W O�. U ti .. 2Q is WON U ;O O m m O2 1/N10000 i i> > � O L •'g� 001 1 ti Iti¢1Q ¢ � W i ti ti 2 2 UI� 1x, 01U U W W WU 101 IQ Q O O a> 1N1 1000020201 1� 1UNUNONONI ¢j i Q i i �� v1VV1UVf 1 WO 121 IOq �O�T�01 I iN2N�N�N1 NNiOi 'OpOp2p2p� OO :¢I \ 1�p ; 121 21 11 pr��I�IgW11 N I�cPitOi,i� }iN N N N � �J1 21 101 01 ti ¢ 10 O O O 1 1 1 1 1 1 as ---- --- - -- --- 1naU e W O 1611 821 0 'Jvj I wfd -S1019 310H H30N0 0-1 3S OW 03N015 3VJ JINOUIJJ73 3Hl 51 133HS SWI JO OHOJ3H 7VIJIJJ0 3H1 /30110N N W ¢ 2 C 9� W W2 Ua W �U ¢ 4 /y Y a Z � N � W2 C W � ¢ U a Z Y c�> a '21 W 3 Q W W � U M O 0 2 m o 9W Z W �lll� �U g Q non �nPR- NQ�`:� ^O1 W W L' OPT 4 j � N N N N N o J aJ U ¢ � ORP 011?ul wCL \iM NMNN�3��OM g = gg a m° j O 2 Q a m 2 a ON 008885���a� 2 m m c m cl- o O ¢ U U W W O W N U4 ��NANNNN�KiNN O ~O as N Lu Q � ? W Ct � a a ¢ O J a oo w p U siaaava a O a a ¢ h mO o a 30 /s � QN ti � h + N W Z ti O O 20 tq OJ z a CC O Q o a W ¢ cn [¢< C = P 4 V k qq 6 W O � Z J � s W w w j Z j N asp§ C5 V � yi y8W� �l N ui O v g o¢ � M O ¢ 2 O W N $W W H 33 Q < ~ a o W ¢ti O Li J W W O N Q O aW ¢ � W ? Q W 2 h V O2 ¢ QW vl O O WO tiO y � W N Q U a W ¢ 2 C 9� W W2 Ua W �U ¢ 4 /y Y a Z � N � W2 C � ¢ U a Z Y c�> a W 3 Q W W � U M O 0 2 Jl.m W �lll� �U g Q non �nPR- NQ�`:� ^O1 W W L' OPT 4 j � N N N N N o J aJ U ¢ ORP 011?ul O \iM NMNN�3��OM g N O WW ' WQ O Q 2 a ON 008885���a� x o mm Qi Ybbv1O O W N U4 ��NANNNN�KiNN O ~O N Q � ? W � a a ¢ J a U siaaava a O a a ¢ h mO o a 30 /s � QN ti � h + N a W ¢ 2 C 9� W W2 �U ¢ /y Y C 9� Z 3 � W2 ¢ Z c�> W 3 Q W W � U M O 2 Jl.m W �lll� �U g Q non �nPR- NQ�`:� ^O1 W a 3�NNma�o`4WM�`4 L' OPT 4 �'1 UO� 4 4 O O 4 N N N N N a W ¢ s �U ¢ O C 9� Z � W2 ti W 3 Q � W � U M O 2 Jl.m W �lll� �U g Q non �nPR- NQ�`:� ^O1 W a 3�NNma�o`4WM�`4 O O N1 � J aJ U � ORP 011?ul O \iM NMNN�3��OM g N WW ' WQ O ON 008885���a� o mm Qi Ybbv1O U4 ��NANNNN�KiNN F Ki iGNNNN�t�'iQN a s ¢ Z � Q � � U M O N W �lll� �U Q i O O O� J aJ U � g N WW ' WQ O ON U4 ¢ a � . { 1611 :BZI )) � 6 6 2 a0 2 % k \ 2 | 92 ( § ) ! ; * k \ §(} t2 \ k 2 E ( ) � k, )© } § ,$ �; ~�( �. ® � m N ci \ -§ QQ § / ® ®q AA�� ¢ ;& % `. ¥ � 1���, � m 1�1 e "G��, !�£ � = , % ,q , q AIR �� � ; ��w7 6� ;; m# » # } ©§§§ ® %! §\ »!»m! `� � ! ■ & %41 �!!: � 6 6 2 ( 2 92 ( § ) * k \ \ k 2 E ( ) cy 1611 1 B21 '7Yj'£00'£2 -5109 3111y N37N0 037tl35 OW 03N015 311 J /AO`J1J313 3N1 SI 133N5 5 /Nl -,o 0WJ3N ]tllJljiJ 3N1 :3J/l0N f9 � ti @B Z2 ul � a o m � W you yaW L ¢ m G 0C � 0 2 h2 O Z�+ti �0i2� mW a W3d38e �� mv/ � �a ti ¢� UW � y✓� � O 2 �2 Wi � ti� aW hIWn�22iWW 6 U �W a 2 2W QQ LL�2�I�UmU 41- �2 xW2 �a yWL� g �W 2 2 b C~ 1= ¢� :w WpWp Y VI mi < .p 1iq�'U F C2 y�� �In � q oo W W � c�c��_ � H� •�(i �v/v���p2m 2d �¢O � N OW > T O < W 2Q � 2 i b j Z 2` Q W 8 VIW tnW In Wa, N Wa Oa In C� Y OW paXWgQI� � O � W y U 4 R ` JJp x � oNi x`p�pOW�00 W L C �-i� O �2CNYp0CI- W�3 2 UC2`!N 2 31•�UCW�� M! ppa¢ - h W�f� W22WW1 -QU Q�O 2 � mOM 2 N U00¢020� Wa� 3 W OWN O U O�OWN��a OO ¢02�hLhW- mWj 2 a Hih W /Wi Ntn320�ObU O Win �n W< a < 202�U30 pp Nf 1-O < Q ORS 2LL�WCVIa ii- �¢O ti � NiW � O pWp��0�2 qWq Ox ULJ 2 2 iW� = 22LNIm UO •O • �Oti � � 222 2 a�321n X02 2U 2 b�< U 2 Z 2¢ ti�ObLpCp< b 20� O 3 NWh �Wi W WC003WE O OW�n � U Q CI 3CW-12 410¢ Q pCO U WU1� O h 2 QO JUU 2 OI�W C Q NWI WppU i0 W~ WVOaNI� d 2 vli h I� � C ippO t. W332b O ti0~ i W pXY> � �LW04ti2�C - m W612 L > aW 20 < W W¢Y23 �I�XC 1/1 Nti 1-O ,U O h �SUO CXWW W WO i OU2 O x I. UbaW 6. O� 3 2W� Uv /n W ¢ Wpp •< M 2 0 � ¢C2 b U W- W�CWUi 2 Cp b a¢ W o< •L 1�a22 Q 2Wi W < I�O< WL 2 in0 WYI��a��� MON Q L 1� N 2OQ WQU >QI.�� ? 20W UJJO 4 ONIY OU� 22 i0 m WOQ1� aI FF 2 UW U -+ 2LOW 2v/` 3 2? Q ¢ W¢O Wa WYx0 h OIn2W x OQ h W ONM X�UWO i < U�Wp2 W QI a0 U2 _ MO W02L30¢I�Y rc O OI'WL V J 003 WU N CW •4 WWNWf~002LpUp WaW. 2 xLa 2� U U� (� W2JA ibW •2 JWV�C O 3 � c�0�a� O $aWb a2OUi30 � U201W- Di twit ti �\U 20 30 .h W24�0¢2COiO1W- L � U1 U x m RU x � 0x 0 8 pp �vQ�ti ~ HQm�O a W<C� Of WmW22Q1 ¢-�WW� ¢W4 -U < •OM W1- �OG12 <2 W 02W /n C � 203 < 2UN NOb�x F. �4� 2W¢ �� L� 2N 1pp-�W iln Off- WOW i I 20WW X2 J N ISO 2 I��Om<= 1- LU2�SONW W2 m O W 2 621 1611 ✓� '7rd•fwf., -SK1N PfW'30N0 037V35 ONV 09MVS 311e OIACW103/3 3'1 5/ 133'5 SI'1 A C"-:w NI.Ae-,V 3'1 :XVION N 95 ti =2 b Kx E 3 = oU b0 O O Z E 4 O 2 2 � 2 m W Z. •(Q aa 'o • �vWi3vl¢iw ig vi g u� ki Q M •QJ Wv�jN Q `i + a' I�Ri ° o i T � o P W a 1`ai�a F«aa qi�3� mW C Vim,$ VI„4 S $ � +o d W z 4 a Q P ¢� ��i• 8�� 0 8�h 4 G 2 u W VI W O m a IL 0 N 'p d � m o 02 31 O m r= m mT ad �a o ^a a r �? ` o � 'N '0A78 NG NVJ173d W W W W m. o� W ' 1611 621 31n 2 ¢NN � � � 7I� �' Boa i I I I 1IL— Wg N O ti ' W WOOLL� I I W � _ p� O W 2W� off¢ y - 0 I I WI I l I III om Wg> ? W N¢ IWiIO ig W � WW �2 � o 21yT`12 2 2 W W O O ¢ ¢� 2W 2 �W ; IOiti W WHO' .2 a�WOa .12 iy 2 O *Xrd'fOPf2 -5105 3VW N30NO 0DV35 ONtl 03NO15 Dig JINOU,J313 3„ 51 133,5 SIN, _,U Obw-:w NIJljj0 3„ .13J/,ON I� I I I I � Iw 11111 I I I I IIII i i I I ' IN I �pI' N W an�rl � it II i I I I n II eat l III I ' � IIIII m � I IIII Iltg 1511 `� I I I j e l l I i I I I I 'Ngl1 \�� �i4� ♦' /d I I I I III W N W , 0�� OW�IynI •IIII III :ill III � :I I III I III Q �:I I III + °1 ®Q bd C 22 3 U � � � � 7I� �' Boa i I I I 1IL— Wg N O ti ' W WOOLL� I I W � _ p� O W 2W� off¢ y - 0 I I WI I l I III l I t ✓ IIII �t��j 2 2 O I� II � I I ( -- I Lia�N, I II O O ¢ ¢� II.I I vt N IIII �n� hl Ie III ! i II III it I ii I I ��II IWVI � I I II I I I o 0 i� ¢�QaQrtn N W OOOy I I� � I II + °1 ®Q bd C 22 I � =0 3 I II Q 7I� �' Boa i I I I 1IL— Ctim2WO lisOC:c� Od W2 ' W WOOLL� I I W � _ I t, I I NII I I off¢ y m Uj I I I I WI I l I III l I t ✓ IIII �t��j � giI I I I� II � I I ( -- I Lia�N, I II II I O ¢ ¢� II.I I vt N IIII �n� hl Ie III ! i II III it I ii I I ��II IWVI � I I II I I I o 0 i� ¢�QaQrtn N W I I I I� � I II III I 2 O I II � � jr- I l iii II III 1 -- A. FW. k h \\ I I I I (Will �W3 IZ-I I Q / a iNi �oo mim NOIIJW, + °1 ®Q bd C 22 tta2,?�yaO�� 'all wVf JHxx W= =0 3 I II Q 7I� �' Boa i I I I 1IL— Ctim2WO lisOC:c� Od W2 ' W WOOLL� I I W II ' 1 _ Emfll,__� a I I ' ' I y o 09 li" W III l I t ✓ IIII �t��j � giI I I I� II � I I ( -- I Lia�N, I II II I O ¢ ¢� II.I I vt N IIII �n� hl Ie III ! i II III it I ii I I ��II IWVI � I I II I I I + °1 ®Q bd C 22 tta2,?�yaO�� 'all wVf JHxx W= O Q O� OIOi Ctim2WO lisOC:c� Od W2 O� UW �¢O tipN Q o 09 li" W W mW ¢ I. a Q 2 O Ft O ¢ ¢� 2x qqc �YWW�YO ON�� V1W W �Nm Idil�O J ®[flEfl vt N o 0 i� ¢�QaQrtn N W W O l�uu2m� qqto h O2� 3 2 O O O O U pW;�OWW� ¢Fi �¢a O ¢I V1 O FW. k h W~In I I I I (Will �W3 IZ-I I Q iNi �oo O n W =2 H 2 C O N ti e �O O P J O M i P 2 9 W W � W W� W i 0 ¢4. Q W ti iW e� W �a NO m w m a � O o O� o 2 mW Ft � g vt N o 0 N W W 2¢ 3 2 O O O O U 2 2O 2 FW. k h O O U NOIIJW, DMIA11 O n W =2 H 2 C O N ti e �O O P J O M i P 2 9 W W � W W� W i 0 ¢4. Q W ti iW e� W �a NO m w m a dg �y WN m oU S c oZ �v w p m m �Cm ad o� 1611 B214 '0'V'3'fwfz -sl" 3)/W a30NN 037V3$ ow 03M01S 3113 OIAOH1J313 311 $I 13315 5111 A GUO.'/3a N/013dJ 311 +3JIlm m 0 0 a F. =g " � I I I I w I I I 3015 J N QNHOM Q 3 I I I I Q I I I I 133a1S 2 N a3teraa Q 63N1� UNI®d6 I I 11111 Q I I 11111 ¢ 3 3 ry�ry ,y w I I I I W oN 3 avoa VON U) I 1 I I 1 1 I I W I I 1 1 I I 1 1 Q a 133tl15 3�5 W= J o N � 3 avoa $ I I I I u 009 aorn g 3 avoa 1 I 11 8 i0A0 tl�06[ R a I I P I I Ljv) I I p 45- QD ` I I 1 Q I I I I N V1 Z Z YtlOY OYOY Q W O 003 ROAD 5 15 WORK 500 Fr 3 W ? O j Qj I I I I " U, m I I I I 1 1 1 1 11 ` I I I I BPEEdNO FlNES W N Q k k I I I I PRESENT ja Q? ti w of a I I I I g � m i Q a a m Q y 11 I I 1 1 I I ROAD 8 WORK N I WLE 3 IN ° I I I I C- N Mt P vl I I I I m 0 0 a 0 `mra Kgv o N 0 c o U 'S r oZ tE rm° m cam �a N N V N S � o � 0 1611 '7Yd'f0O•f3 -Sq5 3Hk/ H3ONH O37N3S OW 03AOIS 31Id 3AW1J313 3H1 S/ 133H5 SIHl A a9M-7a 7V12d 0 3H1 +321ON w 'N TA-18 AU'8 NGJl73d F �w U W � � � W � WWI W W�ti W Iii N III III III N V .w W� W F H 2O2� ¢U C O NW I N a � "• w �� . •I'I I III as 11CIVI Nj till iI1I111 III w till 1 j�l zQ: 1111111 I III o� I�j�lll Ln •il I I 1 ��� 111111; I I l i w� a 1111111 � �w �I I 111 ??N 111111 : I W;I 1 1j1 Ililh 1III9� �'I I III till W •i � I I I 1 ��III�I �I �I I I I �Z I x g Oi H I I I II I I I I 'I I I III I I 7 � I I I III I I I Il�p L4 1 m : I 1111 w w I 1111 a I II I h I I II :I PIIII a 2 N ;I VIII I el !III °zu) a w LQ u) •• .• '` 'ill o "$� -- • yW � -�" - -' VIII W I V i� 111 4 g W l; � W W Jg11 d w 'N TA-18 AU'8 NGJl73d F �w U W � � � W � WWI W W�ti W Iii N III III III N V .w W� W F H 2O2� ¢U C O NW I N a � "• w �� . •I'I I III as 11CIVI Nj till iI1I111 III w till 1 j�l zQ: 1111111 I III o� I�j�lll Ln •il I I 1 ��� 111111; I I l i w� a 1111111 � �w �I I 111 ??N 111111 : I W;I 1 1j1 Ililh 1III9� �'I I III till W •i � I I I 1 ��III�I �I �I I I I �Z I x g Oi H I I I 11 11 I I I I I I III I I � I I I III I I w 1 WI I I� a q I I II I h I I II a I� I 11 l i o o '� �� ` Wi � I N �`MI W�l � • � � �� I ~W I II.. •I �� I I � � OOF a� N WO • W t/�2 O � 2 N O`V10 UddM 2�� Pii���� x Oyxj3 3 3 i wt pg �h� All SCI Wm2�W O jWO� �i V2h� w3� �OV¢iWg i ¢j=cW q23 FYF¢y��Y' a.1��OWy�W tai, �2�W� W �✓]= O p��W� WNp$� W �WWi2 GGF�?m� 2 i C� BOO a ri m a a 0 �8 �y m r 02 N e �m a0 a �a om zN Wt m W � o 2 ti _ U W O a O I ��a W QaN II II„ W W> �I I I W* 8 m j W I IIII OWW I 9 Q Q I�I �W • j I liii ,a }W jIII W� �• �' I h t 9N /dVOSCArd7 '! N TA78 Oa 2. = Np0173d 6,3lina ti O O ti W Z 0 a to W PO Wm� N W � Iligl ` Iii �I Q 111 =1 q I1' Q; HgP � I9 �c o�N �I'I�ga w2Ln ICI LU I I � I • I I III I �Ij N W�tiW �U yg C2'i" � ky qm C �W II II zg 1�1 ii I II W l o I X \ 11 J I '-•� a'W �� 111 It WI I II I I I !I I I II I I II I I II II I I I I I II II�J i I I I II I II I I II �I I i� I II 1~/1 t~i`1 eJ U U }W x2 W� Uy �~ mm 2 e>v m * ICU <I'I� W n IpI N P II'III; I pkW Ilia w � a 1111111 a + 1111111 22N 11 1'� N mm� 111j1�I III IMI 1611 B21- ti� m W g O 3 a Q1 h V Q: III I II I o�� II I N�C� III I ! W11 o c I o � qil I I I II � j' O N F I P11 "a3 8 W g� W * i lad II4 Ci Ln W I� � II I I II Ala ap _ C 2O U = I � m Q a =� a "< a W� m O a 161 1 B21 'J'Y3'f00'F2 -SkN9 31/W N30Nn 03N-:n ONV 03NO15 InId OIWWO- 13 3N1 S/ 133N5 SIN1 eO G=-:;N IVIJ /33O 3N1 +3JIlON m `o a . 1611 § a ) § /( ) ■ Q � ) � @ t � $ m � k � ) e a 4 m * t \� k \ \9 \. \2 : 2 i■§ � k t � , �� ( � � ( k ! § t § ! 7 � k . & k §} § (§ | §© ƒ � �■ \ R. e. ) \ � � § IIQ � | ® � ®t � © ! \ § & k �,6 = 8 97 o � m � 80 i5 .E E m° a0 um �a N r �? C 1611 'J'V'J IrwrL -sw _Wnu H30N0 037V35 ow 03N&S 3LJ JINVtl1JM.? 3H1 SI 133H5 5IH1 -,V 0"-:;U 7VIJIJX 3H1 +3JI10N ti Wz M _ M � II II..IN''Ni s 1 1 1 ! i I� INi III I I .I III I I I m I .t �I IINI i i I I I I I INI I a I I I I I I I j l q 4 ' I NNI i i ! i i I ICI III I I I I � ti � N1 it If I I� III III= 1 I - -tI�W _ 1111111 I I , I' I I I I I' 1 1 1 I I I I It 1 1 I !1111 I; ! I I ICI 11 1 '^� I II It 1 1 s I � III I I 6 IdOIS 1 li 1 C N I J I 11 ii I I I' i t I II II II I -N '0A78 AVG NVO /73d LL i 3 - -+ m. 111 111 ''�� 1111111 � I II I —jl II j\ ��- °_ �� Il 1 1 1 1 Ilti l ; I I I 1 1 1 II II i i 1 1 11� 11!1111 II II 1 1 II II I I ( 11 Illil 1 IA �o I I 111 � � II II I I I II I I I li �� I 1 Il 1111111 „ I II II I II VI �m a IIIII I I I I I I I I I I �� II I 111 ? INjll ; I t II II I I! I I oa �� �1 I ill Iii 111111' I I I II II 1 1 II I I W a I I 1 1 1 Q 11111 It I 111 ¢ Illll� I ; I II l l 1 111 i t a II I }II I I I 111 NCI I it W 1 1 lit III I I II I I WW Ra s 95 m Y 2 m°a oU oZ to � mm m -. a �a vi a rN � h B21a WO C 2 2 f li II � I i ; lill9l II 1 I l I I I I I it I I I 11 { I IIII II I I I I ICI III I II I j� 3 Neem��e III II I IIN illy II m f w� a to to II I rill �� I I i Illll I la - � � n ii i i ll Illgs I Ii ii I I� �° ' �yy� II I I ;c�ii� II II I C iii, Iii I �g�a3 WP W •-, A( �, I I I, N I I I I III III I ` 2 I s Q 'N TA78 AVG NVO173d LL- N /I W �I l ill � I � II i t I I `1 ✓/. II III Illlli i t i ii I II I I l � III III I I Ill l ll' i i I I I I I `— -- 2'I I III IIIII I rnl i ii I II 3 e 3 IIII III Illlll ' �i i ii I I o � {l�l ll l Illrl I i I I I I I I I I W Q Q i t III IIII �� III I I I I I I I I I{ � 11 � � I I III I I II II i i i ii II I II �� I I III Iljllll i i i ii 11 I I I I II II , I I I I I II II II I II I a : :3a3 3 {IIII! ; I II 11 3 omuZ. iou II I III ? IIIIIII i i i ii II I II I ����000 � III c IIIIIII II II I I IIy����� �I I III � IIIII I 1 I 11 0���� Q $ I�� III I~I lillll' I I I II II I I II i WOOa�� W III Q Illill; INI I II II I II I ������� W W W W W I I III Q IIIIIII I I i I l l l IIIIIII � I I I I l l I� II I I s I I III lil�lli i i i i i I i N II I I � li II �l I }il i l i. I III IIIIIII I 1� I!� I I Il I I m m i� a 1611 N 'TV'3'fOD'fd -SIO19 3701 H31]NO O3 V35 ONV 03N&S 3bJ JIA1091O3I3 3N1 S, 13315 SI11 -O C"3a IVIOUX 311 :3OI1ON 95 m Y 2 m°a oU oZ to � mm m -. a �a vi a rN � h B21a WO C 2 2 f li II � I i ; lill9l II 1 I l I I I I I it I I I 11 { I IIII II I I I I ICI III I II I j� 3 Neem��e III II I IIN illy II m f w� a to to II I rill �� I I i Illll I la - � � n ii i i ll Illgs I Ii ii I I� �° ' �yy� II I I ;c�ii� II II I C iii, Iii I �g�a3 WP W •-, A( �, I I I, N I I I I III III I ` 2 I s Q 'N TA78 AVG NVO173d LL- N /I W �I l ill � I � II i t I I `1 ✓/. II III Illlli i t i ii I II I I l � III III I I Ill l ll' i i I I I I I `— -- 2'I I III IIIII I rnl i ii I II 3 e 3 IIII III Illlll ' �i i ii I I o � {l�l ll l Illrl I i I I I I I I I I W Q Q i t III IIII �� III I I I I I I I I I{ � 11 � � I I III I I II II i i i ii II I II �� I I III Iljllll i i i ii 11 I I I I II II , I I I I I II II II I II I a : :3a3 3 {IIII! ; I II 11 3 omuZ. iou II I III ? IIIIIII i i i ii II I II I ����000 � III c IIIIIII II II I I IIy����� �I I III � IIIII I 1 I 11 0���� Q $ I�� III I~I lillll' I I I II II I I II i WOOa�� W III Q Illill; INI I II II I II I ������� W W W W W I I III Q IIIIIII I I i I l l l IIIIIII � I I I I l l I� II I I s I I III lil�lli i i i i i I i N II I I � li II �l I }il i l i. I III IIIIIII I 1� I!� I I Il I I m m i� a January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update (12128/10) Paae 1 of 17 161 1 12-B22 I Clam Bay: A Status Report By Steve Feldhaus, Foundation Secretary Negotiations with Collier County on Clam Bay matters have reached a critical stage, and I would like to provide a full report on the progress that has been made, what is happening now, and what you can expect in the months ahead. I would also like to ask you to share this information with your fellow members. We need the input and involvement of our entire community to ensure that the steps taken to resolve this long running controversy are wise and enduring. For those of you who are new arrivals, or who may have missed one or more of the stages of this saga, various articles from the Pelican Bay Post and other communications on the subject can be found at the Foundation's web site, www.pelicanbaV.org. There is a lot of history here, and I urge you to become informed about this critical issue. The Foundation has reached a preliminary and tentative agreement in principle with the County whereby the Foundation and the County would have equal votes on all decisions affecting the management of Clam Bay. As previously reported, on June 30, 2010, Foundation President Jim Hoppensteadt and I met with County staff. The purpose of the meeting was to determine whether the Foundation and Collier County could find a way to work together on Clam Bay and particularly on a ten year permit and management plan for Clam Bay. We were able to reach a preliminary and tentative agreement in principle with the County whereby the Foundation and the County would have equal votes on all decisions affecting the management of Clam Bay. We contemplate that the agreement will be in effect for ten years, with a provision that it will continue for subsequent ten year periods unless either party elects to terminate it at the end of any ten year period. The Foundation would retain all of its legal rights under the Clam Bay governing documents in the event the agreement is terminated. This agreement in principle is subject to being reduced to writing and approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and by the Foundation Board, but in the meantime the Foundation and County staff have been working together on the assumption and in the hope that a final agreement will be approved by the BCC and by the Foundation Board. The Foundation has been meeting regularly with County staff on Clam Bay matters. These meetings have been extremely productive as we have worked through an extensive array of water quality, testing, dredging, and other issues arising in the context of managing Clam Bay. Since the June 30 meeting we have been meeting regularly with County staff on Clam Bay matters. Jim Hoppensteadt and I, and the Foundation's coastal engineering and environmental consultants, have had multiple meetings with Marla Ramsey, County Public Works Administrator, Gary McAlpin, County Director of Coastal Zone Management, the County's 1 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services 4 Blard Lular S io y 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Co�fii ittee Update (12/28/10 Y rt•IEr 12 -28 -2010 coastal engineering and environmental consultants, as well as representatives of the City of Naples. These meetings have been extremely productive as we have worked through an extensive array of water quality, testing, dredging, and other issues arising in the context of managing Clam Bay. Both County personnel and City of Naples personnel have been extremely cooperative, and we have been able to arrive at proposed resolutions of issues based upon broad scientific consensus. It has been a refreshing change from the acrimonious relationship that the County has had with the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD in recent years. We also have been keeping interested stakeholders within Pelican Bay as well as Kathy Worley of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida abreast of what has been going on with the County. An alarming development: The PBSD Board has been asked to consider a motion at its January 5th meeting to petition the BCC for the PBSD to regain control over certain Clam Bay matters. Incredibly, this motion has been presented without any discussion with the Foundation, with its Ad Hoc Committee on Clam Bay, or with the Pelican Bay community. Our efforts have been directed towards a meeting with County staff, including County Manager Leo Ochs, in early January to begin the process of reducing our tentative agreement to writing. However, there is an alarming development: The PBSD Board is going to consider a motion at its January 5th meeting to petition the BCC for the PBSD to regain control over certain Clam Bay matters. It is regrettably a fact that there area few within our community who are so antagonistic to the County that they view any negotiated settlement with the County as intrinsically suspect and risky. They have devised their own plan forward, which would involve the PBSD having primary responsibility for Clam Bay. Incredibly, their plan has been presented without any discussion with the Foundation, with its Ad Hoc Committee on Clam Bay, or with the Pelican Bay community. This approach risks undermining what have proven to be ver'! successful negotiations with the County. This approach disregards the two plus years of effort of the Foundation's Ad Hoc Committee on Clam Bay, and risks undermining what have proven to be very successful negotiations with the County. Some in this rump group have decried what they see as the lack of openness of the Ad Hoc Committee's negotiations, and yet they themselves have held no public meetings about their approach, nor have they published anything, formally or otherwise, which attempts to justify why the eleventh hour approach they advocate would be superior to the solution carefully crafted over the past several years by the Foundation and its Ad Hoc Committee. Background on how the Foundation's Ad Hoc Committee has apprc ached Clam Bay issues. I will comment below in the merits of their proposal, but first I want to give you a little background on how the Ad Hoc Committee has approached the various Clam Bay issues. Initially, even before the Committee was formed an incredible amount of time was spent January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Div i o ar Reg ar Ses 6b -Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Comm1dat (12/10) PaaP 3 nf 17 12 -28 -2010 researching the legal and regulatory situation applicable to Clam Bay. At the time the PBSD and the County were at odds over red and green lateral navigational markers, over dredging, over water quality studies, over proposed water flow modeling studies, and over who should be responsible for what in Clam Bay. You may recall the vitriolic attacks some of those within our community leveled against the County. The situation grew so intense that the County, which owns Clam Bay and which has total control over the PBSD, simply took away from the PBSD the responsibility for managing Clam Bay. During all of this time no one spoke or wrote about who had the legal right to control what goes on within Clam Bay. It became apparent fairly early on that, through Declarations and Protective Covenants that were created in 1982 when Clam Bay was deeded to the County, the Foundation and only the Foundation has the legal right to a seat at the table in deciding what goes on within Clam Bay. About two years ago the Foundation Board decided that the Foundation, as a party with legal standing, should become involved in what had become a bitter dispute, and the Foundation Board unanimously created the Ad Hoc Committee on Clam Bay, comprised of myself, Bill Carpenter, now Chairperson of the Foundation, Mike Coyne, Vice - Chairperson of the Foundation, Henry Price, former Chair of the Legal Committee of the Foundation, and Cora Obley (recently deceased, a tremendous loss to our community). I would like to explain how the Ad Hoc Committee approached this incredibly complex issue. There is an excellent record available from speeches, articles, emails, and personal conversations, much of which is available on the Foundation's web site, where we have tried to explain what we have been doing in these negotiations, but perhaps it may be helpful to elaborate a bit more on how and on what basis we have conducted these negotiations. There is a discussion on what I call Principled Negotiations attached. The Foundation has conducted its negotiations with the County, and with the interested stakeholders within our community, using the attached fundamental rules of what I call Principled Negotiations. The end result is that the Foundation and the County are close to a resolution of this long simmering dispute. We have conducted our negotiations with the County, and with the interested stakeholders within our community, using these fundamental rules of Principled Negotiations. The end result is that we are close to a resolution. We are not there yet, and there is still a lot of work to be done. But as the Foundation Board has made it clear throughout this process, no deal with the County will be made without a full opportunity for our community to review and comment on and have input into the proposed transaction. Against this background, a few individuals, without any discussions with the Ad Hoc Committee, the Foundation Board, or the larger Pelican Bay community, have proposed their "deal" for the PBSD Board to regain control over certain, as yet undetermined, aspects of Clam Bay. IL_ 3 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division d Ieg ul i] Session D z 1 2 4 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Commit Uoate 121 0) e=.wA 12 -28 -2010 That is the background against which a few individuals, without any discussions with the Ad Hoc Committee, the Foundation Board, or the larger Pelican Bay community, have proposed their "deal" for the PBSD Board to regain control over certain, as yet undetermined, aspects of Clam Bay. On one level, their "deal" has a certain attractiveness. As we all know, the PBSD has done a stellarjob over the years maintaining Clam Bay, and one solution to handling Clam Bay issues clearly could be to put control in the hands of the PBSD. The PBSD has an institutional knowledge of Clam Bay issues and has the ability to levy assessments of our members to be able to fund the studies and analysis that will be necessary going forward to manage Clam Bay. Before we as a community endorse this course of action, however, we should carefully consider all its ramifications. The plan for the management of Clam Bay that is currently being negotiated with the County by the Ad Hoc Committee (admittedly, still to be reduced to writing, and subject to approval by the BCC and by the Foundation Board) involves the Foundation and the County having equal say on all Clam Bay matters, with a provision that if the parties cannot agree, the matter will be subject to arbitration. The proposal for the PBSD to regain control over certain Clam I "ay matters would involve abandoning the co- management plan currently being negotiated between the County and the Foundation. The proposal for the PBSD to regain control over certain Clam Bay matters would involve abandoning the co- management plan currently being negotiated between the County and the Foundation. We need to consider carefully what the control structure truly would be with the PBSD in control of Clam Bay and what matters would properly be under the jurisdiction and control of the PBSD. The County's current practice is to require that Coastal Zone Management have jurisdiction over inlets and passes, a practice that enables the County to control potentially costly issues such as water quality and dredging. It is unlikely that the County will cede water quality or dredging issues o the PBSD. The County's current practice is to require that Coastal Zone Management have jurisdiction over inlets and passes, a practice that enables the County to control potentially costly issues such as water quality and dredging. It is unlikely that the County will cede water quality issues to the PBSD, since water quality issues may well be some of the most critical and potentially costly issues to be dealt with in Collier County in the years ahead. In contrast, the co- management plan being negotiated between the Foundation and the County provides that the Foundation and the party will jointly deal with water quality issues. Already in just a few short months our experts and the County's experts have been able to reach agreement on water quality testing procedures, and have tentatively agreed on a plan to deal with water quality issues in Clam Bay. 4 161 1 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board AUIRZ 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update (12/28/10) Paae 5 of 17 12 -28 -2010 It is also difficult to see the County ceding to the PBSD the control over the dredging of Clam Pass, which is paid for by funds from the Tourist Development Tax, not from Pelican Bay funds. In contrast, the Foundation's negotiations with the County have resulted in an agreement regarding dredging that protects the ebb shoal, that protects our property at South Beach, that ensures that dredging will only occur when necessary for the health of the mangroves, and that gives the Foundation an equal say in when and where to dredge. I don't see the County allowing the PBSD to make those decisions. Regardless of what responsibilities over Clam Bay a majority of County Commissioners might grant to the PBSD today, another majority of County Commissioners could reduce or withdraw those responsibilities at a future date. But most fundamentally, regardless of what responsibilities over Clam Bay a majority of County Commissioners might grant to the PBSD today, another majority of County Commissioners could reduce or withdraw those responsibilities at a future date. The PBSD Board would have no legal right to object to having its responsibilities over Clam Bay reduced or even eliminated, just as they had no right to object in 2008 when the BCC took just that action. Again, in contrast, the agreement being negotiated between the Foundation and the County would be legally binding, and would limit during its term the County from taking unilateral action in Clam Bay. I also note that the City of Naples has an interest in Clam Bay, both because part of Clam Bay is in the City of Naples, because Clam Bay is connected to Moorings Bay, and because Clam Bay and Moorings Bay are both within the same WBID (water body identification number, a designation used by State authorities for managing water resources in Florida). We have taken the considerations of the City of Naples into account in arriving at the currently proposed man .agement structure for Clam Bay. It is not at all clear how the City of Naples would react to the PBSD controlling Clam Bay matters. They certainly did not react well to the way the PBSD handled the red and green marker issue. I am cautiously optimistic that we are going to be able to resolve the red and green lateral navigational marker issue. And speaking of the red and green lateral navigational marker issue, I have previously reported that I am cautiously optimistic that we are going to be able to resolve this issue, and have asked for our community to tamper down its often acerbic approach to this sensitive and contentious issue. Many of us are concerned that those in our community who appear to believe that war is preferable to a negotiated settlement, who seem to have concluded that the County can never be trusted, and who refuse to abandon the conflict with the County over Clam Bay, are leading us down a path of renewed conflict that in fact will not result in our community gaining control 5 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay ServicELL l 1 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update (12/2) Oul II 12- 28-2010 of Clam Bay. A few in this rump group have said that they feel left out of the process, and that they do not understand the rationale behind the various positions that the Ad Hoc Committee has taken over the past several years. How the Ad Hoc Committee conducted its negotiations with the Cot nty. While we have tried to be as transparent as possible, and while no one can doubt that we have spoken and written extensively and I believe very clearly on the subject, perhaps we have not been as clear as we could be. One reason has been that negotiations are delicate affairs, and that publishing your negotiating position is not always a wise thing to do. However, we have now concluded that we are far enough along in the negotiations that we can share with our community how the Ad Hoc Committee has handled these negotiations. To do so I will use the Principled Negotiations framework as per the attached. Principle 1: Aim To Win. The first step was to decide, in a realistic and intellectually honest way, what was possible. From the outset we had no goal other than "winning." However, before one can decide what winning entails, you have to do the hard work necessary to understand the complete legal, factual, and interpersonal background of the situation. In other words, we had to determine, in a very realistic and intellectually honest way, what was possible. We had to understand the legal framework. The work began with an attempt to understand the legal framework. First, it is a fact that the PBSD is an arm of the County, and as such is under the total control of the BCC. The PBSD Board, as an advisory Board, is empowered by and under the authority and control of the BCC, with the authority to advise the BCC on the administration of a Municipal Services and Taxing Benefit Unit that was established to enable the residents of Pelican Bay to assess themselves to pay for certain extra services and facilities, including upgraded street lighting and medians, for example, that the County would not otherwise be willing to provide to Pelican Bay. The PBSD Board is not an elected Board. It is appointed by the BCC. Pelican Bay property owners are entitled to vote their preference for PBSD Board seats, and fortunately the BCC has followed those preferences in making appointments to the PBSD Board, but they are not required to do so. The Ordinance that sets forth the scope of responsibility for the PBSD is subject to amendment at any time by the BCC. We saw this in stark terms when the BCC voted on September 9, 2008 to take away from the PBSD the responsibility for Clam Bay, instead establishing the Clam Bay Advisory Committee to advise the BCC, and the County Coastal Advisory Committee, on Clam Bay matters. A number of us were involved in meeting and talking with the members of the January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Service4i Efardqlegul es�6n i. 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Co U date12 /2 V+ Paae 7 of 17 12 -28 -2010 BCC about that proposed action, and it became apparent in the harshest way that the BCC felt in no way compelled or obliged to deal with the PBSD —the BCC was going to do whatever it wanted to do with regard to Clam Bay. The PBSD is always going to be subservient to the BCC, and it has no independent source of power that it could exercise over Clam Bay. The lesson we learned in this analysis and in our various interactions with the BCC and County staff was that the PBSD is always going to be subservient to the BCC, and that it has no independent source of power that it could exercise over Clam Bay. Even if we could today convince a majority of the BCC to cede control over Clam Bay to the PBSD, there was absolutely no way to make that control permanent. At any time and over any issue a simple majority of the BCC is all that would be required for the BCC to reassign responsibility for Clam Bay matters to whatever entity it wishes. Concurrently, we reviewed the governing documents of Clam Bay and of the Pelican Bay Foundation. That review revealed that the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance that formed Pelican Bay clearly indicated that Clam Bay was being set aside for the residents of Pelican Bay. This Ordinance was passed by the BCC, originally in 1977, and although it has been amended multiple times since, this provision has remained intact over the years. We also found that the predecessor in title to the Foundation, what is now WCI Communities, Inc. (WCI), had deeded Clam Bay to the County in 1982, as part of very complex set of negotiations with the County, the State predecessor to what is now the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and the US Army Corps of Engineers. At the same time that Clam Bay was deeded to the County, WCI placed a set of restrictions and protective covenants on what could be done in Clam Bay. These were done by Deed and were clearly intended to be binding upon the County. The County accepted its Deed to Clam Bay, and when it did so it specifically recognized in writing that it was taking Clam Bay subject to these restrictions and protective covenants. The Clam Bay restrictions and protective covenants, coupled with the PUD Ordinance, provide the only viable source of legally enforceable power for our community to have a seat at the table on Clam Bay matters. These restrictions and protective covenants, coupled with the PUD Ordinance, thus appeared to provide the only viable source of legally enforceable power for our community to have a seat at the table on Clam Bay matters. However, further research indicated that WCI had in fact not fully transferred all of its rights and powers to the Foundation with respect to these restrictions and protective covenants. Thus in the spring of 2008 the Foundation began negotiations with WCI in an effort to convince WCI to assign all of its rights in Clam Bay to the Foundation. These negotiations took approximately one year, but they were successful, and in April of 2009 WCI assigned all of its rights in Clam Bay to the Foundation. 7 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Div io ar Reg�lar S112 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Commie da (1 8/10 Page 8 of 1 t w 12 -28 -2010 As these negotiations were being conducted, and long before the Foundation decided to create its Ad Hoc Committee on Clam Bay, we conducted extensive additional research to determine just how viable the rights were that we were seeking to obtain from WCI. Initially, it became clear that the restrictions and protective covenants were not absolute, and that they did not give WCI total control over all matters in Clam Bay. For example, the restrictions and protective covenants did not cover on their face things like red and green lateral navigational markers, a source of a heated dispute between the PBSD and the County. The coverage of dredging was also quite limited. For example, the restrictions and protective covenants provided that the County could not apply for a dredging permit without the prior approval of WCI, but it did not limit in any way what the County could do once it obtained a permit to dredge. The Foundation's rights under the restrictions and protective coven rots are not absolute. The Foundation has to have reasons for the exercise of it ; rights, and those reasons would have to be reasonable. Finally, the restrictions and protective covenants, even where they were not limited, did not in fact give WCI the absolute rights that their language seemed to provide. Thus, there are a number of the restrictions and protective covenants that read that action is prohibited with the prior written consent of WCI, "which consent may be withheld in the sole and absolute discretion of WCI." However, Florida case law provides that what appears to be an absolute right is in fact not an absolute right, and the WCI would be required by a court to be reasonable in the exercise of its approval rights. Thus, notwithstanding the language of absolute rights, WCI would be required to have reasons for its exercise of its rights, and those reasons would have to be reasonable. Once we came to this conclusion, it became apparent that we were going to have to do an extensive amount of work to understand each and every issue on its merits, and that to do that in a meaningful and adequate way, we were going to need to be part of the discussion of the substantive issues involved. It was at this stage where we began to use the phrase that the Foundation wanted its rightful "seat at the table." The Foundation amended the restrictions and protective covenants to expand their scope. In the course of all this research we determined that there was a way to deal with the limitations on the scope of the restrictions and protective covenants. By this time, we had the assignment of all of WCI's rights in Clam Bay. Article II, Section 2 of the declarations and protective covenants provides that "WCI (as well as its successor in interest, the Foundation) may, in its sole discretion, modify, amend, waive, or add to these covenants or any part thereof. The power of amendment, however, shall be limited to modification or enlargement of existing covenants which shall not substantially impair the general and uniform plan of development originally set forth herein." We saw the possibility of using that power to expand 8 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Serllshtte si BoRegulario 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Ba Up (12/28/1 Pane 9 of 17 12 -28 -2010 the scope of the restrictions and protective covenants. Accordingly the Foundation Board approved an Amendment to these restrictions and protective covenants in April of 2009 that made it clear that red and green lateral navigation markers, or any markers, could only be installed with the prior written approval of the Foundation. That amendment also provided that not only could the County not apply for a permit to dredge without the approval of the Foundation, the County could not commence dredging without the Foundation's approval. There is a fundamental issue of whether the wetlands of Clam Bay are owned by the County or by the State. Another issue involves title to the wetlands of Clam Bay. We have written about this extensively elsewhere (see for example the May 15, 2009 Clam Bay Q & A available on the Foundation's web site), but to summarize the issue briefly, there is an extremely complex and controversial issue whether the wetlands of Clam Bay are owned by the County or whether they are in fact owned by the State of Florida. The County contends that the State owns the wetlands of Clam Bay, and that accordingly the restrictions and protective covenants are not valid in the wetlands. The Foundation contends (1) that the County and not the State owns the wetlands of Clam Bay, and (2) that even if the State owns the wetlands, the restrictions and protective covenants are valid as a matter of contract against the County. The Foundation has other substantive arguments as to why the restrictions and protective covenants are binding against the County. We have conducted an immense amount of research on these issues. It is a fact that the State of Florida itself takes the position that it owns the wetlands in Clam Bay. That position is more than a bit disingenuous, since the State has a tendency to claim ownership of any Florida real estate that is even damp. But the fact is that this is the position of the State, even though the State disclaimed any ownership interest in Clam Bay in 1959 in a formal written and duly filed Deed of Disclaimer. Thus, any litigation with the County that places title to Clam Bay in dispute could be expected to cause the State to become involved. We spent quite a bit of time, and our attorneys spent quite a bit of time, understanding and weighing and evaluating the multitude of variables involved in this ownership issue. Each aspect of this issue has permutations and implications far beyond its narrow confines. I should also mention that the Foundation Board approved in July of 2009 a second Amendment to the restrictions and protective covenants, which provides that even if some or all of the wetlands of Clam Bay are owned by the state, the restrictions and protective covenants are nonetheless binding against the County. I truly believe that the Ad Hoc Committee did not leave a stone unturned in attempting to amass as strong a legal position as possible vis -a -vis the County. Some who are distrustful of the County have urged us to sue the County to enforce our legal rights. I have been skeptical of this approach. 9 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Ser a 6ji\ i s n lyd Regul�j 6.r 1 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam B itt�e Up ate 12/2 Paqe 10 of 17 12 -28 -2010 Some who have been distrustful of our negotiations with the County have encouraged us to sue the County to enforce our legal rights. I have been and remain skeptical of this approach, because even though I was trained as a litigator, even though I am convinced we do have strong legal rights, and even though I have "won" nearly all of the disputes with which I have been involved, I find that a lot can go wrong in trials, and that no result can be guaranteed. More fundamentally, however, even if the Foundation were to go to trial, which could easily involve the State and the County on the other side, and even if we were to "win," we have to look at what it is that we would win. We would win the right to enforce the restrictions and protective covenants against the County. We may even win the right to enforce the Amendments. We must realize what it is that such a win would give us: we would "win" the right to be able to have reasons for our positions, and to have reasons that are reasonable. Note that the flip side of this is that we could lose. We could find the Foundation in a position of having no legal rights in the wetlands of Clam Bay. I really don't think that this is a likely outcome, but it is not an impossibility. Early on we saw that if the Foundation could obtain an agreement: where the Foundation would have a seat at the table, with an equal say in tl a outcome, and with an acceptable dispute resolution mechanism in the event of a deadlock, that we would in fact be achieving as much as if not mc,re than we could "win" via litigation. Once it is determined that the best outcome is that you get to have reasons for your positions, and that those reasons must be reasonable, the benefits of having a "seat at the table" become apparent. By having a seat at the table, and a say in the outcome, you have the opportunity to influence the course of events long before serious disputes arise. Early on we saw that if the Foundation could obtain an agreement where the Foundation would have a seat at the table, with an equal say in the outcome, and with an acceptable dispute resolution mechanism in the event of a deadlock, that we would in fact be achieving as much as if not more than we could "win" via litigation. Principle 2: Set a Clear Goal and Establish a Walking Point We established as a goal a structure that would allow the Fo tndation to participate in the day to day management of Clam Bay, with an eqt al say on all decisions, and with a mechanism such as arbitration to resolve any Deadlock. We thus established as a goal a structure that would allow the Foundation to participate in the day to day management of Clam Bay, with an equal say on all decisions, and with a mechanism such as arbitration to resolve any deadlock. We established a walking point of any outcome that would allow tl le County to act unilaterally in Clam Bay. 10 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clan Paqe 11 of 17 12 -28 -2010 Based upon all of the foregoing research and analysis, we established a walking point of any outcome that would allow the County to act unilaterally in Clam Bay. We determined that even if we were able to convince a majority of the current BCC to allow the Foundation to achieve its goal, if we could not do that in a way that creates a long term solution, one that cannot arbitrarily overturned by a later BCC majority, then it would be better to undertake the risk of litigation. Principle 3: Establishing Trust and Building a Relationship We worked to establish trust and build relationships with all concerned parties. Long before reaching this point in our analysis, we had begun attempting to establish trust and build relationships with all concerned parties. This didn't involve lunches and backslapping, but rather carefully and slowly establishing a reputation for saying what we mean, meaning what we say, and being careful to try to stay on message, to find rational and positive bases for our positions, to try to deal on the basis of fairness, by focusing on the future, not the past, and by trying to build emotional trust, avoiding threats to trust, miscommunications, and, at all costs, avoiding personal attributions. We also never allowed "our side" to think of our position as worthy, and the County as being somehow evil or unworthy. That kind of thinking poisons your ability to think clearly, and is highly counterproductive. It is important to research and understand the interpersonal dynamics that will be involved in a negotiation. While I won't go into the work that was done in that regard, you can be assured that a great deal of effort went into understanding the personalities involved, their political positions, and a host of other factors. Quite frankly, we found out that, contrary to what you may have heard from those who are opposed to the Foundation's efforts to seek a negotiated resolution of our dispute with the County, people on the "other side" do not in reality have horns and tails. In fact, they are not very different from you and me, they just have a different set of interests and responsibilities. Principle 4: Keep it Principled We attempted to avoid taking positions, but rather looked for shared interests. We tried to identify the legitimate interests that the County has in Clam Bay, and to find a way that those interests could be met without sacrificing the Foundation's legitimate interests. From the outset we attempted to avoid taking positions, but rather looked for shared interests. We tried to identify the legitimate interests that the County has in Clam Bay, and to find a way that those interests could be met without sacrificing the Foundation's legitimate interests. The County is going to be responsible for water quality issues in unincorporated Collier County, including in Clam Bay. The forthcoming State and Federal water quality standards could cost 11 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Servi ln6eipdl iBo Regular io 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay (12/28/1 1Z U1 I/ 12 -28 -2010 the County a small fortune. We knew that the County was never going to give up this area of responsibility, and we never asked them to do so. We also knew that the County had a legitimate need for, and a right to, the sand taken when dredging Clam Pass. We recognized that need, and right, early on, and tried to ensure that we could find a way for the County to meet that need without jeopardizing our needs and rights. We also recognized that Clam Bay is connected to Moorings Bay, which is in the City of Naples, and that part of the City of Naples abuts Clam Bay. Thus, the City of Naples, which also faces the same potentially costly water quality issues, has a legitimate interest in Clam Bay, an interest that we recognized and acknowledged as legitimate. Our goal was to keep the discussions focused on issues and not on positions, and, over time, slowly, we were able to make progress. , Our goal was to keep the discussions focused on issues and not on positions, and, over time, slowly, we were able to make progress. We also assiduously avoided using the power button. Sure, we told anyone who would listen that we have a great case, but we did so in the context of also saying that neither side will win if we go to court, that a court case will only harden the already considerable animosity that exists on both sides, and that a Foundation victory could be a negative for the Pelican Bay community as well as for the County, because it would only embolden those on our side who have no desire to work with the County, thus risking a perpetual state of conflict. We argued to the County that the reason it should negotiate was not because we were confident of victory, although we were and so stated, but rather because a Foundation victory could be bad for both sides. Principle 5: Be Positive It is easy for me personally to choose this negotiating style, since I am positive by nature, but, as I mention in the attached, I also believe that in most cases it is the most effective way to approach negotiations. The Ad Hoc Committee consistently followed a positive approach in our negotiations. Conclusion Those who support PBSD control over Clam Bay seem to be following a strategy of "Let's go back to what didn't work before and what h structurally incapable of working for the long term." It is a strategy that would keep Pelican Bay, and Clam Bay, at the mercy of a majority of the BCC. It is simply not a viable long term solution. I readily acknowledge that our friends who are pursuing PBSD control of Clam Bay undoubtedly have the best interests of Clam Bay and of Pelican Bay at heart. The problem, however, is that they are pursuing a strategy that is inherently flawed, a strategy of "Let's go back to what didn't work before and what is structurally incapable of working for the long term." It is a strategy 12 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bayler1ces ivisimp Board Regftr i rA 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Cla B orinitteUpdate (1/1 s Page 13 of 17 12 -28 -2010 that would keep Pelican Bay, and Clam Bay, at the mercy of a majority of the BCC. It is simply not a viable long term solution. Our objective has been and is to put in place a procedure that will enable our community to have an effective voice in the ongoing long term management of Clam Bay, especially when difficult and controversial issues have to be handled. If the PBSD, which is under the absolute control of the BCC, takes over day to day management of Clam Bay, final authority will always rest in the hands of the BCC, and even if a majority of the BCC would be willing to vote today to bring Clam Bay under the auspices of the PBSD, there is no guarantee we will have the necessary majority to resolve critically important issues down the road. The Foundation, which represents all the property owners in Pelican Bay, has a sound legal basis behind its request to have a seat at the table. Obtaining such a seat will enable the Foundation, and our community, to influence the course of events in Clam Bay in a more meaningful way than any other available solution. The Foundation, which represents all the property owners in Pelican Bay, has a sound legal basis behind its request to have a seat at the table. Obtaining such a seat will enable the Foundation, and our community, to influence the course of events in Clam Bay in a more meaningful way than any other available solution. The resolution proposed for the PBSD Board on January 5 represents a step backward for our community. I am convinced that the resolution being pursued by the Foundation and its Ad Hoc Committee will have broad support within our community. I am convinced that the solution being pursued by the Foundation and its Ad Hoc Committee will have broad support within our community. I am also confident that the majority of the PBSD Board will see the relative merits of the Foundation's position and that support for the proposed resolution will be limited to those few who want to continue the battles of the past. I would like to express my appreciation to the PBSD Board for all that it and its predecessors have done for Clam Bay and for our community. I would also like to express my thanks to the multitude of members who have sent their demonstrations of support for the work of the Foundation in attempting to resolve the previously seemingly intractable problems in dealing with the County over Clam Bay. And to those very few who have expressed dismay over the course we are taking, or who have indicated a lack of understanding about just what that course entails, and who are urging that the PBSD should be in charge of Clam Bay matters, I urge you to give careful consideration to all the ramifications of what the PBSD Board is being asked to pursue. We need to find a resolution that is both sound and will be effective for an extended period. The last thing we want is to fashion a resolution of current issues only to find that future thorny problems again subject us to the vagaries of needing to win a vote before the BCC. 13 P January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update (12/28/10) PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATIONS The first and overriding principle— aiming to win Negotiation first and foremost is about achieving your desired outcome. It isn't politically correct to say it, and the word "winning" admittedly has some negative connotations, but negotiations are about winning. The second principle— setting a clear goal and establishing a walking point You have to learn what is possible, and what others have achieved in similar circumstances. There is a lot of hard work involved in this stage, factual research, emotional research, understanding the other party, understanding the harsh realities of the world, but without this underlying homework your desired outcome is unlikely to be realistic and therefore achievable. Your goal does not have to be set in stone, and it can contain variables, but you should know what those variables are, and be prepared to recalibrate your goal as the variables change during negotiations, which invariably happens. To set a goal means more than just establishing aspirations for the negotiations. You need to establish the point at which you would walk rather than enter into an agreement. Establishing this point is determined solely by the political, economic, and legal reality of your situation. A "walking point" should not change during a negotiation unless the objective situation has changed. This is why the most important stage of any negotiation is doing the research to establish your walking point. The third principle — establishing trust and building relationships Why establish trust? The fact is that people that trust you will be more willing to work to expand the pie rather than just to split it. Trust also frees up people to be creative in problem solving. Distrust invariably involves costly detection and regulatory mechanisms that can get in the way of successful negotiations. One of my basic concepts is to try to push all conflict into cognitive conflict, as opposed to interpersonal conflict. Cognitive conflict is largely depersonalized, and consists of focusing on arguments about the merits of ideas, plans, and projects, independently of the identity of the people involved. How to do that? First, try to agree on a common goal or a shared vision. If the parties are focused not on their respective positions, but rather on what they might do together, the discussion becomes positive and idea based rather than position based. Another method is to try to establish a "fair" basis for positions, and then discuss the issue of fairness as opposed to your position. Again, an idea based approach as opposed to a position based approach. 15 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bav Committee UDdate (12128/10) Focusing on the future and not dwelling on the problems of the past also can be used to build trust. If you focus on the problems of the past in a negotiation, the other party is likely to be defensive and may well conclude that your insistence on enforcing all your "rights" for their prior behavior is going to be the way you will act with respect to their future behavior. Establishing emotional trust is also important. Spend time with the other party. Create a good mood. Never gloat. Try to find something in the other party to admire. You also need to be careful to avoid threats to trust. Breaches of trust are the most obvious, when you violate a principle that has been established between the parties. Miscommunications can cause parties to interpret something as a breach when in fact it is not. When you sense an inappropriate reaction on the other side, give first consideration as to whether a miscommunication might be involved. A good idea is to always be ready and willing to clarify what you meant to say. Avoid personal attributions at all costs. Never call into question the other person's character or intentions, because that destroys trust more quickly than anything else. Also avoid thinking of your side as good and worthy and the other side in less favorable terms. If you think this way, it will seep into your negotiations, and lead to a breakdown in trust. The fourth principle— keeping it principled Stay away from positions per se and focus instead on underlying issues: what are the parties' interests, how can they be expanded, what independent standards can you use to determine a fair outcome, etc. All negotiations are ultimately about interests, rights, or power. Interests involve learning about and understanding each side's underlying needs, desires, and concerns. Rights involve standards of fairness. Power involves status, rank, and the ability to hold out, or walk away from the negotiations. Successful negotiations involve the use of each of interests, rights, and power, but I believe that the key is the way that they are used. I try to steer negotiations into discussions of interests, and to finding ways of maximizing the mutual interests of the parties. This is not a revolutionary concept, everyone more or less tries to do it. What I try to do is to take the "person" or "position" out of the negotiations, and concentrate instead on a principle. Just about everyone would acknowledge that you can benefit from focusing on your opponent's reasons for choosing a position, rather than the position itself. What I attempt to do is attempt to engage the party in the interests involved in their underlying concern, and then try to uncover a mutually advantageous way of satisfying those interests. By keeping the discussion focused on principles, and not on positions, you can more effectively utilize the rights and power cards. Even a principled discussion can wind up with the parties it January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b -Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update (12/28/10) 7 /Orl/ W 1 still not seeing eye to eye. But if you have kept the discussion on the level of principle, you have made it much less likely that the other side has dug in, and you have left room to bring in an argument of fairness, that is, you can talk about what is "fair" to your constituency, and what you need to be successful. And if you do need to use the power button, how you do so is critical. I have never said in a negotiation, if you don't give us this point, we will terminate the negotiations. I have, however, said in negotiations that unless we are able to obtain a certain point, we will be unable to sell the transaction to the board, or to the CEO, or to some decision making group, in each case having laid a careful predicate to let the party we are negotiating with know that our decision makers have a reason for needing or wanting the particular provision. Again, a principled use of power. The fifth principle— keeping it positive Most negotiators focus on how to package their negotiations —what I call keeping it principled, focusing on interests, rights, and power in a principled way —but don't focus nearly as much on their delivery. There are three distinct emotional styles that you see in negotiations: rational (unemotional, poker face), positive (friendly and nice), and negative (the rant and rave approach). Each of these delivery mechanisms has a role in negotiations. However, I have come to believe that a positive approach is best for achieving long term results. Research bears out that positive mood negotiators use more cooperative strategies, engage in more information exchange, generate more alternatives, and use fewer contentious tactics than other negotiators. I believe that using emotion positively in negotiations is a self fulfilling prophecy — that a positive approach can determine the emotions of the other party and even the nature of the negotiations. 17 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update ResnickLisa Subject: 1/5/11 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update From: MLMAssocAICP @aol.com To: sf @feldhauslaw.com, wrcjks @gmail.com, ronjr @naegelenet.com, fwuek7 @gmail.com, essondoug @msn.com, jimh @pelicanbay.org, mikecoyne08 @gmail.com, robpender @comcast.net, vbelinpls @yahoo.com CC: josiegeoff @aol.com, hunter.hansen @hilton.com, jbaron @watersideshops.com, jpcbac @comcast.net, hobodory@comcast.net, iaizzo @comcast.net, keithdallas @comcast.net, Teedupl @aol.com, mikelevy @embargmail.com, tedraia @yahoo.com, nfnl6799 @naples.net, JOHNSUSANBOLAND @aol.com, hprice @price - law.com, kathyw @conservancy.org, georgiahiller @mac.com Sent: 12/16/2010 1:35:49 A.M. Eastern Standard Time Subj: Fwd: Recent developments regarding Clam Bay Dear Steve, Jim and Members of the Pelican Bay Foundation Board, With respect to the email updates of the past week ... lack of response should not be interpreted as acquiescence, merely overload at a very busy time of year. There are very many outstanding issues and questions that need to be resolved by the Pelican Bay community itself, before any management agreement proposal is presented to the County. This cannot be accomplished within the timeframe laid out, which anticipates a meeting with County officials on January 6th to review a proposed management agreement. I am taking the liberty of forwarding a commentary provided by John Domenie, whose perspective is informed by his lengthy experience on the PBSD Board, including as Chair of the Clam Bay Subcommittee during the ten years of the Restoration and Management Plan. He raises many legitimate questions about the implications of the management arrangement that is under development. In addition to John, Marcia Cravens and Mary Bolen of the Mangrove Action Group have responded to the recent updates with in -depth commentaries raising serious issues that should be addressed, not dismissed as representing a "very few" dissenters. it is very concerning that MAG has no inkling of what position the Foundation is advocating on the dredging issue - -the issue where action is imminent. At our meeting in November, the Foundation and MAG were very far apart. We are wary of being kept in the dark until matters are essentially settled between the Foundation and the County. What about making sure the Foundation is representing the consensus of the PB community in its negotiating position? How can we be expected to "speak with one voice" otherwise? We urge the Foundation to hold off on any meetings with the County about a management arrangement for Clam Bay until all of the options have been fully explored. This includes allowing our new Commissioner to call for an accounting of the manner in which the PBSD's oversight was removed. MAG would have much more confidence in a Foundation /PBSD management framework than any arrangement that essentially transfers day - to -day oversight to the Coastal Advisory Committee - -a committee dominated by the marine industry and boating interests, which is structured in a way that minimizes Pelican Bay's participation. Protecting the preserve will be a never - ending battle. Sincerely, Mary Mary McLean Johnson President Mangrove Action Group Mary McLean Johnson 6573 Marissa Loop #1501 Naples, FL 34108 Page 1 of 9 1 161 4 214f ry Janua 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regulaission 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update Tel: 239-,566-7515 C�11: 239 -"248 -8546 From: Johan Domenie [mailto:hobodory@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 12:34 PM To: ResnickLisa Subject: Fw: Recent developments regarding Clam Bay Here is the balance of the January 5th Agenda - received from Marcia Cravens Steve, A few questions and comments are prompted by the email you sent out yesterday: I've tried to be as brief as possible, but there are a number of items to be addressed. I'm writing this as someone who has spent the better part of my life for the past 3+ years advocating Pelican Bay's Stewardship over the Clam Bay estuarine preserve within the boundaries of our community. This outstanding mangroves ecosystem does not exist in Seagate or the city of Naple's Parkshore /Moorings Bay community. They destroyed the mangrove ecosystem within their boundaries. This is a Quality of Life issue for our community. The residents of Pelican Bay could have purchased our homes anywhere along this coast. We could have bought in Naples beachfront developments, other golf course focus communities or waterfront homes with boat -docks and no natural shoreline anywhere in sight. We didn't do that. We bought in Pelican Bay because we were seduced by the beauty of the mangroves forest in our backyard and delight in the many beautiful birds and other wildlife that are here due to the mangrove ecosystem. I'm not replying to the government recipients which you included in your email and I have to wonder why you sent such an email to include them? If it's transparency for "affected Stakeholders ", why not show the same or hopefully better courtesy to the most affected Stakeholders (Pelican Bay residents) ? Why not be more concerned with transparency to Ted Raia of the PBSD who has asked you to share information or Mary Johnson, President of the Mangrove Action Group, who has asked repeatedly for the CD of County response to latest FDEP Request for Additional Information which you assured all of us would be shared. It's been over a month now and you still haven't shared it with the organizations you claim are speaking with one voice. Your emails, which include County government recipients, indicates "we" are in agreement with the County's response to FDEP and are poised to provide the County with a Foundation statement to that effect. How can that be when "we" (Pelican Bay organizations and residents) haven't seen the County response in order for your statement to the County to really be the "one voice of Pelican Bay" ? Your email appears intent on persuading Pelican Bay persons in our organizations that County and Naples government won't "cede" or allow PBSD to be reestablished. You don't include advocacy on PBSD's behalf, especially on Clam Bay permits despite your knowledge that our new Commissioner (whom many of us worked hard to get elected) stated that she wants to review the legal basis for the PBSD role over Clam Bay and will advocate for the PBSD. You know that your advocacy would be helpful to her in restoring all of Pelican Bay's overall interests. Instead of advocacy for the PBSD, why are you leaning heavily in the other direction ?! You began acting as negotiator to uphold PB in its role established by the Quit Claim Deed, Covenants and Restrictions, and other documents too numerous to mention and to begin legal filings if you were unsuccessful in getting the County to recognize PB's role and ability to reject any activities within Clam Bay that are inconsistent with the Quit Claim Deed, Covenants and Restrictions establishing the entirety of the Clam Pass system to be preserved in perpetuity essentially in its natural condition as a conservation/ preservation area. However, you began deliberations with County staff under a precondition by them that you would be working towards a binding agreement that is not predicated on the Covenants and Restrictions (or presumably the full record of the Quit Claim Deed). You are very far away from where you started. It is astounding that you appear to not advocate for our PBSD which is also our MSTBU that has contributed many millions of Pelican Bay dollars for water management and restoration projects in order to keep Clam Bay healthy in its essentially natural condition. The County and City government people you are "negotiating" with have attempted to Page 2 of 9 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Divisi I 6 on Board 1 Regulession B21 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update hijack stewardship away from PBSD largely through an attempt to obtain permits. Surely, you must recognize that they want the permits, not to continue Clam Bay works in the manner the PBSD has, but have demonstrated a great desire to significantly alter the Clam Pass system within Pelican Bay boundaries by falsely claiming that Moorings Bay, etc in the Doctors Pass system are all a part of the Clam Bay estuary. You know they are doing this in a scheme to get Federal dollars (WRDA funds) for "studies" to justify construction that will use the Clam Pass system to "flush" the dirty canals of Moorings Bay. It is reasonable to discern that If they fail to obtain permits, they are unable to hijack any real stewardship over Clam Bay. Your last email and the one prior are concerning due to your now assisting the other County interests ability to hijack Clam Bay permits away from Pelican Bay and generally trying to persuade others in Pelican Bay that the PBSD could not or should not hold Clam Bay permits. Why are you putting such a negative spin on restoring the PBSD as permittee over Clam Bay? Do you want the Coastal Zone Manager /Coastal Advisory Committee to dictate what occurs in Clam Bay and be permittee on Clam Bay permits ? Do you wish to tie the hands of our new Commissioner who is taking steps to prove that the CBAC ordinance was not legally sufficient to usurp the PBSD in making recommendations for the maintenance and management of Clam Bay ? Why do you believe the City of Naples has an equal interest in Clam Bay when it has only contributed maybe $ 2,500.00 one time towards WQ testing ? That is not enough to establish that they have heavy investments in Clam Bay. How much has Seagate invested in Clam Bay to prove that they have a substantial investment in it? The expenditures of TDC funds in the last two years were done inappropriately and have wasted too much money on highly questionable contracts with the PBSJ firm that resulted in reports that many people consider without scientific merit. You stated that the dredging of Clam Pass was paid for by TDC funds. It was only a TDC budget item to pay up -front for all of the dredging in Clam Pass for the 2007 dredge event. In prior years there was an agreement that the County would reimburse PBSD for costs of dredging that resulted in nourishment to the public beach areas adjacent to Clam Pass. They reimbursed PBSD only for dredging that resulted in renourishment benefit to the beach below the mean high water line. Additionally, there was an agreement that the County would annually reimburse the PBSD for the cost of maintaining administrative offices at the Sun Trust Bank building location. I believe sometimes these payments ended up being confused within the accounting records and may have showed up as just one payment to the PBSD in the form of a transfer of funds to the PBSD from Fund 111- which was originally a fund of the Natural Resources Department. There can be no doubt that PBSD has paid many millions of dollars of investment directly related to Clam Bay. NO other County department /division /taxing unit comes anywhere close to our investment. You do not have consensus when you assert a position that Naples has equal standing over Clam Bay. They are being a bully and we shouldn't tolerate being bullied. It only invites more bullying. Some folks are so fed up with this situation (not upholding the Covenants or PB's role over Clam Bay) that they are talking about filing a Burt Harris type lawsuit against the County. No there is not consensus or acquiesce to others imposing their values and control over the Clam Pass /Clam Bay preserve. This is not a matter of "the County" ceding anything to PBSD. The PBSD IS a part of the County. It is established as a District, Division, and Unit of Collier County government. PBSD already has a purpose of surface water management that includes its role to monitor and ensure WQ is not degraded by our PUD. PBSD already has a purpose of maintenance of conservation or preserve areas. PBSD already has a purpose of restoration of the mangroves forest. PBSD already has the day to day operation of Clam Bay. These roles and purpose of the PBSD are already established by ordinances. Yes it is true that the BCC have an ex- officio, governing relationship with the PBSD Board, but they established the PBSD /MSTBU Board to make recommendations to them for decisions which affect we who pay ad valorem and additional non ad valorem taxes for certain benefits and responsibilities. The BCC cannot refuse the PBSD from doing that which it was created to do. Again, it is not a matter of "the County" ceding anything. The Coastal Zone Manager tried to intimidate the PBSD into transferring the 1998 permit and was unsuccessful in that. He then went about interpreting a component of the Clam Bay Management Plan which he had no part in creating or authority to act under. He just bluffed it - first that the Coast Guard required red /green markers- when that was disproven, then that the FDEP required it- when that was disproven, then that the Corps required it and he got hold of someone at the Corps that didn't know what he was up to - who provided him with an email that took a long time for us 3 Page 3 of 9 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update to prove that the Corps didn't state anything about requiring red /green markers. In fact the Corps could not make a statement that they require red /green markers because that would be inconsistent with the FDEP position and the FDEP is the lead agency for the Joint Coastal Permits by the FDEP and the Corps. There is now correspondence to Ted Raia of PBSD and also an email by Lucy Blair of FDEP to Ryan Snyder of FDEP with Cc to others whereby both clearly state the Corps doesn't require the red /green markers and it is the County that has made that interpretation. The PBSD sent a letter to the Corps last year to remedy the problem of the CZM imposing his interpretation of the management plan option component on waterway markers, but Jeff Klatzkow, County Attorney then sent the Corps a letter that stated the PBSD was not a part of Collier County government and told the Corps to disregard the letter from the PBSD. This prompted the Corps to respond with a letter to the County telling them that all the different entities of the County need to work together. Frank Halas would have supported Klatzkow, but I seriously doubt that Klatzkow would send such a letter while Georgia is our Commissioner- he knows that she won't tolerate it. Your business letter style of the last email that gives compliments before making criticisms and the email prior to it have been denigrating to the people and organizations within our community. How can you possibly be helping to restore or improve PB status with County government or any other entity when you espouse such a derogatory attitude about the people and organizations of Pelican Bay? I have been in support of your action which most of us felt had value in stalling or denying CZM on permit acquisitions. In truth, you were very successful in delaying them and helping to run the USCG permit out of time until our new Commissioner could take office. However, as time went on and your correspondence indicated to County and possibly regulatory agencies that you were speaking for all of Pelican Bay, it became rather more concerning that you were giving the impression to the County and the regulatory agencies that there was consensus within the PB organizations for any agreement you might arrive at with the County. Consensus among the organizations of Pelican Bay is patently not true for you to assist CZM to achieve a dredging permit. The PBSD, MAG and PBPOA has strongly objected to the PBS1 erroneous reports that are meant to justify significant alterations to Clam Bay. The PBPOA has passed at least one resolution whereby they declared they want Clam Bay permits to be under the PBSD. The Mangrove Action Group has never wavered from its assertion that Clam Bay permits should be under the PBSD. Additionally, the Foundation Board sentiment seemed to also be opposed to CZM achieving approval of its permit applications. It would be very odd for the Foundation Board to be in opposition to the PBSD role over Clam Bay being restored wouldn't it? Our new Commissioner has stated she will review the legal role of the PBSD for Clam Bay which must be considered in relation to any permits. I hope you will not take any further actions or issue any more correspondences that are derogatory to our people and organizations or that may hinder our new Commissioner from fully engaging in restoring and upholding our long- established role of stewardship over the Clam Bay estuarine ecosystem which cannot be divorced from the Clam Pass waterways. The op -ed piece by David Brooks is trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Obama is already despised by Republican leadership. His "compromise" on Bush tax cuts has caused most of the Democrat leadership to lash out at him in a rare bout of their House majority unity. I hope you are not suggesting that PB follow in Obama's footprint. Shall we invite his problems on ourselves? Marcia Cravens From: Johan Domenie [mailto:hobodory@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 12:32 PM To: ResnickLisa Cc: Bob Naegele Subject: January 5th Agenda I would like the following to be included in the January 5th Agenda - separately I am also sending what Marcia said. Page 4 of 9 161 1 B 2 1j January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update Thanks John - - - -- Original Message - - - -- Steve: Let me first state that I am not an attorney, and that this is a complex question. I have had opportunity to negotiate with customers, but find that PB's position at present appears to be one of Defense at all costs - instead of taking a pro - active position. You are renowned for your negotiation skills, and I sincerely hope that PB's position will prevail over the County's. Many thanks for including so many people in your e-mail. You are of course aware that I can only respond to you with copy to four others - not including any members of the PBSD. Therefore I was rather surprised that you included County personnel - no doubt as they are party of the negotiations presently being conducted. But, you have also included the Commissioners - what has been their involvement in your talks with the CZM? However as a member of the PBSD I find it strange that you are ready to state that "It (PBSD) did not distinguish itself over the red /green markers ". And to tell the County and Commissioners that is your feeling - thus denigrating the work of the PBSD has successfully performed over a ten year period. The PBSD had extensive discussions with the CZM regarding this matter, but we came to the conclusion that as an entity of the County we could not sue the County, or even hire an outside attorney to either sue the County or seek further legal help in the matter. In fact I was a strong proponent to ask the Foundation for help, as the Foundation had the financial ability to carry the fight forward. NEVER - and I repeat NEVER - was it our intent to relinquish our say over Clam Bay. The CZM took it upon himself to get the CAC involved and then convinced the Commissioners to authorize the creation of a sub- committee to further his aims. Further I do not believe that any member of the PBSD or the PBPOA would agree that we should share management of this precious estuary with the County - and that if there are disagreements to take the matter to arbitration. If the two parties can not agree on an arbitrator - then what? Please remember that for one year we were negotiating with the CZM regarding the "Peer Review ". Every time we showed some flexibility the CZM went back to his original position - that is not negotiating! And how do you then account for the fact that the PBSD has applied to continue with its maintenance work within the estuary? Will the Foundation and the County determine this work? What experience does the CZM have in managing the estuary? Who will do the work? I am confused. Half way through your second paragraph that is exactly what you are saying "how can two PB entities sit at the table... ?" It was my original impression that you entered the negotiations to assist the PBSD retain the responsibility it had for ten years in managing the estuary. This has now changed to have the Foundation and the County manage it - what will be the roll of the PBSD ? ?? Will we still do the taxing and then turn the money over to you and the County? I do not see that the PBSD Board would go along with that. If the Foundation assumes sole responsibility then the Foundation will have to include the expenses in its budget. Regarding water quality you state that you are doubtful that the County would CEDE water quality issues to the PBSD. How can you cede something that you never had? And therein lies one of the very basic problems. Not only does the County not have certain powers at the moment, but it is commencing its arguments by saying that they already have control and hence will not cede. What has the county done as far as water quality is concerned in the preserve? I appreciate that negotiations may assure that the ebb -shoal will not be involved in any dredging - it protects Foundation property. But, for eight years the County was not really involved in the dredging of Clam Pass. The only dredging that was requested was for the health of the mangroves - we (PBSD) paid for the surveys and Page 5 of 9 1611 liCl� January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update BedTaxes were used for the actual dredging - although - if my memory serves me correctly - the initial dredging was funded by the PBSD and later refunded to us - but this is vague in my mind. The City of Naples was never really interested in "CLAM BAY" - only lately were they convinced by the residents of Seagate to get involved - for NAVIGATION purposes! NEVER to protect the mangroves, benthic communities or water quality WITHIN the mangrove forest. The water quality issue has only been raised recently - especially when PBS &J "created" the new Clam Bay extending south beyond Doctors' Pass. The City of Naples has serious problems with their storm water run -off, and they should settle that before resorting to "solution by dilution ". Again you state that you do not know how the City would react to the PBSD controlling Clam Bay issues. Should we tell the City how to clean up their mess - would they agree to have us tell them what to do in the City? Yes, they did not re -act well to the red /green lateral marker issue. It would appear that you are listening to them. It was THEY who began the problem - not the PBSD. So you are telling us that we were wrong in our legitimate position, whereas the City was right? I do not buy that argument - and I doubt whether other members of the PBSD would. I also do not believe the OP -Ed article in the NYTimes is a model for us. Pres Obama has never been in a position of weakness and has never been FORCED to negotiate. On the other hand you may say that he has negotiated without the full support of Democrats in Congress. You are negotiating without the full support of the Pelican Bay residents - very few of whom are aware of what is going on. (I know, few people attend meetings and fewer are concerned - as long as the view from their balconies remains "green ") Finally, the NRPA is a unique piece of real - estate which has been managed successfully by the PBSD for ten years. Let's negotiate from absolute strength. Again I do not see how the County, City and Foundation can manage this valuable resource. And, if a conflict arises to throw it in the hands of an arbitrator. Is our legal position that weak that we must give in to their demands. No doubt some of my (and possibly others) frustration is that we are not aware of the detailed negotiations which are going on, and as you say, nothing has been put down on paper so far. Unfortunately my experience with the CZM is that when it comes down to putting something into writing that is when the real negotiations will commence. You have dedicated tremendous effort and time in trying to reach an "accommodation" with the County and City. There are no doubt questions and problems beyond my immediate sphere, influencing these negotiations. I do feel that the PBSD has done an excellent job of managing its responsibilities. And the Foundation - if it agrees to the proposed Turrell, Hall & Assoc contract - will be helping the PBSD in locating (and possibly correcting) problem areas. Here the Foundation is taking a really proactive stance. Thanks for all your efforts, John - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Peldhaus. Stephen To: Susan Boland; Mary McLean Johnson (MLMAssocAlCPCcD_aol.com) ; Henry Price; ochs 1; ramsey m; McAlpinGary Fred Coyle ;Jim Coletta ;Donna Fiala; Tom Henning ; Georgia Hiller ; John Sorey ; Bill Carpenter ; Bob Naegele ;Bob Uek ; Doug Esson ; Jim Hoppensteadt ; Mike Coyne ; Robert Pendergrass ; Ronnie Bellone ; Feldhaus. Stephen ; Geoffrey Scott Gibson ; Hunter Hansen ; John Baron ; John Chandler ; John Domenie ; John laizzo ; Keith Dallas ; Mary Anne Womble; Mike Levy; Theodore Raia ; Tom Cravens Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2010 2:24 PM Subject: Recent developments regarding Clam Bay Dear All, Page 6 of 9 161 1 Bel January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update I am advised that the PBSD Board will be considering a motion at its January meeting to petition the BCC for the PBSD to regain control over certain Clam Bay matters. As we all know, the PBSD has done a stellar job over the years maintaining Clam Bay (although perhaps it is fair to say that it did not distinguish itself over the red and green marker issue), and one solution to handling Clam Bay issues clearly could be to put control in the hands of the PBSD. The PBSD has an institutional knowledge of Clam Bay issues and has the tax resource's to be able to fund the studies and analysis that will be necessary to manage this resource going forward. Before we as a community endorse this course of action, however, I would hope that we will carefully consider all its ramifications. The plan for the management of Clam Bay that is currently being negotiated with the County (admittedly, still to be reduced to writing, and subject to approval by the BCC and by the Foundation Board) involves the Foundation and the County having equal say on all Clam Bay matters, with a provision that if the parties cannot agree, the matter will be subject to arbitration. It is unclear to me whether the proposal for the PBSD to regain control over certain PBSD matters contemplates abandoning the management plan currently being negotiated with the county, but it would seem that it would, since it is unlikely that the county would place two Pelican Bay entities at the table with the power to direct day to day matters for Clam Bay. We also need to consider carefully what the control structure truly would be with the PBSD in control of Clam Bay and what matters would properly be under the jurisdiction of the PBSD. For example, it is unlikely that the county will cede water quality issues to the PBSD, since water quality issues may well be some of the most critical and potentially costly issues to be dealt with in Collier County in the years ahead. It is also difficult to see the county ceding to the PBSD the control over the dredging of Clam Pass, which is paid for by funds from the Tourist Development Tax, not from Pelican Bay funds. Our negotiations with the county have resulted in an agreement regarding dredging that protects the ebb shoal, that protects our property at South Beach, and that gives the Foundation an equal say in when and where to dredge. I don't see the county allowing the PBSD to make those decisions. I also note that the City of Naples has an interest in Clam Bay, both because part of Clam Bay is in the City of Naples, because Clam Bay is connected to Moorings Bay, and because Clam Bay and Moorings Bay are both within the same WBID. We have taken the considerations of the City of Naples into account in arriving at the currently proposed management structure for Clam Bay. It is not at all clear how the City of Naples would react to the PBSD controlling Clam Bay matters. They certainly did not react well to the way the PBSD handled the red and green marker issue. And speaking of the red and green lateral navigational marker issue, I have previously reported that 1 am cautiously optimistic that we are going to be able to resolve this issue, and have asked for our community to tamper down its often vitriolic approach to this sensitive and contentious issue. In that regard, I am reminded of the excellent OpEd piece by David Brooks in Thursday's The New York Times. I am including it in its entirety below because I believe it is relevant to the handling of local as well as national issues. My concern is that we need to put in place a procedure that will enable our community to have an effective voice in the ongoing long term management of Clam Bay, especially when difficult and controversial issues have to be handled. If the PBSD takes over day to day management of Clam Bay, final authority will always rest in the hands of the BCC, and even if we have the three BCC votes now to bring Clam Bay under the auspices of the PBSD, there is no guarantee we will have the necessary three votes to resolve thorny and potentially critically important issues down the road. Again, I urge the PBSD Board, and our entire community, to give careful consideration to all the ramifications of what the PBSD Board is being asked to pursue. I am copying all of the interested parties on this email so that we can have a full and open dialogue about the available options for managing Clam Bay. Best, Steve Feldhaus Page 7 of 9 1O.I.L'BL�a„ January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update December 9, 2010 Obama's Very Good Week By DAVID BROOKS Over the past week we've seen the big differences between cluster liberals and network liberals. Cluster liberals (like cluster conservatives) view politics as a battle between implacable opponents. As a result, they believe victory is achieved through maxim um unity. Psychologically, they tend to value loyalty and solidarity. They tend to angle toward situations in which philosophical lines .ire clearly drawn and partisan might can be bluntly applied. Network liberals share the same goals and emerge from the same movement. But they tend to believe — the nation being as diver,;e as it is and the Constitution saying what it does — that politics is a complex jockeying of ideas and interests. They believe progress is achieved by leaders savvy enough to build coalitions. Psychologically, network liberals are comfortable with weak ties; they are comfortable building relationships with people they disagree with. This contrast is not between lefties and moderates. It's a contrast between different theories of how politics is done. Ted Kennedy was a network liberal, willing to stray from his preferences in negotiation with George W. Bush or John McCain. Most House; Democrats, by contrast, are cluster liberals. They come from safe seats, have a poor feel for the wider electorate and work in an institution where politics is a war of all against all. Barack Obama ran for president as a network liberal, and entranced a Facebook nation. But in office, Obama, like George W. Bush before him, narrowed his networks. To get things done quickly, he governed like a cluster liberal, relying on partisan leaders. The results were predictable: insularity, alienation and defeat. So now we are headed toward divided government. But there is a whiff of coalition - building in the air. Dick Durbin and Tom Coburn boldly embraced the bipartisan fiscal commission process. Obama opened up a comprehensive set of negotiations with Republican leaders to handle the Bush tax cuts. The big story of the week is that Obama is returning to first principles, re- establishing himself as a network liberal. This isn't a move to the center or triangulation. It's not the Clinton model or the Truman model or any of the other stale categories people are trying to impose on him. It's standing at one spot in the political universe and trying to build temporarily alliances with people at other spots in the political universe. You don't have to abandon your principles to cut a deal. You just have to acknowledge that there are other people in the world and even a president doesn't get to stamp his foot and have his way. Cluster liberals in the House and the commentariat are angry. They have no strategy for how Obama could have better played his weak hand — with a coming Republican majority, an expiring tax law and several Democratic senators from red states insisting on extending all the cuts. They just sense the waning of their moment and are howling in protest. They believe nonliberals are blackmailers or hostage- takers or the concentrated repositories of human evil, so, of course, they see coalition - building as collaboration. They are also convinced that Democrats should never start a negotiation because they will always end up losing in the end. (Perhaps psychologists can explain the interesting combination: intellectual self - confidence alongside a political inferiority complex). The fact is, Obama and the Democrats have had an excellent week. The White House negotiators did an outstanding job for their side. With little leverage, they got not only the unemployment insurance, but also an Earned Income Tax Credit provision, a college scholarship provision and other Democratic goodies. With little leverage, they got a package that could win grudging praise from big - name liberal groups like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Center for American Progress. Moreover, Obama has put himself in a position to govern again. The package is popular. According to the most recent Gallup numbers, 67 percent of independents and 52 percent of Democrats support extending all the tax cuts. Higher numbers support extending the unemployment insurance. Obama is reminding independents why they liked him in the first place. Page 8 of 9 161 1 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6b - Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update 8 21�+ He only needs to work on two things. He needs to explain his method better than he did in his press conference. It is entirely consistent to support a policy and be willing to move off of it in exchange for a greater good or a necessary accommodation. That's called real life. Then he's got to bring this networking style to the larger issues. It's easy to cut a deal that explodes deficits. It's harder to cut one that reduces them. But there are more networks waiting to be built: to reform the tax code; to reduce consumption and expand productivity; to reform entitlements. 'I f I q Washington doesn't know how to handle coalition - building anymore; you can see consternation and confusion all around. But did anybody think changing the tone was going to be easy? Page 9 of 9 N January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session ° 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Page 1 of 16 Q N r 16 FELLOW PBSD BOARD MEMBERS: 8 I WANT TO ADDRESS YOU REGARDING THE 32 CANOEIKAYAK TRAIL MARKERS WHICH EXTEND FROM SEAGATE TO THE NORTHERN UPPER CLAM BAY - MARKERS WHICH WERE INSTALLED IN 2000, PAID FOR BY THE PBSD. THEY ARE IN SERIOUS NEED OF REPLACEMENT (SEE THE PICTURE ATTACHED) - A SAFETY ISSUE. SO FAR THE COUNTY HAS REJECTED ALL ATTEMPTS TO REPLACE THESE 32 MARKERS EVENTHOUGH REPLACEMENT MARKERS HAVE ALREADY BEEN IN THE POSSESSION OF THE PBSD FOR 18 MONTHS - PAID FOR BY PBSD. ATTACHED IS THE CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL INFORMATIVE GUIDE - SECOND EDITION - THE FIRST EDITION WAS READY UPON COMPLETION OF THE INIOTIAL TRAIL MARKERS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO DISTRIBUTE SOME RELEVANT DOCUMENTS: 1.- ON MARCH 2, 2000 ON BEHALF OF THE PBSD, TURRELL & ASSOCIATED APPLIED TO: A.- THE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS B: DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION C.- UNITED STATES COAST GUARD, AND D,- FLORIDA FISH & WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE 32 MARKERS. 2.- INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE WAS A CERTIFIED COPY OF COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE 96-16 (ACCURACY HAS BEEN TESTIFIED BY THE CLERK OF COURTS) - CONTENTS WITH WHICH YOU ARE NO DOUBT FULLY FAMILIAR AS IT ADDRESSES THE "SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE CANOEING PUBLIC KA YAKERS AND SMALL BOAT OPERATORS" IN THE "CLAM BAY SYSTEM WHICH HAS SEEN DESIGNAMO AS A NATURAL PROTECT/ONAREA IN COLLIER COUNTY" AT THE ORAL REQUEST OF THE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, TURRELL & ASSOCIATES RESPONDED ON MARCH 22M° (ITEM 3) CLARIFYING "MARKING TH /S DREDGED CHANNEL IS A COWN17 IENT OF THE CLAM BAY RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN WH ICH WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE CORPS AND DEP - AND THESE MARKERS FULFILL THATCOA/MIywENT." 4.- ON MARCH 24, 2000 FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE APPROVED THE REQUEST FOR PLACEMENT OF CANOE MARKERS IN CLAM BAY. SUB- January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Sessio 6c - Status of 1o6ailf a r s -P of� F PARAGRAPH 5 STATES: "ALL CANOE MARKERS AUTHORIZED UNDER 8 THIS PERMIT MUST BE MAINTAINED /N PROPER CO,�(,�,/ ►M AT ALL TIMES. COLLIER COUNTY MUST /MMEDIATEL Y REPORT AND CORRECT ANYDISCREPANC /ES OFANYMARKER" INCIDENTALLY COPIES OF THIS APPROVAL WERE SENT TO THE USCG, USACOE AND DEP. NO ONE OBJECTED. AS A RESULT THE PBSD INSTALLED THE 32 MARKERS. SO, NOW THE OPPORTUNITY IS RIPE FOR US TO BRING THESE DOCUMENTS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE C.A.C. AND THE B.C.C. TO RESOLVE THIS SERIOUS SITUATION WHICH HAS BEEN HIJACKED BY THE CZM IN AN ATTEMPT TO GET THE RED & GREEN LATERAL MARKERS APPROVED. I SINCERELY HOPE THAT ALL MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD WILL BE READY AND ABLE TO ATTEND THE C.A.C. MEETING ON JANUARY 13T" AND RE- INFORCE THIS POSITION. I WILL PRESENT THESE DOCUMENTS TO THE C.A.0 MYSELF. January 5, 2011 I ?Pelican Bay Services Division Boa Pan egu af r Session 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Pag f j 1 b em http://pelicanbay,servicesdivision.net/documents/2010/0505 I O/ClamBayMarker.RG 12/1312010 O 00 8 6 1, 2' January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Page 4 of 16 4 N TUMELL & ASSOCI TES. INC. N MARINE & MMONMEWAI CONSULTING 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B s Naples, Florida 34104 + (941) 643 -0166 • Fax (941) 643 -6632 March 2, 2000 Ms. Tara Alford, Planner II Office of Enforcement Planning & Policy Coordination Division of Law Enforcement 620 South Meriden Street Tallahassee, FL. 32399 -1600 RE: CLAM PASS CANOE TRA.IIa MARKERS TTT #9845.1 Dear Ms. Alford: This package is submitted in request for a permit to place uniform waterway mad= ftn a canoe tnii l in the Clam Bay system, located within portions of Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 South, Range: 25 East and Sections 4, 5,8 and 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East. A trail consisting of 32 trail markers is presented and an educational and informational brochure is also being produced that will have a map of the area and provide information about the plants and animals likely to be seen along the trail. The following information is enclosed with, this letter: • County ordinance establishing the Clam Bay system as an idle speed zone. • A map depicting the body of water with the approximate location of each marker. • A marker list with the latitudeilongitude coordinates of the requested markers • The name of the person responsible for the placement and maintenance of requested markers: Kyle Lukasz, Pelican Bay Services Division Complete application packages have also been forwarded to the United Sates Coast Guard, the: United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Environmental Protection (Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Office). Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TURRELL & ASSOCIATES, INC. Cloc Essex �� I.- .-- January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division BoalR ula 0 6c - at of no rail i r ������ P N TURRELL & A S A S, INC. � MARINE & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 8 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B a Naples, Florida 34144 • (941) 643 -0166 • Fax (941) 643 -6632 Joe Bachelor March 2, 2004 United States Army Corps of Engineers Post Office Box 19247 Tampa, FL 33686 RE: CLAM PASS CANOE TRAIL MARKERS TTT #9845.1 Dear Mr Bachelor: This package is submitted in request for a permit to place uniform waterway markers for a canoe trail in the Clam Bay system, located within portions of Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East and Sections 4, 5,8 and 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East. A trail consisting of 32 trail markers is presented and an educational and informational brochure is also being produced that will have a map of the area and provide information about the plants and animals likely to be seen along the trail. The following information is enclosed with this letter: • County ordinance establishing the Clam Bay system as an idle speed zone. • A map depicting the body of water with the approximate location of each marker. • A marker fist with the latitude/longitude coordinates of the requested markers • The name of the person responsible for the placement and maintenance of requested markers: Kyle Lukasz, Pelican Bay Services Division Complete application packages have also been forwarded to the United Sates Coast Guard, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Environmental Protection (Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Office). Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TURRELL & ASSOCIATES, INC. Cloe Essex 161 l .�{Jj Z.14 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board ReguldT'Session 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Page 6 of 16 m N y to MARINE & ENVIRONMENTAL CQNSULTING 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B • Naples, Florida 34104 • (941) 643 -0166 • Fax (941) 643 -6632 Lucy Blair March 2, 2000 Department of Environmental Protection Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Program Office 2295 Victoria Avenue Ft, Myers, FL 32902 RE: CLAM PASS CANOE TRAIL MARKERS TTT #9845.1 Dear Ms. Blair: This package is submitted in request for a permit to place uniform waterway markers for a canoe trail in the Clam Bay system, located within portions of Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East and Sections 4, 5,8 and 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East. A trail consisting of 32 trail markers is presented and an educational and informational brochure is also being produced that will have a map of the area and provide information about the plants and animals likely to be seen along the trail. The following information is enclosed with this letter: • County ordinance establishing the Clam Bay system as an idle speed zone. • A map depicting the body of water with the approximate location of each marker. • A marker list with the latitude/longitude coordinates of the requested markers • The name of the person responsible for the placement and maintenance of requested markers: Kyle Lukasz, Pelican Bay Services Division Complete application packages have also been forwarded to the United Sates Coast Guard, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Environmental Protection (Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Office). Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TURRELL & ASSOCIATES, INC. Cloe Essex January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay1rvii s IlivisiClTBoard aulZeIn 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Page 7 of 16 Q N TURRET. L & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr ME & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULnNG S 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B s Naples, Florida 34104 • (941) 643 -0166 • Fax (941) 643 -6632 Joe Embres March 2, 2000 United States Coast Guard 909 S.E. I" Avenue Miami, FL 33131 RE: CLAM PASS CANOE TRAIL MARKERS TIT #9845.1 Dear Mr. Embres: This package is submitted in request for a permit to place uniform waterway markers for a canoe trail in the Clam Bay system, located within portions of Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East and Sections 4, 5,8 and 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East. A trail consisting of 32 trail markers is presented and an educational and informational brochure is also being produced that will have a map of the area and provide information about the plants and animals likely to be seen along the trail. The following information is enclosed with this letter: • County ordinance establishing the Clam Bay system as an idle speed zone. • A map depicting the body of water with the approximate location of each marker. • A marker list with the latitudellongitude coordinates of the requested markers • The name of the person responsible for the placement and maintenance of requested markers: Kyle Lukasz, Pelican Bay Services Division Complete application packages have also been forwarded to the United Sates Coast Guard, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Environmental protection (Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Office). Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TURRELL & ASSOCIATES, INC. Cloe Essex 2010-12-2104:29 006 cco o� m c4 �N a` m m O m o m m, U a 0 N P. m D c 16 14B 2 1w' lied fil- f. i N �l Q EIC W o a ¢ Of .-W RI Lo gR E I � y W � �J o�m���mmm�m;,�m��m .-, ,/� zzzz2=tZZZ�z�F=zF .-a s z SSVd HVIO UF �a:rO�NtUw NNNWNlY t7�e�l !T co m cd z3+o�,`ZOnFFFFFZ zzzz aNCUCUCU i�i�ia�ii �c 'N a i iS to 10%Dh wO+a� lb 1 bLl January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Page 9 of 16 Q N N ORDINANCE NO.96- 16 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO VESSEL CONTROL AND WATER SAFETY IN THE CLAM BAY SYSTEM; PROVIDING FOR INTENT''. �,0 2A 21 ND PURPOSE; �r'ROVIDiNG TITLE AND CITATION; SETTING u+ n TH APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR VESSEL SPEED PE LATION; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING T<T.S; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT; PROVIDING oa y_ FOit * NFLICTAND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING jD—� + c* �,.,i►N DATE. r of68�g94Ex }�v WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 327.60, Florida Statutes. has the legal authority to adopt this Ordirumce to impose idle speed zones on waterways In the unincorpomed areas of the County, sad WHEREAS. the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan„ adopted by the CAW County Board of County Ca misnaonem on May 23, 1995, has identified the Clam Bay System as an idle speed zone; and WHEREAS, it u necessary that the speed and operation of vessels locate(i in the Clam Bay System as Specified herein be controlled in order to protect manatees and their babita, and WHEREAS, the Clam Bay System has been designated as a Natural Resource Protection Area in Collier Cotmty. and WHEREAS, it is in the interest for the safety and welfare of the (emoting public, kayakers, and small boat operators, that certain controls and regulations be enacted to reduce risk and berry to the camming public, kayakers, and small boat operators and ensure the atjoyablity of than natural resouraa by the general public. NOW, 77MROOM BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECMON ONID IMENTAND PURPOtSE It is the intent and purpose of this Ordinance to protect and promote the health, safety and welfare of the public, beluding residents and visitors to Collier County and in particular to die Clam Bay area by providing reasonable regulation to the operation of vessels as defined. It is ftuther intended that this ordinance shall be liberally construed to effect such intent and purpose. SECTION M. TIMAND CITA77ON This Ordinance shall be known and be cited as the "Clam Bay System Water Safety and Vessel Control Ordinance, 0 SECTION THREE. APPLICABILITY This Ordinance OWI apply to and be enforced on an the waters of the following described Restricted .tress: i. The Clam Bay System including Upper Clam Bay, Inner Clam Bay, Outer Clam Bay, and Clam Pass. The restricted areas are as specified on the map attached hereto as "Exhibit A." 2. Reserved. 17e N�+y t0 lei E, January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session c tic - Status of Canoe Trail Markers P 1 1 161 �, 0 0 SECTION FOUR: MUfL SPEED REGUTATION Except during an emergency or operation by an official of the government while evism d in official business, the operation of any vessel in excess of idle speed, au defined hw*K in or on airy waters of the Gam Ba f System is hereby prohibited and is a violation of this 0rdinance. Said prohibition is effbaive and ardbrombile provided the `no waive" area is designated by rgpktm madw, sigi buoy, or any other notice of the "no wake" status. The locations of such notices abaf bt paced at the diacledion of the County Staff. All such notion posted by the Courty are official nodoes of the CmM, It is no defense to a violation of this Ordinance to afore that fire Uef indant did not observe potkae of the "no wake• :tams of the waters of the Clam Bay System. SECTION FIVE. DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this Ordinance, the following words are defined as follows: A. IDLE SPEED means the minimum speed through or over the surface of the water that will slow the vessel operator to maintain steerage of the vessel. B. OPERATE mains to be in control of the speed of a vessel traveling over or in water. C. VESSEL means a motor propelled and/or artificially propelled boat, aailboat, barge, sirboat or other watercraft used or capable of being used as a means of transportation of one (1) or more persons over or in the water, whaiier propelled by wind, propeller, or forcing Bove of water by propeller or impola, or otherwise. Vessel don not include a osnhoe, kayak or similar small mininatm wake type vessels provided the vend is then being propelled only by paddle and not by motor. pow, or sod. "Vessel" don not include seaplane. SECTIONSIX: PENALTIES Each violation of this Ordinance is a civil infraction. If a Citation of Violation is not contested and is paid in full and on time, the fine shall be Fifty dollars ($50.00) for the first vidatioa within any sot (6) month period, and one hundred dollars ($100.00) for a second violation by due same person within any one (i) year period. If the fine Is not paid in hull and on tong the Count may impose a fine of up to five hundred dollars ($500.00) Phu court cotta and nypow coats and/or floss authorized to be imposed by the Court by Florida Statutes. As an dtern elM means of aftircement, violations of this Ordinance may be rd'erred to the Collier County Code Fiftircement Board. SECTION SEVEN: ENFORCEMENT The provisions of this Ordinance shalt be enforced by any member of any duty authorized law enforcement agency or otitoera having enforcement jurisdiction in Collier County, Florida. Civil Citations may be used to notify the defendant of allegations of violations of this Ordinance. SECTION E[GH9. CONFLICT AND SEVEMBILITY In the evert this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other appGeabie la% the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ord'uuute>d It held Invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate. dia kw and Independent provision and such holding shell trot affect the validity of the remaining portion. kAbz SEC770NNIN8 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Page 11 of 16 Q 1611 621 Y S INCLUSIONIN ?WE CODE OFLl WSAND 0XI)DVANCE& &"% rr A The provWons of Nds Ordimnce shalt beoomc and be made a pet of the Coda of i.aws and 0r&ow'm of Cofer County. Florida. The tendon of the Ordbumm may bo reaumbered or r lettered to a000atpltsh ukk and the word " ordinance" may be changed to "secflW "artkte, " or any 00W appropriate word. SECTION TEN: EM "VR RATF This Ordinance " t1ke Offixt upon Ming with the Secretary of State. PAS3)c•D ANb DULY ADOPTED by the Bard of Courty Cbma imloo s of Col6w County. F%rlda. this JP '4 day of _ ��..a 1996. a 14 Dt�►Ciii'Pa'.. Clerk • ,: It t • •1 Approved a to bm end 4w may: Thopw C. Palmer AnWm County Attorney •3- Tt,�1trr wdh+wa filed w tt1 1M Li4adof+ of *of a,�_ of and oduwwl*dpM+wmt 0101 frt nc }Fr+d daY of �' owwr crR RECEIVED MAY 0 8 im NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT o� N O t/J f0 N 01 7 (p �a a a� Y O l6 m� o 4 0o H C U Z o a y 7 N � 07 � C ' U (O .5 CL O N U) z ca cu7 C rll '01 WA I vir, AVg\ Wd13 0 A 1611821 3AVA ON G334S 33QI SSVd Wtll3 T JJ II` OOI ' 13>18VYV -33dS C -ISWO0 ' N N r Or N S3`IIW S' 0 31V3S 0 f 3 n X W F r U. 0 L 7 T JJ II` OOI ' 13>18VYV -33dS C -ISWO0 ' N N r Or N N January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session ° 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Page 13 of 16 Q N 16i1 82t g w STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) 1h 1, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of: ORDINJXE No. 96 -16 Which was adopted by the Board of County Cosmissioners on the 9th day of April, 1996, during Regular Session. WITNESS sW hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County. Florida, this 10th day of April, 1996. DWIGHT E. BROCK Clerk of Courts and Clei'ii�r "` " "' •.. Ex- officio to board of % County ComissiGrAt" .i '► .o f 18111aure kingpin , Deputy C1*1e •.5-. R 2 Services Divisi BoaTRRe urar ls�ion' January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay g 6c - Status of Ca ioe Trail Markers -Page 14 of 16 .. ,, uMU & ASSt"3CIATE SIC. ��a€RiNB � ENYXRONMEMAL CI�tIL171VG 35M Eachoo Avanne. Suite H Ttaplas. Floruta 34104 * (441) 643 -0166 • Fu (941) 6434632 Mr. Ed Faust March zw 2000 U.S. Ar w Corps of s 2301 MoCIt many, Shmd., Sonia 300 Ft Myers, FL 33901 RE: Clam Bay Canoe Trait USACE #20WIVM MW. -1) rrT ~ IK This letter is to v+i * the h* mstion we spot ebont yeetw&y re aAAAg the cum b-ail p= ft for Claws Bay. We are appiyig for the Natkawide 01 pera* daft with +yids to nrAp im. The m;WficWA '. Felimn Bay SciN;Am DiVW= Sol Lena d Chic Ddw Suite 605 N'apIM FL 34W Mw peram ax le For dw bmudlatim and nwh9eamm of fim X11 is: Kyw Lvkm Fhm% (941) 597-22455 Fuc (941) 397 -3400 1 dduk this CC4►m the discoulm wo h4 fed frw to Ca11 wit2l mW quatim Yow hide in this eft is Il7} - 0 111aimili Sincamlys TURRELL & AS30CWrES, WC. (IA V_ F4 5e) CMe R. Essmc BkAOItIA 0 Q N N J 1 � ad Janu�+ary 5, 2011 P li /��j� FLORIDA FISH AN* WILDLIFE coNsERvAd 'spf dOffZ1b2V' of 16 JAMts L •JAAWADNMI& AL WiMA G Lam QW11DU L HfDOilli'!M ODs H.A.'HMKr HUWMAN Jwioare Mini Doleooa DAVID L MSSHAN JUU19 L MORNS 'FONT MOSS 11DM1Af I RORLR7:. DC JOHN D. ROOD SL le OR" smwod NkW r"Amods Jaduloswile ALLAN L RON=, P"v tame Dbeftor VWM L H1114JOL AaoYtaot ZXKW W Dh*ft r Ms. Cloe Essex, Biologist Tuirell dt Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B Naples, Florida 34104 RE: File No.: 2003 -0511 -016BS Location: Clam Bay Canoe Trail Dear Ms. Essex: DIVIOM OF 1AW M ORCSMSNT OOLOM PUDOW L I M/ARDS„ EONtac +oR LT. OOIAN=1. RANDY HOPIMM ASSISTANT DUN TiOR MM 4884W1 TOD (45% 44&-9641 March 24, 2000 RECEIVED MAR 2 9 208 USACE RMULATORY 1fER;, FL The Division of Law Enforcemeat, Office of Enforcement Planning A Policy has approved your request for placerne nt of canoe markers in Clam Bay, within Collier County. Permit number 20-016 has been issued to Collier County and is subject to the following conditions: Permit number 20-016 is contingent upon the consent of, and if necessary, the issuance of appropriate permits by the Department of Eavironmenal Protection, Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Program Office, 2295 Victoria Avenue, Suite 16SA -D, Fort Myers, Florida 33901; the United States Coast Guard at 904 S. E. Ist Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131; and the United States Department of Army Corps of Engineers, at Post Office Box 19247, Tampa, Florida 33656; authorizing the placement of structures for the support of the canoe markers. 2. This permit requires Collier County to place thirty -two (32) canoe markers exactly as indicated on the attached marker list. Each marker(s) shall be consistent with the Florida Uniform Waterway Marking System format as shown on the attached diagram. 3. All canoe markers must be manufactured in accordance with the Uniform Waterway Marker . system. The markers must be IS" X 15 ", and will be placed along the river(s) at 400' intervals, all makers will be on the same side of the water body unless otherwise noted. 7*k is xecesskxW due to the ball users behV drmm frog- older sw mxx&n Popes gm#W and tke fregwext sight of Ike xmr*ers wlll serve as y(J7rowtlox that they area & Ike comet dbwc&oL Permit number 20-016 must be displayed on each canoe maker at any location where it is readily.visible. These numbers must be displayed in black block characters measuring at least one (1") inch in height. 620 South MM" Sterne • Tolkhe • FL • 32399.1600 ewWAW.a.wle mRkd 161 B21-1.0 January 5, 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Board n Ms. C{Oe EiaCx 6c - Status of Canoe Trail Markers -Page 16 of 16 Q N March 24, 2000 Page Two 4. The placement of canoe markers shall be completed within a reasonable time after receipt of this permit. If the information for any marker(s) varies from the originally permitted marker list, the Collier County must immediately provide this office with the corrected information. Such changes will require that this permit be amended. S. All canoe markers authorized under this permit must be maintained in proper oondition at all times. The Collier County must immediately report and correct any discrepancies of any marker to this office by calling $SO -4$8 -5600, extension 164, or by facsimile at 85048 &4284. 6. Permit. number 20-016 does not authorize the invasion of private rights, nor grant any exclusive privileges, nor does it obviate the necessity of complying with any other state, federal, or 1=1 laws and regulations. 7. Violation of any provision of this permit shall result in the revocation of the authorization to place uniform waterway markers in, on, or above the waters of this state. If you have any questions, please contact Tam Alford at 850488 -5600, extension 164. Sincerely, ubya, Ms. Tara Alford, PWuumer Captain Alan S. Richard Office of Enforcement Planning & Policy Division of Law Enforcement F.Vi-:71?1 cc: Mr. Joe Embres, USCG Mr. Joe Bachelor, USCOE Ms. Lucy Blair, DEP Major Mike Long, FWC Captain David Stamm, FWC Captain Denis Grealish, FWC TA wm c O N a) m 7 01 N of -Q 0 in O Ln U N N T � m � C mU) UN _ U a o �a o Q' CV Cp- LC) 0) C � O 7 ' c m O Q d 3 f6 N H dl 'O CL` tko .r- 0 00 C O m m C U di a 1611 R21 M a Ln w J O N N i a) m m d N N O N O u U U cu aJ n o U 0 V 0 CL a H c c c c c c N 'O '0 O > o cu C y C C u t N p 0 a+ N 'O O E O p" ` a� v c T~ c A m m a o m O v ami N o Y°' Y p u C �° p '.' c u c to ` c m m O a O w N p -° C O vNi h0 > o u v 'c c m Y u 'N s a '� m T v O Q N Ou Y W a '� Q •� 'C U> w v +.' N 7 Q. pa a) C O H ' n ° to 7 Y N � a u U O m N N +' N m �. ,C p V m O' 7 - u O o Q Y O C p > a0 aC l a a C O U m N E L V N O C w E o y N E •C y co C o m m v N v u •3 E a c a v c N o N v m y a o ° 3 ¢ r ° v N (U r E u Y a a) � m E a d Q ai y Ua w c T+ \ oa C N o 3 C � v w Y c s E N '� F+ O O +, 7 L .` U N N C u Y N UD to C N � O 'i t o E aJ L F' �_ CO N 7 aJ -0 u ° Y -Q C N Y C C ° Q1 p -° _° a1 Y N aJ N al N L m �' N 7 m Q o O N °j aJ >_ � Y m C C t O = �+ Y 7 C O _p C m C aJ a>+' LY 04 E o m .� .N u 0 m co ° co o -E C CL + CO m m YO aJ OO C O •� m Ua N C 4Y no CO to m° YO m N aJ O ua * u p C a0+ m O C i m u E >. m C m p O T y �'' al m C u C O E E a1 `n O V1 aN+ t O 7 vN m ° u— �M L C R °�° C Q m E ° N m n N o° ' aLNi o +� c N v v3 v N u m E L m p> o o '� a) O 6 a0+ > a w m 16 o° aLU+ °° .� L c" a, ° m m e o ` 3 m 4+ m d Qf Y > Q• C O Y p Q a - N L N U O O N m Q- Y> O m O v? a1 M- ° `1 O H N ° a1 Y C aJ C p m a w O C co:) w C a u `' E Y E m YO i Y+ d ° -..i O t i° 'u o` v m E Y tt: y E ° O m c 'O _ p a1 -Q 'Y L O m N N E m 3 w ° ba Y ° Z 'A CL r- m 7 C L° ate+ C1a C O N v c v C m .— L1 1_+ = m Ua >, a m m L a+ a) "O a) 'N ° "O U U U Q N m a p Y a -0 \y N C N w 7 N a a U ..fl O. E o o v C-0 v°-0 Q 3 c u` 'o. n Y 3 c c a° c° a m ° ° m o a s a' m Y -o °1 v" m v c L o T E E O O c \ 3 0 a, v 3 > N E N cu + 0 °° y a; >Q 0 c L m m U CO aci J O a, E N C ° O a, Z a°1i N m" a .3 j `° L m ° m° o o°c ° Y y m u \-1 O O ci U C C— ei O \ m u O m O-1 E .--I N U \ C l0 C v \ m> l0 a! \ an l0 \ D• e-1 a LO .°C rN^I m m CL v rCO ON LD cNi d cN-1 '6 > N FY c[ Y Z Z Z Z Y m a L w aJ C C y N N N -p ° o ''' u !-' E U E m r' V m E ° a E Q a`, vi N u u o � U U Q N CL C Y m E m c p Q 7 p N w Y N aJ -0 m bZ N ° N C to 0 � C Q u 3 m E a m o c o O p ' E O U V w N w a 0 -0 �O c m C +� J m m N O a O O p 0 Q O Z' C Q p � a m a, a v ar - s °- o \ Ln N E c E u 2 O' 41 c p v O m -p E O vNi to ° °• c w 0 w l7 u m s C7 O a ° \ o \ 0 0 ti 0 0 d a m 1 \� ° L °\ ° ko o -04 C4 rq M a Ln w J O N N i a) m m d - - -- - - - - -- -- - -- - -- - - - -- Fiala - EIVED Hiller Henning JAN 2 5 2011 Coyle ,� + L:ororntsutoners Colette Bard of ��owP•' . a PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 6 t Municipal Services Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12, 2011 NOTICE 1S HEREBY GIVEN OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BUDGET COMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD AT HAMMOCK OAK CENTER, 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34108 ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12; 2011 at 3:00 PM. 1. Roll Call 2. Audience Participation 3. Summary Update of FY 2010 Actual vs. Estimated Actuals contained in FY 2011 Budget. Impact (if any) of available Capital Funds. 4. Status of FY 2012 County guidelines regarding salaries, benefits and tax rates. 5. Initial Discussion of new Capital Funds for FY 2012 Budget and beyond. 6. Review of last years' format for Budget Preparation. 7. Schedule for preparation of FY 2012 Budget 8. Review of current format for the Monthly Financial Report. 9. Audience Comments 10. Adjourn ADDITIONALLY, THIS NOTICE ADVISES THAT, IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD, WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, HE WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THAT FOR SUCH PURPOSE, HE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PERSON REQUIRING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS AT THIS MEETING BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY OR PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENT SHOULD CONTACT THE DIVISION OFFICE AT (239) 597 -1749 AT LEAST FIVE CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. Misc. Corres: Date: Item* C_:r)ies to: t4 N U.) 0 O O 0 M w 3 M Q M Q T N O N W C Q m rD 1+ 16110214 - v• HT 3 co r° an v c r+ rD 3 rD =3 r m r+ o' r+ I-� �o W (J� to 00 iJ? 00 .p 4�b t/? 01 rQ V O N w N T 0 fD n v N m CD T O D7 G7 n '^ n 0 m D CA N D A C D r OA l0 .P W N N W 01 O N FA 00 O W Q1 00 A p1 10 O D n '+ c 3 Q' d m x m m Z C m N -i 0 -� D r Ol (D N cn W o O V O to F- v Co 00 4j). ri W .p tn FA 00 t/> w � v D)' m 1611 B21 �[-a77 -nx{ �41 OnSj s� 0 Off. o v OO D ������3� ?������_�� �rpO �I �7��95:� P Con �' m� Nm y N OD w 'Y; cc yg 69 N (�� � � _ n 0 iN"fA....N.NNN.N..(p yW m m y 4 �Xf C19 COOyy�a W p7 0 04D C CnQ1 tC h W� d,.q� 7 T ttDD N W (A H x 07 > T C* (A w �m C o Q M -a V V D1 .w► W((.TA�� ..► t7f +V W AA t (D -4 WC" r&(-,,� C)cc) K) 0) W�tAt��NO � BIND O O AO 4 -4 W W W -4N C) -4 h N N N :A N N N NN N NN 69 N N H/ Nflf.6* A M N N tV s� N p�1[C��pgOWO -+W V WU4�IQaN V(Ur�t�N N � 4m o v OO D �i CA 0 14 :� Vi i woo + y N OD w Y Qi Q ��pp pppp p�ppp ���pp QQ�� OWp pVppp �0 tD C9NNtiANO>OD A.P N V �� VOi cc yg 69 N N iN"fA....N.NNN.N..(p NN J O N O MW q§ ... VN pp pp O Cp Cpp D + t7� p� o v OO D W V U1Cpt0 GNTt W � V �O�UAaOWD00 N �O qOq pS C�DCWCD� OfS N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N M N M N {A N N N 4t q N N FA OIa:ICAjC�l+�1.a4/V W <AA Wi.1gmN W 0 ca cm aN�$�p�� opt N V m �C8 VN��wlw� ��w0�� V a wS lb1 1#4 621 =+ FY 2011 BUDGET PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE Late February Budget Policy approved by the BCC 2nd week of March Mid April April & May Late June Late July Early September GovMax available Pelican Bay Budget Due County Manager's Review BCC Budget Workshops & Wrap -up BCC Release Tentative Budget and Set Proposed Millage Rates Budget Public Hearing 5:05 P.MM 1611 if, 2- P14, -3 r7 exi d I 0-,k '7 4 3155 % 7- 2- FYe2. 821 i Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2011 16 I l 8210 Item 6 of Budget Agenda Water Management Operating Department Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2010 & Fiscal Year 2009 Budget to Actual Expenditures Revenue Assessments Interest Income Developer Plan Reviews Miscellaneous Income Prior Year Expenditures Carryforward Total Revenue: Appropriations: Administration Regular Salaries ER 457 Contributions Other Salaries and Wages Termination Pay Reserve For Salary Adj. Social Security Matching Retirement Health Insurance Life Insurance Worker's Compensation Sub - total: Indirect Cost Reimbursement Other Contractual Services Telephone - Service Contract Telephone - Direct Line Postage, Freight, UPS Rent - Building Information Tech Automation A Insurance - General Rent Equipment Printing (Outside) Legal Advertising Interdept. Payments Recording Fees Office Supplies Computer Software Other Educational Sub - total: Additional - Public Relations Sub - total: Total Administrative: Received Anticipated Total Proposed FY 2009 FY 2009 FY 2010 Expended Mar. /Sept. Received FY 2011 Budget Actual Budget Year -To -Date 2010 Expended Budget $661,400 $638,159 $742,500 $629,614 $80,000 $709,614 $723,900 $14,600 $16,208 $11,800 $340 $3,200 $3,540 $3,200 $1,500 $0 $1,500 $0 $0 $0 $1,500 $0 $7,532 $0 $81 $0 $81 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $131,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $808,500 $661,899 $755,800 $630,035 $83,200 $713,235 $728,600 $38,900 $21,690 $28,000 $9,692 $18,308 $28,000 $28,000 $200 $0 $200 $0 $200 $200 $0 $13,013 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,435 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,100 $1,555 $2,200 $713 $1,487 $2,200 $2,200 $4,065 $2,136 $3,200 $955 $2,245 $3,200 $3,300 $8,700 $8,700 $10,600 $0 $10,600 $10,600 $7,500 $300 $300 $100 $0 $100 $100 $100 $200 $19 $200 $0 $200 $200 $100 $59,900 $47,413 $44,500 $11,360 $33,140 $44,500 $41,200 $108,600 $108,600 $117,600 $58,800 $58,800 $117,600 $108,200 $37,100 $20,789 $21,300 $4,700 $16,600 $21,300 $21,300 $600 $336 $600 $0 $350 $350 $600 $5,000 $2,343 $3,500 $930 $1,500 $2,430 $3,500 $5,700 $2,690 $3,000 $41 $2,700 $2,741 $3,000 $11,100 $11,343 $11,100 $6,245 $5,000 $11,245 $11,100 $4,100 $0 $4,100 $2,050 $2,050 $4,100 $4,100 $1,300 $980 $17,900 $0 $17,900 $17,900 $17,900 $2,300 $2,072 $2,300 $0 $2,300 $2,300 $2,500 $2,300 $1,056 $2,300 $250 $800 $1,050 $2,300 $3,000 $1,153 $2,000 $0 $1,200 $1,200 $2,000 $20,600 $20,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $0 $2,000 $0 $1,000 $1,000 $2,000 $2,500 $664 $4,261 $2,067 $1,200 $3,267 $2,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,100 $1,374 $1,100 $103 $500 $603 $1,100 $207,300 $174,000 $193,061 $75,186 $111,900 $187,086 $182,100 $0 $0 $18,300 $0 $0 $0 $18,300 $207,300 $174,000 $211,361 $75,186 $111,900 $187,086 $200,400 $267,200 $221,413 $255,861 $86,546 $145,040 $231,586 $241,600 1611 82 Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2011 Water Management Operating Department Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2010 & Fiscal Year 2009 Budget to Actual Expenditures Field Services: FY 2009 Budget FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget Received Expended Year -To -Date Anticipated Mar. /Sept. 2010 Total Received Expended Proposed FY 2011 Budget Plan Review Fees $1,500 Regular Salaries $76,200 $80,670 $79,400 $27,467 $51,933 $79,400 $79,400 ER 457 Contributions $700 $165 $700 $19 $681 $700 $700 Reserve For Salary Adjustment $11,646 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Overtime $16,400 $16,500 $15,400 $6,157 $9,243 $15,400 $15,500 Social Security Matching $7,400 $7,041 $7,300 $2,442 $4,858 $7,300 $7,300 Regular Retirement $10,054 $9,571 $11,000 $7,032 $3,968 $11,000 $11,200 Health Insurance $26,200 $26,200 $31,700 $0 $31,700 $31,700 $17,400 Life Insurance $500 $500 $200 $0 $200 $200 $300 Worker's Compensation $3,500 $1,133 $2,900 $0 $2,900 $2,900 $2,500 Sub - total: $152,600 $141,780 $148,600 $43,117 $105,483 $148,600 $134,300 Engineering Fees $12,000 $10,270 $12,000 $0 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 Plan Review Fees $1,500 $750 $1,500 $0 $0 $0 $1,500 Other Contractual Services $51,800 $28,959 $1,000 $272 $500 $772 $1,000 Tree Trimming $0 $0 $27,600 $2,496 $27,000 $29,496 $30,000 Temporary Labor $42,400 $42,000 $42,400 $14,287 $28,000 $42,287 $42,400 Swale Maintenance $14,000 $13,500 $14,000 $0 $14,000 $14,000 $14,000 Water Quality Testing(Ind Pay) $14,700 $18,087 $21,100 $1,974 $19,500 $21,474 $22,600 Telephones (Includes Cellular) $1,000 $678 $500 $144 $300 $444 $500 Trash & Garbage Disposal $12,300 $9,790 $8,300 $3,331 $5;500 $8,831 $8,300 Insurance- General $2,500 $2,500 $2,600 $0 $2,600 $2,600 $2,400 Insurance - Auto $4,600 $4,600 $3,600 $0 $3,600 $3,600 $900 Autos Trucks RM $500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900 Labor - Fleet Maint. (ISF) $1,000 $996 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000 Fleet Maim. Parts $3,000 $637 $4,500 $1,834 $2,500 $4,334 $600 Fleet Non. Maint. ISF Parts $200 $662 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,500 Boat R &M $500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500 Other Equip. R &M $1,500 $0 $1,500 $0 $1,000 $1,000 $1,500 Uniform Purchase & Rental $1,900 $1,869 $1,900 $1,765 $500 $2,265 $1,100 Fertilizer, Herbicides, Chem $111,100 $79,009 $98,400 $32,602 $64,000 $96,602 $98,400 Replanting Program $0 $0 $8,500 $0 $8,500 $8,500 $8,500 Fuel & Lubricants - Outside $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Fuel & Lubricants - Inside $3,300 $1,736 $2,000 $713 $1,500 $2,213 $3,200 Other Operating Supplies $13,500 $20,966 $2,500 $1,530 $1,000 $2,530 $2,500 Personal Safety Equipment $0 $0 $500 $0 $500 $500 $500 Sub - total: $293,300 $237,0091 $254,400 $60,948 $192,500 $253,448 $255,800 1611 821 Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2011 Water Management Operating Department Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2010 & Fiscal Year 2009 Budget to Actual Expenditures Capital Outlay Building Improvements Improvements General (Mnt. Fa Other /Off. Mach. & Equip. /True Sub - total: Total Field Services: Other Fees & Charges Tax Collector Property Appraiser Revenue Reserve Total Other Fees & Charges: Total Appropriations: Net Income from Operations Fund Balance October 1, 2009 (Actual) Current Year Transfer from Fund 133 Current Year Transfer to Fund 322 Fund Balance September 30, 2010 (Projected) Fund Balance Allocations - Fiscal Year 2011 Reserved for Operations Opening Balance (10 /01 /10) Fiscal Year 2011 Transfer from Fund 133 (Uninsured Assets) Fiscal Year 2011 Transfer to Car yforward Fiscal Year 2011 Transfer to Fund 322 (Capital Projects) Sub -total Reserved for Operations: Reserved for Capital Outlay Equipment Replacement (Opening Balance 10 /01 /10) Adj, to 25% of Replacement Fiscal Year 2011 Additions Fiscal Year 2011 Transfers to Carryforward Sub -total Reserved for Capital Outlay: Total Equipment Replacement Cost $44,529 $516,000 $0 $283,691 $276,838 $244,113 $0 $0 $87,000 $157,113 $32,725 $0 $0 $32,725 Total Fund Balance - Sept. 30, 2011 (Projected) $189,838 25% of Replacem Cost Received Anticipated Total Proposed FY 2009 FY 2009 FY 2010 Expended Mar. /Sept. Received FY 2011 Budget Actual Bud et Year -To -Date 2010 Expended Budget $13,200 $2,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 c $20,445 $13,125 $13,200 $8,232 $3,000 $11,232 $13,200 $34,200 $34,100 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,000 $67,845 $49,325 $14,200 $8,232 $3,000 $11,232 $14,200 $513,745 $428,114 $417,200 $112,297 $300,983 $413,280 $404,300 $20,500 $12,654 $23,000 $12,655 $0 $12,655 $22,400 $20,700 $11,663 $22,400 $11,185 $0 $11,185 $22,000 $34,800 $0 $39,000 $0 $0 $0 $38,100 $76,000 $24,317 $84,400 $23,840 $0 $23,840 11 $- 82,50 -0 $856,945 $673,844 F $757,461 $222,683 $446,023 $668,7(_)61J 728,400 Net Income from Operations Fund Balance October 1, 2009 (Actual) Current Year Transfer from Fund 133 Current Year Transfer to Fund 322 Fund Balance September 30, 2010 (Projected) Fund Balance Allocations - Fiscal Year 2011 Reserved for Operations Opening Balance (10 /01 /10) Fiscal Year 2011 Transfer from Fund 133 (Uninsured Assets) Fiscal Year 2011 Transfer to Car yforward Fiscal Year 2011 Transfer to Fund 322 (Capital Projects) Sub -total Reserved for Operations: Reserved for Capital Outlay Equipment Replacement (Opening Balance 10 /01 /10) Adj, to 25% of Replacement Fiscal Year 2011 Additions Fiscal Year 2011 Transfers to Carryforward Sub -total Reserved for Capital Outlay: Total Equipment Replacement Cost $44,529 $516,000 $0 $283,691 $276,838 $244,113 $0 $0 $87,000 $157,113 $32,725 $0 $0 $32,725 Total Fund Balance - Sept. 30, 2011 (Projected) $189,838 25% of Replacem Cost Current Assets Cash and Investments Interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable Accrued Wages Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Total liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Uabliities and Fund Balance Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - December 31, 2010 Operating Fund 109 (Unaudited) 1,457,384.29 (1,912.30) (23,830.64) $ 1,431,641.35 $ 1,431,641.35 UabUities and Fund Balance $ 843.50 38,979.87 (2,590.48) (1,468,556.63) $ 37,232.89 (1,468,556.63) $ (1,431,323.74) Page 1 of 1 1611 821, 1,00 «:6001- L0 -L1,0a Operating Revenues: Pelican Bay Services 161 18 214 Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - December 31, 2010 Operating Fund 109 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Carryforward $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 $ 943,100.00 - Special Assessment - Water Management Admin 728,400.00 619,140.00 648,445.67 29,305.67 Special Assessment - Right of Way Beautification 1,938,600.00 1,647,810.00 1,726,381.34 78,571.34 Charges for Services 1,500.00 3,000.00 IT Office Automation 81000.00 Surplus Property Sales 2,000.00 $ - Indirect Cost Reimbursement Interest 11,700.00 425.00 415.41 (9.59) Total Operating Revenues 3,623,300.00 3,210,475.00 3,318,342.42 107,867.42 Operating Expenditures: Water Management Administration Payroll Expense $ 41,200.00 $ 8,400.00 $ 9,049.87 $ (649.87) White Goods 81800,00 - _ $ _ IT Direct Client Support (Capital) 200.00 50.00 50.00 $ 3,000.00 IT Office Automation 81000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 $ - Indirect Cost Reimbursement 108,200.00 93,100.00 54,100.00 $ 39,000.00 Interdepartmental Payment 14,600.00 - - $ Temporary Labor Other Contractural Services 30,800.00 7,700.00 7,781.40 $ (81.40) Telephone 4,100.00 1,000.00 726.50 $ 273.50 Postage 3,000.00 100.00 247.79 $ (147.79) Rent Buildings and Equipment 13,600.00 3,400.00 4,026.52 $ (626.52) Insurance - General 1,300.00 300.00 325.00 $ (25.00) Printing, Binding and Copying 2,300.00 - 934.00 $ _ Clerk's Recording Fees 4,000.00 - _ $ _ Advertising 2,000.00 _ 11100.00 $ 420.05 Other Office and Operating Supplies 2,500.00 600.00 38.31 $ 561.69 Training and Education 11100.00 300.00_ 25.00 $ 275.00 Total Water Management Admin Operating 245,700.00 116,950.00 78,370.39 38,579.61 Water Management Field Operations Payroll Expense 134,300.00 29,200.00 29,120.32 79.68 Engineering Fees 16,381.25 4,100.00 165.00 3,935.00 Flood Control Berm and Swale Mntc. 14,000.00 1,750.00 - 1,750,00 Flood Control Replanting Program 81500,00 3,000.00 2,986 00 1400 Interdepartmental Payment (Water quality lab) 22,600.00 5,700.00 2,047.75 3,652.25 Plan Review Fees 11500.00 - _ Other Contracturai Services 11000.00 300.00 - 300.00 Temporary Labor 42,400.00 10,600.00 11,209.00 (609.00) Telephone 500.00 100.00 108.12 (8.12) Trash and Garbage 8,300.00 2,500.00 1,400.46 1,099.54 Motor Pool Rental Charge 200.00 100.00 - 100.00 Insurance - General 2,400.00 600.00 600.00 - Insurance - Auto 90000 20000 225.00 (2500) Fleet Maintenance and Parts 4,500.00 1,100.00 166.00 934.00 Fuel and Lubricants 3,200.00 800.00 409.18 390.82 Tree Triming 30,000.00 7,500.00 4,992.00 2,508.00 Clothing and Uniforms 11100.00 300.00 420.05 (120.05) Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 100.00 - 100.00 Fertilizer and Herbicides 98,400.00 21,700.00 21,944.20 (244.20) Other Repairs and Maintenance 1,500.00 400.00 34.30 365.70 Page 1 of 3 too 1,VV00V1.0.1.1.0Z 1611 821� Other Operating Supplies and Equipment 2,500.00 600.00 1,300.83 (700.83) Total Water Management field Operating 394,681.25 90,650.00 77,128.21 13,521.79 Right of Way Beautification - Operating 136,900.00 47,700.00 31,400.17 16,299.83 Payroll Expense 42,400.00 81700.00 9,323.55 (623.55) White Goods 7,400,00 _ - 1,198.45 IT Oirect Client Support and Capital 7,000.00 1,750.00 1,750.00 - Other Contractural Services 37,500.00 9,400.00 8,017.20 1,382.80 Telephone 3,900.00 1,000.00 726.50 273.50 Postage 3,000.00 100.00 1.79 98.21 Rent Buildings /Equipment/Storage 14,000.00 3,500.00 4,322.29 (822.29) Insurance - General 500.00 125.00 125.00 Printing, Binding and Copying 2,600,00 _ - Clerk's Recording 4,000.00 2,475.00 2,475.00 - Legal Advertising 2000.00 - _ - Office Supplies General 3,000.00 800.00 66.30 733.70 Training and Education 11500.00 400.00 25.00 375.00 Total Right of Way Beautification Operating 128,800.00 25,775.00 24,357.63 1,417.37 Right of Way Beautification - Field Payroll Expense 827,700.00 173,600.00 159,834.37 13,765.63 White Goods 3,300.00 - _ Flood Control (Water Use & Swale /Berm Mntc.) 136,900.00 47,700.00 31,400.17 16,299.83 Pest Control 51000.00 1,300.00 - 1,300,00 Other Contractural Services 29,500.00 7,400.00 6,201.55 1,198.45 Temporary Labor 204,500.00 51,100.00 50,024.09 1,075.91 Telephone 3,200.00 800.00 683.14 116.86 Electricity 3,400.00 900.00 557.67 342.33 Trash and Garbage 24,900.00 7,400.00 2,057.41 5,342.59 Rent Equipment 5,500.00 2,600.00 127.09 2,472.91 Motor Pool Rental Charge 700,00 - . Insurance - General 91000.00 2,250.00 2,250.00 Insurance - Auto 91900.00 2,475.00 2,475.00 - Fleet Maintenance and Parts 21,200.00 5,300.00 8,136.68 (2,836.68) Fuel and Lubricants 44,200.00 11,100.00 7,291.58 3,808.42 Licenses and Permits 800,00 200.00 - 20000 Tree Triming 35,900.00 34,100.00 36,377.50 (2,277.50) Clothing and Uniforms 9,400.00 2,400.00 1,909.62 490.38 Personal Safety Equipment 3,000.00 800.00 512.00 288.00 Fertilizer and Herbicides 62,000.00 18,900.00 24,296.62 (5,396.62) Landscape Maintenance 60,200.00 22,600.00 29,049.30 (6,449.30) Sprinkler Maintenance 30,000.00 7,500.00 81119.85 (619.85) Painting Supplies 800.00 200.00 - 200,00 Traffic Signs 3,000.00 800.00 - 800,00 Minor Operating Equipment 3,000.00 800.00 868.34 (68.34) Other Operating Supplies 11,500.00 2,900.00 2,546.37 353.63 Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Operating 1,548,500.00 405,125.00 374,718,35 30,406.65 Total Operating Expenditures 2,317,681.25 638,500.00 5S4,574.S8 83,925.42 Capital Expenditures: Water Management Field Operations Other Machinery and Equipment 1,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 General improvements 13,200.00 3,300.00 - 3,300.00 Total Water Management Field Operations Capital 14,200.00 3,600.00 - 3,600.00 Page 2 of 3 Wo 161 1 B 21�d Right of Way Beautification - Field Building Improvements 13,600.00 3,400.00 3,400.00 Autos and Trucks 28,000.00 24,000.00 - 24,000.00 Other Machinery and Equipmeny 17,000.00 - (43,502.36) (43,502.36) Total Right of Way Beautification - Field Capital 58,600.00 27,400.00 - 27,400.00 Total Capital Expenditures 72,600.00 31,000.00 - 31,000.00 Total Expenditures 2,390,481.25 669,500.00 554,574.58 114,925.42 Operating Profit/(Loss) 1,232,818.75 2,540,975.00 2,763,767.84 (222,792.84) Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (259,200.00) (259,200.00) (259,200.00) - Tax Collector Fees (82,500.00) (23,200.00) (47,496.55) (24,296.55) Property Appraiser Fees (75,300.00) - (43,502.36) (43,502.36) Reserves (21/2 months for Operations) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) (555,025.00) - Reserves for Equipment (124,875.00) (124,875.00) (124,875.00) - Revenue Reserve (140,300.00) Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditures, net (1,237,200.00) (962,300.00) (1,030,098.91) (67,796.91) Net Profit /(Loss) (4,381.25) 1,576,675.00 1,733,668.93 (290,591.75) Page 3 of 3 Vw ZVOO 01.-L0- I,1,0Z Current Assets Cash and Investments Interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - December 29, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 (Unaudited) Assets $ 382,652.22 382,652.22 $ 382,652.22 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (522.50) $ (878.50) (1,401.00) (423,553.80) 42,302.58 (381,251.22) Page 1 of 1 $ (382,652.22) 1611 B21 9w ZVVO of -cat M 1611 621 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - December 31, 2010 Clam Bay Fund 320 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Fund 111 Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: Clam Bay Restoration Engineering Fees Other Contractural Services Other Equipment Repairs Minor Operating Other Operating Supplies Total Clam Bay Restoration Clam Bay Ecosystem Engineering Fees Other Contractual Services Total Clam Bay Ecosystem Total Clam Bay Operating Expenditures Operating Profit /(Loss) $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.17 $ 435,219.17 $ - 35,000.00 29,750.00 31,279.39 $ 1,529.39 35,000.00 - _ $ - 1,300.00 200.00 134.67 $ (65.33) 506,519.17 465,169.17 466,633.23 1,464.06 $ 102,943.75 $ 2,800.00 $ - $ 2,800.00 137,390.00 7,100.00 5,324.40 $ 1,775.60 485.42 100.00 506.00 $ (406.00) 4,800.00 1,200.00 - $ 1,200.00 11000.00 300.00 - $ 300.00 246,619.17 11,500.00 5,830.40 (155,625.58) 5,669.60 11,300.00 - - 305,177.25 $ _ 25,000.00 36,300.00 - _ 282,919.17 11,500.00 5,830.40 5,669.60 Non- Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): 223,600.00 453,669.17 460,802.83 (4,205.54) Transfer to Fund 322 (65,000.00) (65,000.00) (65,000.00) - Tax Collector Fees (1,100.00) (275.00) (625.58) 350.58 Property Appraiser Fees (700.00) (175.00) - (175.00) Revenue Reserve (1,800.00) Reserves (21/2 month for Operations) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) (155,000.00) - Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expt (223,600.00) (220,450.00) (155,625.58) (64,824.42) Net Profit/(Loss) $ (0.00) $ 233,219.17 $ 305,177.25 $ 60,618.88 Page 1 of 1 900 ZVV of -�Wz Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - December 29, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 2,365,851.87 Interest Receivable _ Due from Tax Collector _ Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable Goods Received Inv. Received Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenues (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities and Fund Balance Page 1 of 1 452.36 (1,960,586.75) (405,717.48) 1611 g21 2,365,851.87 $ 2,365,851.87 452.36 (2,366,304.23) $ (2,365,851.87) coo zVto of -&o-LM Operating Revenues: Carry Forward Special Assessment Interest Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: 1611 821+ Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - December 31, 2010 Capital Projects Fund 322 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance $ 1,943,987.30 $ 1,943,987.30 $1,943,987.30 $ - 121,600.00 103,360.00 - $ (103,360.00) 7,700.00 770.00 681.02 $ (88.98) 2,073,287.30 2,048,117.30 1.00 (103,448.98) Irrigation & Landscaping Engineering Fees $ 113,628.45 $ - $ _ $ _ Other Contractural Services 2,354,658.85 - _ $ Total Irrigation & Landscaping Expenditures 2,468,287.30 Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer from Fund 109 General $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ 259,200.00 $ - Transfer from Fund 320 Clam Bay 65,000.00 65,000.00 65,000.00 $ - Transfer from Fund 778 Street Lighting 83,600.00 83,600.00 83,600.00 $ - Tax Collector Fees (3,800.00) 950.00 - $ (950.00) Property Appraiser Fees (2,500.00) - _ $ _ Reserve for Contingencies (100.00) (100.00) - $ 100.00 Revenue Reserve (6,400.00) - _ $ _ Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expenditure! 395,000.00 408,650.00 407,800.00 $ (850.00) Net Profit /(Loss) (0.00) 2,456,767.30 407,801.00 (2,048,966.30) Page 1 of 1 9W ZL:V0 0I.- L0-1.1.0a Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet - December 29, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 (Unaudited) Current Assets Cash and Investments Interest Receivable Due from Tax Collector Total Current Assets Total Assets Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable Goods Received /Inventory Recv'd Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities Fund Balance Fund Balance - unreserved Excess Revenue (Expenditures) Total Fund Balance Total Liabilities and Fund Balance Assets $ 288,379.60 $ 288,379.60 $ 288,379.60 Liabilities and Fund Balance $ (869.67) (3,397.45) $ (4,267.12) (208,670.25) (75,442.23) Page 1 of 1 (284,112.48) $ (288,379.60) 1611 621 600 eVvo ot-L loZ 1611 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/ Budget - December 31, 2010 Street Lighting Fund 778 - FY 2011 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carryforward $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ 169,800.00 $ - Curent Ad Valorem Tax 273,200.00 232,220.00 227,362.02 $ (4,857.98) Delinquent Ad Valorem Tax 50.00 20,800.00 - $ _ Interest 1,200.00 72.00 64.31 $ (7.69) Total Operating Revenues 444,200.00 402,092.00 397,226.33 (4,865.67) Operating Expenditures: Street Lighting Administration Payroll Expense Indirect Cost Reimbursement Other Contracturai Services Telephone Postage and Freight Rent Buildings /Equipment /Storage Insurance - General Office Supplies General Other Office and Operating Supplies Total Street Lighting Admin Operating Street Lighting Field Operations Payroll Expense White Goods Other Contractual Services Telephone Electricity Insurance - General Insurance - Auto Fleet Maintenance and Parts Fuel and Lubricants Other Equipment Repairs Personal Safety Equipment Electrical Contractors Light Bulb Ballast Total Street Lighting Field Operating $ 41,200.00 $ 10,300.00 $ 9,049.92 $ 1,250.08 6,300.00 $ 3,200.00 3,150.00 $ 50.00 20,800.00 $ 5,200.00 7,781.40 $ (2,581.40) 4,100.00 $ 1,000.00 523.50 $ 476.50 2,000.00 $ 100.00 1.79 $ 98.21 13,600.00 $ 3,400.00 4,147.57 $ (747.57) 400.00 $ 100.00 100.00 $ - 800.00 $ 200.00 - $ 200.00 1,000.00 $ 300.00 4.90 $ 295.10 90,200.00 23,800.00 24,759.08 (959.08) 62,900.00 13,700.00 13,629.00 71.00 9,600.00 - - - 800.00 200.00 200.00 500.00 100.00 108.12 (8.12) 44,200.00 11,100.00 8,734.89 2,365.11 800.00 200.00 200.00 - 900.00 225.00 225.00 - 1,100.00 300.00 50.00 250.00 400.00 100.00 84.97 15.03 200.00 100.00 - 100.00 500.00 100.00 - 100.00 7,300.00 1,800.00 4,147.66 (2,347.66) 12,400.00 2,500.00 1,287.25 1,212.75 141,600.00 30,425.00 28,466.89 1,958.11 Page 1 of 2 a 2 111A 01,0 CV100 01.-1,0-c 1,0z Total Operating Expenditures Capital Expenditures: Street Lighting Field Operations Other Machinery/Equipment General Improvements Total Capital Expenditures Total All Expenditures Operating Profit /(Loss) 23101800.00 S4,225.00 S3,22S.97 161 1 821 999.03 11000.00 300.00 - 300.00 13,200.00 3,300.00 - 3,300.00 (4,200.00) (4,573.36) (373.36) Property Appraiser Fees 14,200.00 3,600.00 - 3,600.00 246,000.00 57,825.00 53,225.97 4,599.03 198,200.00 344,267.00 344,000.36 (9,464.70) Non - Operating Revenues and (Expenditures): Transfer to Fund 322 (83,600.00) (83,600.00) (83,600.00) - Tax Collector Fees (8,400.00) (4,200.00) (4,573.36) (373.36) Property Appraiser Fees (5,500.00) (1,375.00) - 1,375.00 Reserves (21/2/ months for Operations) (58,800.00) (58,800.00) (58,800.00) - Reserves for Equipment (27,500.00) (27,500.00) (27,500.00). - Revenue Reserve (14,400.00) Total Non - Operating Revenues and Expo (198,200.00) (175,475.00) (174,473.36) 1,001.64 Net Profit/(Loss) 168, 792.00 169,527.00 Page 2 of 2 (8,463.06) �wEVV0OVLO -cwt ResnickLisa 161 a 1 B21 I From: ResnickLisa Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 10:14 AM To: John P. Chandler Qpcbac @comcast.net); John laizzo (iaizzo @comcast.net); Geoffrey S. Gibson aosiegeoff @aol.com); Keith Dallas; Mike Levy Cc: LukaszKyle; McCaughtryMary; Jim Powers; Neil Dorrill (neil @dmgfl.com); ResnickLisa Subject: on behalf of Mr. Chandler re: FW: Pelican Bay Boulevard From: John Chandler rmailtoJpcbacC&comcast net) Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 10:10 AM To: ResnickLisa Cc: McCaughtryMary Subject: FW: Pelican Bay Boulevard Lisa, Please see that all Budget Committee members receive a copy of this as soon as possible. John From: John Chandler rmailto:jpcbacwd)comcast net] Sent: Sunday, January 09, 20113:37 PM To: 'Neil Dorrill (neiI(5)dmgfl.com)' Subject: Pelican Bay Boulevard Neil, John lazzo raised a good point at our recent Board meeting when he mentioned that Pelican Bay Boulevard (PBB) needs to be resealed if not repaved. You mentioned that neither action is on the County's schedule for the foreseeable future. I believe that you also said that the current condition of the road "is the result of a failed experiment" (the County using a new process for the last repaving). In thinking about this situation, it seems to me that if PBB is deteriorating more rapidly than in the past due to "an experiment ", then the County is responsible for correcting its mistake. I'd like us to discuss this issue at our 2/2 meeting. To aid in the discussion, it would be good to have the following information available: -A history of PBB's repaving and resealing, showing the years in which either or both of these occurred -The cost, paid by the County, for each of these actions -An explanation of what the County's "experiment" was Please see that all PBSD Board members receive a copy of this communication. John Chandler unaer rionda Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 16 t I B 21 Pelican Bay Services Division 2012 Budget Ideas for Developing Budget I have been thinking of ways we could approach our 20012 Budget process to determine if there is some way for the PBSD to divert resources from our normal maintenance practices so they can be used to start implementing some of the CIP items, particularly in the landscape area. Of course, to be practical, any ideas should be first developed by PBSD staff, the people who are most familiar with and responsible for current practices. The intent would be to maintain current level of staff, but have them do some of the less necessary current maintenance functions in order that they can free resources to begin some of the higher priority CIP landscape items. I suggest to start this process that the Budget Subcommittee consider the following: First consider a status quo budget, reflecting no change in operations, but incorporating any cost increases (e.g. salaries) that we expect. Next consider to what extent the Status quo budget can be reduced in order that the saved monies can be reallocated to implement some more of the items of the Community Improvement Plan. For planning purposes, I suggest that staff be asked to determine how we could save alternatively 5 %, 10 %, and 20% of our current operating budget. By looking at the impact of the alternatives, it should help us determine what changes are feasible while still reasonably maintaining our community. Next develop a plan for implementing CIP items identified in our 1St and 2nd Phase recommendations that will not be covered by existing capital assets or by diverting current resources. We should recommend a period for acquiring needed assets, as well as how we would specifically recommend adjusting tax rates. Then we should develop a similar plan for addressing street lighting, including a recommendation of Ad Valorum versus Non Advalorum taxes. Our thoughts could then be presented to the full board for their discussion and ultimately decisions. By going through such a budget process, I would hope the exercise would help us focus our thinking as to how our Board wants to approach funding CIP items, and start the budget process to implement our recommendations. Keith x 16I 214; PF( "'EVE Hill& � lMM ;)P SERVICES DIVISION BOARD REGULAR SESSION MIN14@UMg :2iz= ;, ;► �,� WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2010 Coletta LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Regular Session on Wednesday, October , 2010 at 1:00 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples. The following members present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Mary Anne Womble, Vice Chairwoman absent John P. Chandler absent Tom Cravens Johan Domenie Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill Kyle Lukasz Geoffrey S. Gibson absent John Iaizzo Michael Levy Theodore Raia, Jr. John Baron absent Hunter H. Hansen absent Mary McCaughtry Lisa Resnick Also Present: Susan Boland, President, Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Marcia Cravens, Vice - President, Mangrove Action Group Tim Hall, Senior Biologist & Principal, Turrell, Hall & Associates Jim Hoppensteadt, President, Pelican Bay Foundation AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Agenda Approval 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes a. September 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session b. September 2, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session 4. Audience Participation 5. Administrator's Report a. Clam Bay Channel Maintenance Permit Application Update b. PBSD Responsibilities for U.S. 41 Noise Abatement Update C. Monthly Financial Report d. BCC Approval of Final Budget Update 6. Chairman's Report a. Mr. Ochs' Response to Peer Review Letter Discussion b. Draft Language for PBSD CIP Priorities Discussion C. Nutrient Management Plan Discussion d. Announcements 7. Community Issues 8. Committee Reports and /or Requests 9. Old Business 10. New Business 11. Miscellaneous Correspondence a. Ongoing Projects Status Sheet 12. Audience Comments 13. Adjournment ROLL CALL With the exception of Mr. Baron, Mr. Chandler, Mr. Gibson, Mr. Hansen, and Vice Chairwoman Womble, all Board members were present and quorum established. AGENDA APPROVAL Mr. Domenie made a motion, second by Mr. Levy to approve the agenda as presented.. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. Misc. ew": Date: 8403 Item #: _ Cv ,pies to: Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 1611 October 6, 2010 APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2010 REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Levy to approve the September 1, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session minutes as presented The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 2, 2010 SPECIAL SESSION MINUTES Mr. Levy made a motion, second by Mr. laizzo to approve the September 2, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session minutes as amended. Page 8401 amended to read, "Pathways will need to become ADA compliant when redone... " and "Asphalt may be permeable... " The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Pelican Bay resident, Mr. Joe Doyle stated that there is a "gap" in communication for noticing meetings and the annual assessment. Regarding the assessment, he suggested mailing two notices, the first in June or July, so that he could address this Board, and then a second notice in September to address the Board of County Commissioners at the Budget Hearing. Mr. Dorrill said that one notice is sufficient and suggested Mr. Doyle visit the Services Division website for meetings schedule and information. Second, Mr. Doyle suggested that this Board use an ad valorem assessment method, based on property value. Mr. Dorrill said the Board of County Commissioners' is the taxing authority and any change in assessment method would require the Commissioners to amend the Board's ordinance. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT CLAM BAY CHANNEL MAINTENANCE PERMIT UPDATE Mr. Dorrill reported that staff initiated a request for proposals or RFP to search for an environmental consultant for services in Clam Bay because Turrell, Hall & Associates' contract is expired. He recommended the Chairman appoint a Board member to assist staff with short- listing a candidate. Dr. Raid made a motion, second by Mr. laizzo that the Chairman appoint a knowledgeable member of the Board to assist staff in selecting an environmental consultant for services in Clam Bay. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. Chairman Dallas appointed Mr. Cravens and Mr. Cravens accepted. Mr. Hall reported that the Clam Bay channel maintenance permit application is still under review by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Mr. Hall reviewed the Humiston & Moore Tidal Analysis Report No. 11. Clam Pass is doing a good job of maintaining itself. There is a normal progression of natural shoaling. There is collection of readings done over a timeframe that showed a higher tidal phase lag caused likely by wave action and storm activity at that time. Tidal lag is based on where the cross - section is, linear constrictions and the amount of water going through. It appears that the report is consistent with a four to five year dredge period, and barring any major storm event, they should not need to dredge the Pass for another four or five years. Mr. Hall reviewed the Turrell Hall and Associates' Mangrove Monitoring report. There are several areas that are constricted, but because no areas are blocked, those areas can wait until the new maintenance permit is received. The work will be done before to the next rainy season. There are eight plots doing very well, and three plots (plots four, nine and eleven) that have some ongoing issues that need to be dealt with, on the east side of the waterway closest to the berm. The areas farthest from the water are more susceptible to exotic infestation and vines. Areas damaged by the hurricanes of 2005 are starting to come back, but because the ground is completely covered and lack of sunlight growth is reduced. Overall health of the mangroves is good. Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes October 6, 2010 1611 B21 i Mr. Lukasz said field staff does monthly maintenance for exotics east and west of the berm. They will address areas that Mr. Hall has identified at plots four and nine. PBSD RESPONSIBILITIES FOR U.S. 41 NOISE ABATEMENT UPDATE Mr. Dorrill reviewed the history of U.S. 41 noise abatement responsibilities in Pelican Bay. In 1993, a noise study was done to predict the impact of widening U.S. 41. The results did not predict any noise - related impact. Construction began in 2000 and because of community concerns, the Services Division's ordinance was amended in 2002 to include ambient noise abatement as a power and duty. While the Services Division maintains the landscaping along the berm, the Foundation owns the parcel, therefore the Services Division does not contemplate any proposed Community Improvement Plan projects related to a barrier along the U.S. 41 berm. Mr. Hoppensteadt said the Foundation is looking into obtaining a revised noise study. He announced two Community Improvement Plan sessions November 16 at 7:30 PM and November 17 at 3 PM to present Foundation and Services Division project recommendations. MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Mr. Dorrill presented the monthly financial report, month ending September and the 2010 Fiscal Year. Staff finished the year approximately $370,000 under budget. Mr. Levy made a motion, second by Dr. Raia to accept the monthly financial report into the record as resented The Board voted unanimous! y in favor of the motion. BCC APPROVAL OF FINAL BUDGET UPDATE Mr. Dorrill reported that the Board of County Commissioners approved the Fiscal Year 2011 Budget as presented. Mr. Cravens commented that the Adopted Budget format is good, however there are references made to sections that are not included that he suggested should be. Chairman Dallas suggested members review and bring suggestions to the next meeting. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT MR. OCHS' RESPONSE TO PEER REVIEW LETTER DISCUSSION At the last meeting, the Board decided to send a letter to Mr. Ochs regarding the peer review and that the Services Division Board had reached an impasse with Coastal Zone Management. Mr. Ochs responded by" "leaving the door open." Mr. Cravens said that he recalls they decided at the last meeting to include the Worley and Wanless reports as attachments to the letter to Mr. Ochs. Chairman Dallas said the reports were mentioned but not included. Mr. Hoppensteadt said that the Foundation is challenging the County on the issue of installing red & green navigational markers. The Foundation's position is that the argument is moot. The County appealed to the Governor however, he does not expect any action over the next year. They are talking with the County on issues of water quality. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has not established water quality criteria for Group Five, Western Everglades, which includes Clam Bay. Both the Foundation's consultant and the County's consultant believe that dissolved oxygen is the issue and with the proper data entered into STORET that site - specific criteria can be developed and submitted to the FDEP. The Foundation believes one of the four County water bodies as identified by the State of Florida (Water Body Identification Number or WBID) should split into two and Clam Bay should be separate from Venetian Bay and Moorings Bay. They are also discussing dredging, sediment, and beach erosion issues. Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Dr. Raia that the Pelican Bay Services Division "reaffirms the traditional boundaries of the Clam Pass /Clam Bay estuarine system Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA). This system is made up of Clam Pass, three Bays (Upper, Inner and Outer), and the creeks connecting them and adjacent preserve areas that are located entirely within the P.U.D. 'O1 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 1611 October 6, 2010 U of Pelican Bay in Collier County Florida. This system is shown on the CLAM PASS UNIT FL -64P Map which was adopted by Congress on October 15, 2008, via Public law 100 - 419." Ms. Marcia Cravens said the Mangrove Action Group (MAG) is passing a similar motion that goes further to support its purpose and function of unique water body identification. Once passed, MAG plans to send the information to the United States Environmental Protection Agency via the FDEP. The Board did not vote on Mr. Cravens' motion; it was tabled and they plan to readdress at the December meeting. NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLAN DISCUSSION Mr. Hoppensteadt said the Foundation is developing a nutrient management plan. First, they need to establish baseline measurements within each of the basins and work with the communities within those systems to develop a plan to limit the nutrient loading. It is a five -year program to cost $400,000. Mr. Dorrill has asked a consultant working in Rookery Bay as to how individual basin lands and the FDEP might respond to several lawsuits there. He will work with Mr. Hoppensteadt to determine which entity needs to play what role and address at the December meeting. DRAFT LANGUAGE FOR PBSD -CIP PRIORITIES DISCUSSION Mr. Dorrill distributed a document entitled, "Pelican Bay Community Improvement Plan Summary of Fundable Projects for Fiscal Year 2011" that outlines immediate, intermediate and longer term phased needs. He asked for member comments at the November meeting. Chairman Dallas said it is important that they submit an article to the Pelican Bay Post regarding the Services Division's role and the Board's consensus for Community Improvement Plan projects prior to the November sessions. He asked for comments to his draft language and whether the Board liked the order of priorities. Ms. Cravens strongly suggested they do not use the term "redevelopment." Mr. Dorrill said the term "redevelopment" refers to maintenance activities of existing infrastructure as well as some new construction of pedestrian crossings. Ms. Cravens said that because the Services Division handles surface water management for all of Pelican Bay, they should consider pervious surface projects. Chairman Dallas said he was "very saddened that someone on our Board found it necessary to put out an unofficial, un -vetted survey through the Men's Coffee. We all want public input. I thought that our plan was to make some preliminary recommendations, make sure they are properly explained to the public... and in a very neutral way, and ask for input... I thought the survey broke all of those rules. I think this is going to confuse the public and they will just pay less attention to us later on. It was very biased. As a member of this Board, I feel a responsibility not to say things that may be perceived as official... I ask us all in the future to keep that in mind." Board consensus was to convey in the article that this is a preliminary proposal and encourage public input. The Services Division would make presentations at the November sessions. No decision made on how to obtain public input. Mr. Barry Zell, Pelican Bay resident said the signs in the road at the North Tram station crossing make it more dangerous for both drivers and pedestrians. He suggested they install the same crossing that is at Myra Janco Daniels Boulevard. ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Dallas said the Foundation Board meets Friday, October 22 at 8:30 a.m. The Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC) meets October 14 at 1 p.m. and the CAC Clam Bay Subcommittee meets October 21. COMMUNITY ISSUES No discussion .M Pelican Bay ervices Division Board Re 1611 B 2 1 Y Regular Session Minutes October 6, 2010 COMMITTEE REPORTS/REQUESTS Mr. Cravens said the Landscape Committee has not met yet. They are waiting for Mr. Gibson to return. They plan to schedule their first meeting in November. He suggested Mr. Hoppensteadt, Mr. Hall, and Mr. Lukasz attend. OLD BUSINESS No discussion NEW BUSINESS No discussion MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE No discussion AUDIENCE COMMENTS No discussion ADJOURN Dr. Raia made a motion, second by Mr. Cravens to adjourn The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion and the meeting adjourned at 4:19 PM. &,—Gha4Rftm M%o y 4 me oo rvrn�tc � v� J i cc Minutes by Lisa Resnick on 10/13/2010 8:25:01 AM I 1 PFOEIVELD 1611 2 JAN 2 5 2013 H ping Coyle{ �ioard oor—,,n, J;ionorL Coletta 1 >��` y&N BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUT + WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Regular Session on Wednesday, November 3, 2010 at 1:00 p.m, at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples. The following members present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board Keith J. Dallas, Chairman absent Mary Anne Womble, Vice Chairwoman John P. Chandler Tom Cravens Johan Domenie Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill Kyle Lukasz Geoffrey S. Gibson John Iaizzo Michael Levy Theodore Raia, Jr. John Baron Hunter H. Hansen absent Mary McCaughtry Lisa Resnick Also Present: Susan Boland, President, Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Marcia Cravens, Vice - President, Mangrove Action Group Tim Hall, Senior Biologist & Principal, Turrell, Hall & Associates Jim Hoppensteadt, President, Pelican Bay Foundation Mary Johnson, President, Mangrove Action Group Cora Obley, Pelican Bay Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Kathy Worley, Co- Director Environmental Science & Biologist, Conservancy of Southwest Florida AGENDA I . Roll Call 2. Agenda Approval 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes a. October 6, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 4. Audience Participation 5. Administrator's Report a. Monthly Financial Report b. Status of Permit for Clam Bay Maintenance C. U.S. 41 Berm d. Status of RFP for Environmental Services 6. Chairwoman's Report a. Implementation of Community Improvement Plan (J. Chandler) b. Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update (T. Raia) C. History of Navigation Markers (T. Raia) d. Announcements 7. Community Issues 8. Committee Reports and /or Requests 9. Old Business 10. New Business IL Miscellaneous Correspondence a. Ongoing Projects Status Sheet 12. Audience Comments 13. Adjournment ROLL CALL With the exception of Chairman Dallas and Mr. Hansen, all Board members were present and quorum established. AGENDA APPROVAL Mr. Levy made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to approve the agenda as presented T&V Board voted unanimous! in favor o the motion. QC. � ,O a. Date: 8408 item #: Copies to'. Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 161 1 821A November 3, 2010 APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 6, 2010 REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to approve the October 6, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session minutes as presented The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Ms. Marcia Cravens recommended that the Board take action today to approve funding to install the Clam Bay canoe trail markers. She said the Clam Bay system is classified as a Class II water body; there are records in Collier County that the Doctor's Pass water body was downgraded to Class III in the 1980's. This is important because "you cannot have two different classes of water bodies in the same water body identification boundary (WBID). The Mangrove Action Group (MAG) passed a resolution in October affirming the traditional boundaries of Clam Bay estuary that it is delineated on Federal map, FL64P. Secondly, MAG believes the Clam Bay Estuary should have a unique WBID number. She requested that the Board support and endorse MAG. Ms. Mary Johnson reviewed her response to Mr. Feldhaus in item 6b. MAG's supports Clam Bay remaining a Class II water body for water quality standards. Clam Bay should have its own distinct WBID. They are concerned about measures used for dredging triggers at the mouth and throat of Clam Pass. Dr. Raia asked if changing the water classification in Clam Bay to Class V would make navigation an allowed use. Ms. Kathy Worley said Class V navigation is in this instance, not referring to recreational vessels, but large vessels. Ms. Cravens explained the difference between Class II and Class III. Class II is water that is capable of shellfish propagation and harvesting. Class III water allows swimming and fishing. Class III - Limited is "splashable." ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Mr. Dorrill presented the monthly financial report for October 2010 and beginning of the 2011 Fiscal Year. He anticipates that people will pay their assessment early to receive up to a 4% discount. By November, there will most likely be charges for "service" and distribution from the Tax Collector. Mr. Chandler said at the time the budget was approved he recommended they annualize it. Mr. Dorrill said it was an oversight and staff would correct. Regarding the administrative office lease, staff is seeking a rent reduction and extension of a one -year lease, not three -year renewal. He has discussed with Mr. Hoppensteadt, the possibility of sharing office space with the Foundation. To renovate the existing field office to include an administrative office, they would be required to submit a revised site development plan, and make substantial fire, safety and ADA modifications to the building and parking lot. Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Dr. Raia to accept the monthly financial report into the record as resented The Board voted unanitnouslY in favor of the motion. STAUS OF PERMIT FOR CLAM BAY MAINTENANCE Mr. Hall reported that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) made a site visit, and Request for Additional Information (RAI) concluded and complete. FDEP has 90 days to issue a permit or deny a permit, but he expects FDEP to issue a permit before end of year. Once FDEP issues the permit, the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) will follow. U.S. 41 BERM Mr. Dorrill said there were questions asked regarding the original or recent improvements to the U.S. 41 berm related to exotic removal and whether the project was complete. There are landscaping gaps in some sections. The Chairman is interested in .,I. Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 16 11 j B 2 1 November 3, 2010 staff developing an inventory of the number of ornamental plants it would take to complete the landscaping and fill in the gaps. He intends for staff to do some surveying and report to this board at the December meeting. STATUS OF RFP FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Mr. Dorrill reported that staff has received a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) for environmental services as they pertain to Clam Bay. Mr. Lukasz said the RFP was posted and there is a pre - proposal meeting on November 15 that will provide an opportunity for companies planning to submit proposals to ask questions about the project. Proposals will be open on November 23 and once received, the Selection Committee (Mr. Dorrill, Mr. Lukasz, and Mr. Cravens) and Purchasing will meet to discuss parameters for the selection committee to come back with three recommendations. The recommendations made by the Selection Committee will go back to the Services Division Board, and eventually the Board of County Commissioners for approval. Ms. Cravens asked for clarification of the RFP. Mr. Lukasz said the RFP is for environmental services in outer, inner, and upper Clam Bay, but does not include the Pass because the Pass is under the purview of Coastal Zone Management. The technical specifications are similar to work done in the Clam Bay System for the past twelve years. Ms. Cravens asked for clarification of the purchasing process. Mr. Dorrill responded that although they have a designated purchasing agent, they are non - voting; the selection committee will determine the short list. CHAIRWOMAN'S REPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN Mr. Chandler said although there are two Community Improvement Plan meetings planned for November 16 and November 17, he is concerned about poor attendance because most people will not be in town until after the holidays. He suggested they hold a meeting in February and move ahead on projects in March. He is concerned about adding five crosswalks on Pelican Bay Boulevard and suggested those in favor of them to get statistical data showing how dangerous they are. He said maintaining the pathways on the west side of Myra Janco Daniels Boulevard are part of the Services Division's normal responsibility. Vice Chairwoman Womble agreed and added that St. Williams is planning to renovate and that the Services Division should take this into consideration and possibly collaborate. Mr. Cravens said the County has begun replacing pathway sections along the east side of Pelican Bay Boulevard, but it is a very patchwork type of situation. Mr. Domenie said that all pathways should be made with pervious material. Mr. Lukasz said pervious asphalt requires more maintenance than impervious surfaces. Mr. Gibson said the new section of I -75 was constructed with pervious material and has heard it is "terrific in the rain." The Board discussed the possibility of holding a Community Improvement Plan meeting in February and how they should provide notice to get maximum turnout. Mr. Gibson suggested sending several email bulletins with the meeting notice solely. Mr. Iaizzo suggested sending letters to each unit owner to participate. Mr. Cravens suggested making a presentation to the President's Council. Someone made a suggestion to post fliers in all condominium buildings to urge people to attend. Mr. Hoppensteadt agreed to make a Community Improvement Plan presentation at the President's Council meeting of December 8 at 3 p.m. Mr. Chandler said they should be sure to take attendance, so they know who did not attend. Mr. Dorrill suggested that this Board compile a "short- list" of public works projects to present to Commissioner -Elect Hiller at the Services Division's December 1 meeting. FOUNDATION AD HOC CLAM BAY COMMITTEE UPDATE Dr. Raia is concerned that the Foundation's Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee efforts to have Pelican Bay "speak with one voice" and actively seeking input of the Services Division, Pelican Bay Property Owners Association, and Mangrove Action Group is misleading. He said there are many issues that he would like the Ad Hoc Committee to elaborate, including the resolution for a 10- year management plan and the 1982 Declarations, and suggested that the Committee be invited to a Services Division Board meeting to answer them. Mr. Hoppensteadt said that many of the parts are in the preliminary stages and that prior to anything becoming ;T. K Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes B211 November 3, 2010 memorialized, they would hold a workshop, but that they cannot "workshop their way through this." Dr. Raia repeated his concerns that the work being done by this committee has the input of the Services Division, Property Owners, and MAG because it does not. Mr. Hoppensteadt said Mr. Feldhaus would attend the January Services Division meeting. Ms. Worley said it is important to know where they are coming from a scientific point of view and if they are going to hold a workshop, background material should be disseminated prior to it and have technical people available to answer questions. Mr. Dorrill asked if they were getting into "unchartered waters by having this Board schedule a public hearing for matters that we are not a party to." The Committee is an Ad Hoc Committee of the Foundation. Dr. Raia disagreed because the Ad Hoc Committee's statement implies that they are involved in the decision - making process. Ms. Cravens agreed with Dr. Raia and said they are eager to make that statement true. She also agreed with Ms. Worley regarding having background material made available prior to the workshop. Mr. Hoppensteadt agreed with Mr. Dorrill that the Foundation should take the lead scheduling a workshop and he would work with the Ad Hoc Committee to schedule a date. HISTORY OF NAVIGATION MARKERS Dr. Raia made a motion, second by Mr. Domenie to send a letter to the Collier County Commissioners stating, "The Pelican Bay Services Division respectfully wishes to call to your attention that the County is mistaken in claiming that the 1998 Clam Bay Restoration and Management Permit requires the installation of lateral red -green navigation signs. The regulatory and information signs required in the permit and the installation of the canoe trail markers by permit number 20016 authorized March 24, 2000 are the only required signs." His research is available for review. Vice Chairwoman Womble said they should provide the information to the Ad Hoc committee, but to be patient and suggested they hold off on sending anything to the Commissioners. Mr. Chandler agreed. Dr. Raia said, "If we fail to do this, the Collier County people in charge of this are going to proceed by default. We are committing an act of omission by not defending what is right." Mr. Hoppensteadt said that the Foundation is challenging the County on the issue of installing red & green navigational markers. The permit to install the red -green markers was denied and the County was appealing to the Board of Trustees. They have since been able to get the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) to reconsider with additional Requests for Additional Information (RAI). The County still needs approval from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and to his knowledge, this has not happened. The Foundation has filed letters of objection and plan to request administrative hearings on many issues. He does not expect any action over the next year. Dr. Raia said they could put an end to this now. Mr. Cravens asked Dr. Raia if Commissioner -Elect Hiller asked him to do this. Dr. Raia said yes. Mr. Dorrill said normally, a Commissioner communicates such instructions for support in writing to the Chairman. He added that she was invited to the December meeting and to bring the issue up at that time. Dr. Raia expressed being frustrated and withdrew his motion. He said it is the Services Division's responsibility to replace the canoe trail markers in disrepair. "Those markers have been in terrible shape. For two years, I have been trying to get that done and people are afraid to tell the Commissioners that they are acting in the wrong way and preventing those markers from being corrected. I have wasted enough time on this Board. I'm leaving." He submitted his research materials for the record and departed. Ms. Cravens suggested that this Board take action to appoint Dr. Raia as this Board's liaison to the Commissioner. She repeated her request that this Board take action to fund the installation of the canoe trail markers. 8411 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 1611 B21 November 3 2010 Mr. Dorrill said the signs have been purchased and are in storage. He has the authority within the appropriation unit to spend that money as he sees fit, so no Board action is necessary. Until the Board of County Commissioners says otherwise, they cannot install the signs. ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Chairwoman Womble congratulated Mr. Cravens for being elected to the Water and Soil Conservation District Board. Georgia Hiller was elected as Commissioner for District 2. At the Community Center, there is a blood drive on November 9, two Community Improvement Plan presentation sessions on November 16 at 7:30 p.m., and November 17 at 3 p.m., and the Foundation Board meets November 19. At their last meeting, she reported that the Strategic Planning committee discussed the need for more Foundation administrative office space and what to do. Regarding the proposed noise assessment study, the Foundation Board voted it down and they will not be doing one. Regarding Board term changes, Ms. McCaughtry said on the second Tuesday in December, the County will put out their public notice that they are accepting applications for people to apply to this Board. If there are more than three applications, there will be a straw vote communitywide election like last year. Mr. laizzo, Mr. Levy, and Dr. Raia's terms are expiring. COMMUNITY ISSUES No discussion COMMITTEE REPORTS/REOUESTS In response to Mr. Domenie, Mr. Lukasz said that contractors are working along U.S 41 to remove dodder vine. Mr. Cravens said he would like to schedule a Landscape Committee meeting prior to the December meeting and to include Mr. Lukasz and Mr. Hall to attend. The three committee members are Mr. Cravens, Mr. Domenie, and Mr. Gibson. Mr. Chandler suggested they use more color in the landscaping. OLD BUSINESS No discussion NEW BUSINESS No discussion MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE Mr. Dorrill noted that staff would update the miscellaneous correspondence sheet. 15, 17, 18, 19 are complete. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms. Johnson asked if the RFP for environmental services includes biological monitoring in outer Clam Bay. Mr. Lukasz said yes, with the exception of monitoring the sea grass. Ms. Cravens requested they hold off on using copper sulfate until they get recommendations for alternatives from the Landscape Committee. Mr. Dorrill said they will not be delaying the use of copper sulfate and it is highly effective in killing algae. Regarding developing a best management practices program, Mr. Hoppensteadt said the Foundation approved $250,000 to perform baseline measurements with Turrell Hall as sole source provider. He would provide copy of contract when finalized. ADJOURN Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to adjourn The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion and the meedhir ad'ourned at 3:19 PM. Kei . Dallas, irman Minutes by Lisa Resnick on 11/8/2010 3:54 PM 8412 1611 621 '� LANDSCAPE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Landscape Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Tuesday, November 16, 2010 at 1:00 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples. Landscape Subcommittee Members Tom Cravens, Chairman Johan Domenic Geoffrey S. Gibson Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill Mary McCaughtry Kyle Lukasz Lisa Resnick Also Present AGENDA Keith J. Dallas 1. Roll Call 2. Audience Participation 3. Seek Ways to Implement Best Management Practices in Pelican Bay 4. Develop Educational Outreach to Members Regarding Best Management Practices 5. Audience Comments 6. Adjournment ROLL CALL All Subcommittee members were present and quorum established. Mr. Dallas was also present. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION No audience participation SEEK WAYS TO IMPLEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN PELICAN BAY Mr. Cravens defined Best Management Practices (BMP) as landscape management practices designed to minimize negative environmental impact and the practices vary depending upon the landscape environment, i.e., BMP in an agricultural environment differ considerably from BMP in an urban environment. BMP are designed to minimize non- source pollution, or pollution that does not have an easily identifiable source. Mr. Dorrill said that the University of Florida, Institute for Food and Agricultural Science (IFAS) Extension Service established suggested BMP operating standards and procedures for the State of Florida. Mr. Cravens said he had concerns whether, although they were trained and certified in BMP, employees are not actually engaging in BMP. He showed a photo of fertilizer dropped on a pathway and said there were numerous examples. Mr. Lukasz said he could mandate a training refresher course accompanied with better supervision, but sometimes they are using temporary labor, which makes it harder to comply. Mr. Dallas said in order to be effective, they should give employees a refresher course just prior to application. DEVELOP EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH TO MEMBERS REGARDING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Mr. Cravens said the Services Division could educate the community by having Cathy Feser, the Urban Horticulture Specialist with the IFAS Extension Service could make a presentation before the President's Council or Men's Coffee and perform a site visit. Mr. Lukasz said that Doug Caldwell, Commercial Landscape Extension Agent would join Ms. Feser. 1 16 I l B21 Landscape Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board Meeting Minutes November 16, 2010 Mr. Dorrill said they are intending to increase awareness, but in order to be effective, "we, as the advisory body to the community should give them a take -away, at that same meeting. That take -away might be a suggested amendment in their contract language with their landscape contractor" that requires them on those days that they are scheduled to fertilize to advise the client in advance and require them to have a principal of the firm on site because "in my world and Kyle's world, it is a world of lowest common denominator." He suggested that they also have empirical data to back up presentation. Mr. Cravens said duckweed is very small, but one duckweed can produce an offspring in 24 hours and can cover an area within a matter of weeks. It is also extremely effective at removing nitrogen, phosphorus, and heavy metals, however, it disrupts the aquatic environment, preventing sunlight and oxygen from getting to the plants beneath the surface and kills aquatic life. Mr. Lukasz said that copper sulfate is effective in killing algae, not duckweed. The Services Division has been using the chemicals Reward (Diquat) and Sonar (Fluridone) to kill duckweed. Mr. Cravens said they could also introduce a biological agent such as grass carp or tilapia, or use mechanical means, such as skimmers. Mr. Dorrill said that staff would research the options available. They would obtain the latest edition of the IFAS BMP edition. They would prepare or propose a suggested amendment to existing residential or commercial landscaping contracts as they pertain to fertilization. They would obtain the existing Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) guidelines for permitted acquisition of grass carp and tilapia. They would arrange for Ms. Feser to make a presentation to discuss suggested improvements to the plan palette for a demonstration project. Mr. Cravens said regarding median landscaping, there is too much turf and he suggested that Cathy Feser develop a low maintenance median landscaping project. Mr. Dorrill said to check out Colliers Reserve median. It is not colorful, but low maintenance. The Committee discussed performing a pilot project at the lake south of Hyde Park by planting ornamental grasses in front of lake to prevent runoff. Mr. Cravens said it would be good to have the initial readings from Turrell Hall. Mr. Dorrill said that their pilot project could coincide with the Turrell Hall study. The Committee planned to meet again during the second week of December and invite Tim Hall and Jim Hoppensteadt to participate. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No audience comments ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:04 p.m. Tom Cravens, Chairman 2 Minutes by Lisa Resnick \11/23/2010 2:47:24 PM RECEIVED JAN 25- 2+011 Board of Count,° Conmrk sioners �.� lei Henning Coyle �- Coletta PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD & PELICAN BAY FOUNDATION STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN TOWN HALL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board and the Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee held a Community Improvement Plan Town Hall on Tuesday, November 16, 2010 at 7:30 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive. Pelican Bay Services Division Board Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Mary Anne Womble, Vice Chairwoman John P. Chandler absent Tom Cravens absent Johan Domenic absent Geoffrey S. Gibson Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill John Iaizzo Michael Levy Theodore Raia, Jr. John Baron absent Hunter H. Hansen absent Lisa Resnick Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee Bob Uek, Chairman Gerald A. Moffatt Ronnie Bellone, Co -Vice Chairwoman Noreen Murray Merlin Lickhalter, Co -Vice Chairman Ralph Ohlers absent Carson Beadle absent Mary Anne Womble Rose Mary Everett Pelican Bay Foundation Staff Jim Hoppensteadt, President Suzanne Minadeo Wilson Miller Stantec Kevin Mangan, Principal & Landscape Architect PRESENTATION Mr. Beadle via videotape, Ms. Bellone, and Mr. Dallas gave a brief introduction. Mr. Hoppensteadt made a Strategic Master Plan presentation to approximately seventy attendees showing the plan improvement areas, proposed conditions for crosswalks, pathways, the Commons, community berm, street lighting, and public art, and probable budgets. PUBLIC SPEAKERS Mr. John Mueller, Pelican Bay resident said there is a noise pollution problem, not only along Oakmont, but also in Pine Woods. Ms. Hoppensteadt responded that the Board is continuing to debate the issue of whether a wall would help with noise. Ms. Murray responded that according to the study, a large earthen berm is the best noise preventer, however they do not have the space or material to construct a large earthen berm along U.S. 41. A wall provides better noise protection than shrubbery and the absence of shrubbery has contributed to noise. She said she objects to spending $65,000 for an additional noise study when they have sufficient information from the Wilson Miller report regarding how a wall would lessen the noise better than shrubbery, however prickly shrubbery filling in the bare Misc. Corres: 107 Cam' item #: Crpies to: 1611 821 Pelican Bay Services Division Board and Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee Community Improvement Plan Town Hall Meeting Minutes November 16, 2010 areas would also help with security. The issue is whether they want to build a wall at what cost to address primarily security. Mr. Lickhalter said that the Collier County Sheriff's office does not reflect the true data because many do not report incidents along U.S. 41 to the Sheriff. Mr. Ray O'Connor, Oakmont resident said shrubbery planted by the Services Division many years ago did not diminish noise as much as they had hoped. They need to address the issues of noise and security immediately. Mr. Bob Sanchez, Vice President, Oakmont Association said they should plan for a barrier along U.S. 41 before it is too late. Mr. Rick (inaudible) Oakmont resident said he would like more data regarding a wall before he can make a decision. He suggested reducing the speed limit on U.S. 41 to reduce noise. He said he does not use the pathways because they are either dirty, moldy, being irrigated, or impassable. Bicycle riders are a major problem and enforcement of traffic laws are important and they should work with the Sheriff s office to calm traffic. Mr. Bruce Beauchamp, Oakmont resident said sound on U.S. 41 diminishes property values and the Board should consider a sound barrier and hold a meeting specifically regarding the subject. Mr. Stephen Feldhaus, Pelican Bay Woods resident said the Board should reconsider a sound and security barrier and encouraged another meeting to exclusively discuss this subject. Mr. Hoppensteadt said that there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of crime and vagrants along the U.S. 41 berm, but not official Sheriff reports. Mr. Stan (inaudible) said that a wall could enhance the aesthetic appeal of Pelican Bay. Mr. Dallas said one of the issues is how much would a wall reduce the sound. The Wilson Miller report states that a wall would reduce sound by about three decibels. Mr. Jim Hoban, Oakmont resident said they should build a wall along U.S. 41 because if one part of Pelican Bay is affected, all of Pelican Bay is affected. Mr. Charles (inaudible) asked what it would cost to fund the first three years of projects. Ms. Murray said they have funds for the first three years of projects. Mr. Charles (inaudible) asked how future projects would be vetted. Mr. Hoppensteadt said they would have the same vetting process as they are using now by holding meetings and articles in the Pelican Bay Post, and continue to seek ways to engage the entire community. Mr. Dave Doran, Lugano resident said they need to continue to look at the commercial areas abutting the community for ingress and egress and funnel out non - residents of Pelican Bay to decrease traffic. Regarding pathways, he does not believe that widening the pathways on one side is a solution. Bicyclists ride on both sides and both sides should be widened. Mr. Bob Swart, Oakmont resident said number one on the list they should be addressing security and noise with a wall along U.S. 41. He said that property was stolen from his home, although he did not report to the Sheriff. Mr. Tom (inaudible) said pathways should be widened on both sides and one side designated for walking, the other for bicyclists. The stop signs in the roadway at the crosswalk of the North Tram station make a very dangerous situation. The costs being quoted for crosswalks seem unreasonably high. 108 16 1 l B 2 tl Pelican Bay Services Division Board and Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee Community Improvement Plan Town Hall Meeting Minutes November 16 2010 Ms. Louise Chase, Beauville resident said there should be a four -way stop at Ridgewood and Pelican Bay Boulevard. Mr. Uek said the last thing he wants to do is recommend to the Board that they spend $1.5 million on a wall until they have the information that they need that a wall will be effective in reducing noise. Mr. Moffatt encouraged reporting crime to the Sheriff. The meeting was adjourned. i J. Dall , Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick \11/24/2010 9:42:34 AM 109 Alk Strategic Master Plan Information Event Pelican Bay Foundation and Services Division }--� November 16 and 17, 2010 N Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 I-A ON N Kev Map of Communitv Improvement Plan Areas LEGEND 'OUNDATION PROPERTY COMMUNITY BERM/BOARDWALK TRAM STATIONS PARKS STREET P, O)A' EXISTING PATHWAYS ENTRY SIGNAGE ------ US 41 BERM upotp, 1w-A Cr% �-A a3 r\) 1--& Plan Imorovement Area - North Tram Station: Existinq Conditions Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan In dimition Event I November 16/17,'A10 a Q7 Plan Improvement Area - North Tram Station: Proposed Conditions I PROPOV D SPfIT fA(-r PAM 81 OCK 1Ni COK13 I BANW, _ _.... PROPOSM PAVFR CROSSWAI K, AND RAMPS m....� �...�evnn✓ , Ey,.p ' •, - »..,. -av - ..r....m_ xic w.. .� arc. PELICAN BAY BLV() 1 a ypy � L� PEUCAN BAY CROSSWALK AT sA IMPROVEMENT AREAS ■� -3 Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 Plan hDrovement Area - Crosswalks: Existinq Conditions Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan information Event I November 16/17,2010 1-A ON 0 Plan Improvement Area - Mid -Block Cross Walks Location Ma Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 ON W IV D1-E: MIDDLOCK LOCA11ON MAP Q Crosswalk Improvement Number Patterned Pavement Areas Mid6bck Crosswalk Locatons on Pelican Bay Boulevard PELICAN BAY BLVD.. / REACHWAIK PATHWAY- - P91CAN BAY BLVD. / NORTH TRAM STATION PELICAN BAY BLVD. / SANDPIPER PARIONG- PELICAN BAY BLVD. / THE COMMONS O YARD 11 PELICAN BAY 81VD.IGLENVEW.PLAC17 �... •: 10, PELICAN Cg� 1 P BAY BOUT ARD ON ROAD DR: /��, 44, � OOWE " _ O F A� 4 M. }D. BLVD. O^K,ppNT PARR,* AY TAMIAW TRAIL NS 40 TAMIAMI TM (US 48 Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 ON W IV Plan Improvement Area - Intersection Cross Walk Locations Ma TAMIAMI TRAIL NS 471 TAMIAMI TRAIL NS 41) Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event ( November 16117, 2010 Cps N 1-& ON F-A Is 114,W IMT T ..p a Strategic Pelican Bay f • November L• Plan Improvement Area - Median/Roadway Landscape: Existing Conditions I --k MIN Pelican bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16/17, 2010 1--A C7% F--4 M Plan Imarovement Area - Median /Roadway Landscape: Proposed Improvements Pelican Bay I Strategic Master 06n Information Event "I bo tuber 16117, 2010 ON oD N IN • . l . • 11,1111,11 [!1!iv11111; s r Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event ( November 16117, 2010 Common Issues: Accessibility i1'1 11• Material Changes Uneven Surfaces Trip Hazards Excessive Slopes Mix of Uses/Width Proximity to Road rNown ?01 Plan ImarovementArea - Pathways: Existinq Conditions — 5 foot wide Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 74-4 N Plan Improvement Area - Pathways: Proposed Conditions - 8 foot wide Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 ON CO N Plan ImarovementArea - Pathways: Proposed Improvements East Side ___ - -- - - Pelican Bay Boulevard — West Side F--r Q7 N #. �. ♦ w Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 ON II--" N N Plan Improvement Area - The Commons: Proposed Improvements I REBUILT COMMONS ENTRY SIGN REAUGN AND COVER EMPLOYEE STAR! 15 X 45 TRASH COMPACTOR TANKFARM DUMPSTTRS �_._�.... 5�� a CART/TRAM TURN AROUND AREA SECURE TRAM STATION WAITING �fA.CWRT DRQP OFF STRUCTURE WITH GATED ACCESS AND CARD READER — VEHICULAR DROP OFF h ADD S MEWALK FOR TRAM ACCESS i i Ma OVER OR WE UNDER v / ter? -"— PATH FOR SWAIF CONTINUANCE ?WCAN SAY BLVD. TRAM STATION PERGOLA STRUCTURE DECORATIVE URNS WITH BE14CH SEATING ' —FROG' RELOCATION/ REMOVAL TRIM VEGETATION AROUND UTILITIES FOR VISBESfY TRAM STATION ELEVATION 0: ON Pelican Bay Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16/17, 2010 ■ • Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event if 16117, 2010 ON V Imm Plan Improvement Area - Community Berm: Existinq Conditions Eroded Bank Sedimentation Limited Shade & Rest Opportunity 10 Foot Wide Inlet Box Pelican Bay ( Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16/17, 2010 e Plan Improvement Area - Tram Stations: Existing Conditions Limited Areas of Cover Bicycle Parking Pedestrian Safety Circulation /Use Conflicts Architecture Repairs Tram Area Furnishings Pelican Bay ' Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 ll- . ON N Cx7 N Plan Improvement Area - Tram Station: Proposed Improvements PROPOSED NEW BIKE RACKS PROPOSED TACTILE PAVERS PROPOSED COVERED WAITING AREA AND SITE FURNISHINGS WITH ADDITIONAL BENCHES RAMP AREA Rw -- NEW PLANTINGS, EXPAND PLANTING AREA AND ADD NEW PALMS PROPOSED REALIGNMENT OF CURB; ALLOW FOR PATH; ADD NEW PLANTINGS LOG(�AND SURFACE Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 W N Plan ImarovementArea - General Landscape: Existina Conditions Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 F-" Plan Improvement Area - General Landscape: Proposed Improvements Ri Plan Improvement Area a General Landscaae: Existina Conditions Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information Event I November 16117, 2010 9 Plan Improvement Area - General Landscape: Proposed Improvements I a` F--A 00 N ... Plan Improvement Area - Street Lighting Strat 1"" N E, SECONDARY ENTRIES A. PELICAN BAY BLVD. "+ ' " E. SECONDARY ENTRIES B, GULF PARK DIL D. OAKMONT DR. " - . , x G RDGEWOOD DR. 1"" N Plan Improvement Area - Community Si na a trate Existing Variety Before r �, 11 . Ot Plan Improvement Area - Public Art Stra V W N x llt'KiAF?R lW; PA1116N5 :,.;1 urry �rl v nun+ "^ � ce '�"°" 'i�tvN :t,N4R i1AKT 4 #T ; rJdtNz 'i rzteoric.kdev�; J �uwk�e t i a ••.,w .•, A "IINbN�t � ...�a � .. ,,... <...,..,„�! 14541 Ch Si V W N Initial Master Plan Projects Probable Budget Costs: Project Description: North Tram Median Reconfiguration: Install North Tram Station Crosswalk: Install 4 Mid -Block Crosswalks: Install 9 Intersection Crosswalks: Roadway Landscape and Irrigation Improvements: Widen PBB pathway Commons to North Tram: Rebuild Myra Janco Daniels Blvd west pathway: Reconfigure the Commons Area: Install Rest Areas and Overlooks on Community Berm: Foundation 'BSI $164,500 $ 39,500 $183,500 $ 51,000 $ 817,000 $ 246,200 $ 205,700 $ 39,500 Improve North Tram Station Waiting Area: $ 207000 Improve Sandpiper Tram Station Waiting Area: 11,500 CS` Lake/Preserve Landscape and Storm Water Filtration: $122,900 F-A Totals: $1,368,000 $1,431,300 co N Pelican Bay I Strategic Master Plan Information 2010 `..i Long Term Strategic Master Plan Projects Probable Budget Costs: Project Description: Widen the balance of the west side asphalt paths on Pelican Bay Boulevard: $ 489,700 Replace Single Family Neighborhood Paths: $ 300,500 Low water demand landscape and irrigation improvements: $1,679,000 Add canopy trees in Gulf Park Drive area: $ 725000 Retrofit street light fixtures with LED on Pelican Bay Blvd. and Gulf Park Drive: $ 712,600 Replace light poles on Pelican Bay Blvd. and Gulf Park Drive: $ 321,400 Replace light poles with LED fixtures on Ridgewood, Oakmont and Green Tree Drive: $ 646,000 .r Total: $ 41221,200 F--� N t� 1--A ION 1-1 N 4 4 D V ..1. V co N 1--A ON 1�-& a) M3- I 1 N $..J I-A N F--A oz 1-" CIO ) Q1 IL N 1--A ON N I-MA ON �-A m N A 1-1 ON I-A oc. N N Vic. F-A v F"J ON -==I rr co �w P 1�-j co N a3 I-i CYS N • d� � 1--A ON M..1 N I �"'� �"'� N .�� 1--A ON 1--A L v t..A ON co N F--b. MIV 1-IsnnIng � c9Owo nt Gp�t�a C,J c.ornmissioners —'—"— PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD & PELICAN BAY FOUNDATION STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN TOWN HALL MEETING WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board and the Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee held a Community Improvement Plan Town Hall on Wednesday, November 17, 2010 at 3:00 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive. Pelican Bay Services Division Board Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Mary Anne Womble, Vice Chairwoman John P. Chandler absent Tom Cravens Johan Domenie Geoffrey S. Gibson absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff Mary McCaughtry John Iaizzo Michael Levy Theodore Raia, Jr. absent John Baron absent Hunter H. Hansen absent Lisa Resnick Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee Bob Uek, Chairman Gerald A. Moffatt Ronnie Bellone, Co -Vice Chairwoman absent Noreen Murray Merlin Lickhalter, Co -Vice Chairman Ralph Ohlers absent Carson Beadle absent Mary Anne Womble Rose Mary Everett Pelican Bay Foundation Staff Jim Hoppensteadt, President Suzanne Minadeo Wilson Miller Stantec Kevin Mangan, Principal & Landscape Architect PRESENTATION Mr. Beadle via videotape and Mr. Uek gave a brief introduction. Mr. Hoppensteadt made a Strategic Master Plan presentation to approximately thirty -five attendees showing the plan improvement areas, proposed conditions for crosswalks, pathways, the Commons, community berm, street lighting, and public art, and probable budgets. PUBLIC SPEAKERS Mr. Bill McCormick said there are not any immediate needs for lighting. Mr. Dallas explained that they might want to start putting money aside for lighting for the future. Mr. McCormick asked if pathways were to be widened would they use the concrete or asphalt and if they choose asphalt he suggested they use a different color than black, such as green, or tan, which would be cooler. Mr. Neim Malo, Oakmont resident said building a berm along U.S. 41 should be their first priority. Mr. Uek said they are trying to figure out what type of barrier would best minimize noise and want scientific evidence before spending $2 million. Mr. Charles Sikorski, Oakmont resident said information is available now regarding a need to reduce noise along; U.S. 41 and he is in support of a wall. Mr. Uek responded that the Board plans to revisit consideration of a sound study. Ms. Womble said this subject has been discussed for many years amongst both the Serm5m (Zgmbn and Foundation Boards, they are concerned, and reaffirmed that this is not a "dead issue." plate: - 110 Item #: — C :*S to: 1611 B21! Pelican Bay Services Division Board and Pelican Bay Foundation Strategic Planning Committee Community Improvement Plan Town Hall Meeting Minutes November 17, 2010 Ms. Susan O'Brien asked how soon the Board would be acting to get some of this work done. Mr. Hoppensteadt said they plan to make additional presentation in January when more of the community is here and around February or March the Strategic Planning Committee make recommendations to the Foundation Board. Following that, they would go through a long permitting, and bidding process. Mr. Dallas agreed. Mr. Uek said they are coordinating projects for maximum fiscal responsibility. Mr. Jim Murray, Oakmont resident said there is a tremendous cost benefit in LED lighting. Mr. Doug Kopp, Oakmont resident said there are security considerations in favor of a wall along U.S. 41. He asked if they considered pathways along Oakmont Parkway. Mr. Mangan said there are land issues that prevent an easy pathway along Oakmont Parkway. It is part of the recommendation for consideration, but just not part of Phase One. Mr. Hoppensteadt said although there is anecdotal evidence of vagrancy and crime, there is not official Collier County Sheriff data that exists. It is a complicated issue and one that they need to address. Ms. Murray said regarding security, they could spend $100,000 on landscaping to provide a barrier right away, but it would not affect noise. Mr. Peter Gerbosi, Willowbrook resident suggested they consider a fishing pier off the boardwalk near the Sandpiper. Mr. David Richter said the boardwalk is noisy and they should do something about that. If Pelican Bay were being built today, a wall would be built. He asked they reconsider the cost benefit is of widening the pathways, considering that bicycle paths would be built in the roadway the next time Pelican Bay Boulevard is resurfaced. Ms. Sally Walker asked if they considered widening the berm. Mr. Hoppensteadt said there are too many conservation and environmental permitting issues involved with widening the berm. It would require significant construction and costs that they could not justify. A resident asked if ADA issues would be addressed with slopes of pathways. In addition, would emergency vehicles still have access with all of the proposed projects? Mr. Hoppensteadt said yes, ADA issues would be addressed, and if anything, they have increased accessibility. A resident asked if the sign could be replaced on U.S. 41 denoting Gulf Park Drive. Mr. Hoppensteadt said they would continue to petition FDOT to put the sign identifying Gulf Park Drive. Ms. Marcia Cravens asked if the Foundation could apply for a permit to replace the Canoe Trail Markers as part of the Community Improvement Plan process. Mr. Hoppensteadt said the conservation area was not a part of the scope of the study. The Foundation is in negotiations with the County and they hope to resolve eventually. There was no further discussion and the meeting adjourned. V 1 r ,��W,4 /- ) e . Dalla Chairman 111 Minutes by Lisa Resnick \11/24/2010 2:27:22 PM Hi 16erl JAN 2 1 J` J Henning Coyle 44 ,> «016ta *NCISAM SBRVICES DIVISION BOARD REGULAR SESSIO1Cj TES WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Regular Session on Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 1:00 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples. The following members present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board Keith J. Dallas, Chairman Geoffrey S. Gibson Mary Anne Womble, Vice Chairwoman John Iaizzo John P. Chandler absent Michael Levy Tom Cravens Theodore Raia, Jr. Johan Domenie John Baron absent Hunter H. Hansen Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill Lisa Resnick Kyle Lukasz Also Present: Susan Boland, President, Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Marcia Cravens, Vice - President, Mangrove Action Group Tim Hall, Senior Biologist & Principal, Turrell, Hall & Associates Georgia A. Hiller, Esq., Collier County Commissioner, District 2 James Hoppensteadt, President, Pelican Bay Foundation Steve Sammons, Landscape Architect, Wilson Miller Stantec AGENDA Roll Call Remarks by Commissioner Georgia Hiller Agenda Approval Approval of Meeting Minutes a. November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session b. November 16, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee c. November 16, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Town Hall d. November 17, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Town Hall Audience Participation Administrator's Report a. Monthly Financial Report b. Status of Permit for Clam Bay Maintenance c. Status of RFP for Environmental Services d. Discussion of Need for Landscaping along U.S. 41 Chairman's Report a. Implementation of Community Improvement Plan b. Foundation Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee Update c. Independent District Update d. Canoe Trail Markers J. Domenie e. Announcements Community Issues Committee Reports and/or Requests a. Landscape Committee i. Initial Meeting Update ii. Foundation's Nutrient Management Plan Update 10. Old Business IL New Business 12. Miscellaneous Correspondence a. Ongoing Projects Status Sheet 13. Audience Comments 14. Adjournment Mist Corres: ROLL CALL Date: With the exception of Mr. Baron and Mr. Chandler, all Board members were present and quorum established. Item M 8413 Ccpies to: 16I 1 Pelican Bay ervices Division Board Regular Session Minutes B21 Y g December 1, 2010 REMARKS BY DISTRICT 2 COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ. District 2 Commissioner Georgia A. Hiller stated her concerns. She said that the Pelican Bay Services Division, as it exists today, is not empowered as intended. The County is consistently circumventing the PBSD. Over the past few years, the County created advisory boards, specifically the Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC) and the Clam Bay Advisory Committee (CBAC) to sanction what they want to have done to prevent Pelican Bay Services Division from participating in the process. She referred to a meeting she had with Leo Ochs, Gary McAlpin, and Marla Ramsey two days ago. They were discussing Coastal Zone Management projects in deliberation. They informed her that the United States Coast Guard (USCG) permit application for red /green navigational markers has lapsed and the USCG is now requiring an environmental impact assessment before they will reconsider the permit. That is going to cost a lot of money. Further, Mr. McAlpin informed her that this matter was going to be brought before CAC in January and then before the Board of County Commissioners (BCC). She pointed out that the process bypasses the Pelican Bay Services Division from being a part of the discussion. One of the things that she is hoping to correct is to reaffirm the Pelican Bay Services Division's role as the Board responsible for the maintenance of Clam Bay and Clam Pass, and for preservation of the mangroves. There are rules of statutory construction that do not allow the County to create ordinances at a later time when an ordinance currently exists that clearly defines what the Services Division's jurisdiction is, however that is in effect what has happened. Commissioner Hiller referred to Dr. Raia's motion that states it is the County's belief that red /green markers are needed to close out the permit. She does not agree with the County. She said that if this Board recommends to the BCC that they should close out the permit because this Board has satisfied all the requirements, the BCC should take that and act accordingly. The debate over the markers is a significant debate because if red /green markers are required, then the argument will become about dredging for deeper draft boats and navigation. This is clearly a problem because this is a Natural Resources Protection Act (NRPA) area and they must preserve and protect the environmental sanctity of that space. Mr. Gibson referred to the Community Improvement Plan project and the possibility of installing a wall along U.S. 41 for security and noise reduction. He wanted the Commissioner to be aware of one of the suggestions made to slow traffic on U.S. 41. Commissioner Hiller said she was not sure if the County has jurisdiction to change the speed limit on a state road, but she would inquire with the Transportation department and report back. San Marino resident Mr. Steve Seidel asked who has jurisdiction to determine whether they could construct a wall and its specifications on U.S. 41. Commissioner Hiller said that the County has jurisdiction through the Land Development Code and the County Permitting department would work with Pelican Bay community. Mr. Seidel asked Commissioner Hiller to state her position on Jackson Labs. Commissioner Hiller said that she does not believe that tax dollars should be used to fund a private entity unless "you say that is what you want" through a referendum. She has reviewed all of the financial information that the non - profit company Jackson Labs presented. The bottom line is that the numbers do not support this project as being an economically viable project. The cost to Collier County taxpayers totals $500 million in exchange for the creation of 200 jobs over the course of a ten -year period. There is no guarantee that Jackson Labs will bring in any other business, and no commitment to repay the money that will be advanced to them. "If I was underwriting a bond on this deal, it would be rated junk. That is a fact. It is so high -risk and government, as a matter of public policy, has to be very conservative. When government invests tax dollars before they are used, the standards are very, very strict... It just goes against the principles of prudent government to invest in a deal like this." Mr. Cravens said that based on Commissioner Hiller's earlier comments, from what he understands, she believes it would be appropriate that this Board pass a resolution to send to the BCC stating that this Board feels that the existing markers are reason enough to request that they close the permit. ;M Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 1, 2010 16111B211 Commissioner Hiller affirmed Mr. Cravens' understanding. She added that she would expect such action. She does not understand why this permit has not been submitted for closure with the information that exists. Her observation is that the County historically has done things ahead of what is required. She said, for example, that the County has argued that dredging is required because someday maybe the state or Federal government will develop water quality standards for the estuary. The idea that the County should be preemptive and dredge because it might be a solution for a possible future requirement is absolutely the wrong way to do business as a government. Mr. Domenie said the Services Division has Canoe Trail markers that were permitted and installed in 2000. Some of the markers are in ill repair. About two years ago, the Services Division ordered thirty -two replacement markers and they have been sitting in storage because the County will not allow the Services Division to install them even though the Canoe Trail markers are tied to a separate permit. Mr. Gibson showed a photo of a barnacle - covered canoe trail marker. Commissioner Hiller said the Services Division Board has to look at the ordinance that governs this Board and act accordingly. If the Services Division Board has legal documents that certain things should or should not be done, then this Board's role is to advise the BCC accordingly and execute resolutions that give the BCC guidance and explain why. The Board discussed ways to get items on the BCC agenda, i.e., public petition. Commissioner Hiller said one could always ask her to put an item on the BCC agenda. Ms. Marcia Cravens referred to an item that was tabled by this Board on October 6 regarding reaffirming the traditional boundaries of the Clam Bay Estuary, embodied by Federal map FL -64P, and recommended this Board pass a motion in support. Dr. Raia said the significance of the red /green navigational signs is that they denote safe passage, so once they are in they would be obligated to dredge and maintain a safe passage. One would not install canoe trail markers in the same area as red/green markers because powerboats have the right of way over canoes and the canoe trail markers would create obstructions. Further, the County has directed this Board to cease and desist all activities in Clam Bay and this Board has refused to challenge the County. Ms. Womble said on April 23, 2008 after a few Services Division Board members spoke at the BCC meeting, the BCC created two new ordinances and committees to handle responsibilities in Clam Bay. Commissioner Hiller acknowledged that as a problem because there is a pre- existing ordinance. The BCC cannot just create ordinances in conflict with existing law. The first -in -time ordinance is the governing ordinance and the other ordinances are in conflict with it. The BCC is trying to usurp this Board's power. Chairman Dallas said, "along the way to get our attention they stopped paying our bills." Commissioner Hiller suggested this Board follow up with the Clerk about that issue. Dr. Raia said that the County blocked the Services Division from installing the canoe trail markers by not authorizing payment for installation. Commissioner Hiller asked who blocked the action. Mr. Cravens said the decision was made by Coastal Zone Manager, Gary McAlpin. Commissioner Hiller responded that is a problem because legally the BCC cannot delegate discretionary decision- making or spending authority to anybody. The law only allows for ministerial decisions. Such a decision to deny payment is something that would have to come before the BCC and the BCC would have to make a decision to approve or deny. Dr. Raia said in May of 2009, the County Attorney sent a letter to the Army Corp. of Engineers (ACOE) stating that the Pelican Bay Services Division is a dependent branch of Collier County and as such is not authorized to bind the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Hiller responded that no advisory board or county administrator at any level has the ability to bind this County or the Board with respect to discretionary issues. That is a matter of law. Over time, this Board's authority has been diluted and one 8415 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 1, 2010 1611 B21 1 of her concerns is to whom the Services Division's administrator answers. Currently, the Services Division's administrator, Mr. Dorrill answers to the County Manager, and she believes that Mr. Dorrill should answer to this Board directly, so this Board can give him direction on how expenditures should be executed. It warrants more investigation, but the current structure does not make sense. They need to revisit why this Board was created and respect the original intent of the enabling ordinance. Chairman Dallas referred to redistricting rumors that part of Pelican Bay might become part of Commissioner Coyle's District 4. Commissioner Hiller responded that she believes such rumored redistricting could be problematic because districts have to be reasonably equal in population and a compelling race based argument against it. If Pelican Bay were to be moved into Commissioner Coyle's district, there would not be a representative balanced distribution. She believes the change would be in the other areas and prefers the "layer cake" approach, slicing east and west. Mr. Cravens asked whether the BCC could become elected "at large" like in Lee County Commissioner Hiller said Lee County is a charter county, so their rules are different from Collier County, which has a constitutional form of government. She does not agree with charter government, the objective of which is to get rid of the Constitutional officers, which are the only checks and balances there are on the system. Charter county enables the county to trump municipal law. She would prefer to be an "at large" commissioner, if they can have it that way. Mr. Dorrill summarized the discussion. From his understanding, Commissioner Hiller is encouraging this Board to consider an official request by way of a resolution to do several things. The first would be to ask the BCC to close and suspend further action associated with the original permit and navigation markers issue. The second would be to ask the BCC to reaffirm or readdress this Board's role with respect to authority over Clam Bay maintenance and operations, and Canoe Trail markers. The third would be to evaluate separately and reaffirm the authority of this Board more as an administrative body as opposed to an advisory body. Lastly, resolve conflicts in any ordinance that transfers jurisdiction to another entity, i.e., Coastal Advisory Committee. After this Board approves this resolution, it should be placed on an upcoming January, 2011 Board of County Commissioners' regular agenda. Commissioner Hiller responded that the best way to convey this information would be in writing by resolution and then as a BCC agenda item. State the issues, state the facts, state the law or budget being relied on, and what is wanted. Keep it clear, concise, legal and provide supporting documentation. Mr. Dorrill added there would be an executive summary, fiscal impacts, review by the Growth Management department and County Attorney's office for legal sufficiency, then, it would either be a County Manager or County Commissioner regular agenda item at one of the January BCC meetings. Commissioner Hiller said time is of the essence and to bring forward to the BCC in January because Mr. McAlpin plans to go before the CAC regarding the environmental impact study on January 13 and the BCC on February 11. Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Ms. Womble to direct the Administrator to prepare a resolution to include Commissioner Hiller's suggestions that this Board will vet on January S, 2011. Specifically, the resolution should first, request that the Board o County Commissioners (BCC) close and suspend further action associated with the original Clam Bay Restoration & Management Plan permit and navigation markers issue. Second, request that the BCC reaffirm or readdress this Board's role with respect to authority over Clam Bay maintenance and operations, and Canoe Trail markers. Third, evaluate separately and reaffirm the authority of this Board, more as an administrative body as opposed to an advisory body. Lastly, resolve conflicts in any ordinance that transfers this Board's jurisdiction to another entity. After this Board approves this resolution, it should be placed on an upcoming January, 2011 Board of County Commissioners' regular agenda. The Board voted unanimously to approve the motion. A short recess was taken and then the meeting reconvened. Ms. Womble spoke kind words about Ms. Cora Obley who passed away and the Board took a moment of silence. MM Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 1, 2010 AGENDA APPROVAL 1611 � B21 i Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Domenie to approve the agenda as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 3, 2010 REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Ms. Womble requested that Ms. Obley be listed as present as a member of the Foundation's Ad Hoc Clam Bay Committee. 'I Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Dr. Raia to approve the November 3, 2010 Pelican Bay Services Division Board 'I Regular Session minutes as Presented The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 16, 2010 LANDSCAPE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Mr. Cravens amended page one to read, "... BMPs are designed to minimize ... pollution that does not have an easily identifiable source." �Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Gibson to approve the November 16, 2010 Landscape Subcommittee of the Pelican 'I Bav Services Division Board meeting minutes as amended. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 16, 2010 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN TOWN HALL Mr. Domenie amended page 107 to read "Mr." Hoppensteadt. Ms. Womble amended page 108 to read, "He said that property was stolen from his home, although he did not report to the Sheriff." Mr. Levy said Dr. Raia and Mr. Iaizzo were present. Mr. Levy made a motion, second by Ms. Womble to approve the November 16, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Town Hall meeting minutes as amended. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 17, 2010 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN TOWN HALL Ms. Womble referred to a comment made by Mr. Bill McCormick on page 110 regarding colored asphalt. Mr. Steve Sammons responded that an impervious colored coating could be applied to pervious asphalt. Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Domenie to approve the November 17, 2010 Community Improvement Plan Town Hall meeting minutes as resented The Board voted unanimously in favor o the motion. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Ms. Marcia Cravens said that the conservation areas were omitted from the Community Improvement Plan and that the area should be considered. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Mr. Dorrill presented two versions of the preliminary partial monthly financial report for November 2010. The one distributed at the meeting shows the variance between the year -to -date budget and the year -to -date actual and gives a much better sense of true performance. $350,000 of non -ad valorem assessment payments were received within the first two weeks of November. Even though some County indirect expenses are front - loaded, other expenses were slightly below budget. Mr. Levy made a motion, second by Mr. Iaizzo to accept the monthly financial report into the record as resented. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. 8417 Pelican Bay ervices Division Board Regular Session Minutes 161 l B 2 1 Y g December 1, 2010 STAUS OF PERMIT FOR CLAM BAY MAINTENANCE Mr. Dorrill said the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) may entertain a short two -week continuance at the request of Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) regarding impacts on the rookery areas within the mangrove channel maintenance area, otherwise, the Clam Bay channel maintenance permit is expected to be issued on December 6. STATUS OF RFP FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Mr. Dorrill reported that the County Purchasing department, when evaluating the Services Division's Request for Proposals (RFP) for environmental services as they pertain to Clam Bay, took it upon themselves to inquire of other County departments of similar needs to have environmental consultants in the coming year to "tag along." As a result, Purchasing has expanded the selection committee from three (Mr. Cravens, Mr. Dorrill, Mr. Lukasz) to five. Purchasing appointed two additional County staff people. Mr. Dorrill protested this as "a further indication and type of action that causes extreme, unnecessary alarm on the part of this Board because it appears... as interference... and specifically pointed the finger at Coastal Zone Management department, whether right, wrong, or indifferent, this appears to have their hands all over it." The other County appointees are Alex Sulecki of Conservation Collier, and Greg Barlow of Risk Management. Purchasing has scheduled a selection committee meeting for December 14. DISCUSSION OF NEED FOR LANDSCAPING ALONG U.S. 41 BERM Mr. Dorrill reported that at the last meeting, the Chairman was interested in staff developing an inventory of the number of ornamental plants it would take to complete the landscaping and fill in the gaps along the U.S. 41 berm. Mr. Lukasz reported that to fill in the gaps they would purchase $11,000 worth of ten - gallon sized buttonwood plants because that is the best plant for the low- lying area. Mr. Cravens said buttonwoods would not provide an effective barrier for security, but was not prepared to make a suggestion for a better plant today. Mr. Dorrill said based on the directive, this resolves gaps in the landscaping along the U.S. 41 berm and addresses aesthetics, not security, which would be resolved by a barrier wall after further discussion and funding through the Community Improvement Plan. He suggested that Mr. Lukasz have the authority to choose the plant material. Mr. Hoppensteadt said the Foundation would reimburse the Services Division for the cost of the plants to be placed on land owned by the Foundation along the U.S. 41 berm, historically maintained by the Services Division. If a wall were to be constructed later, Wilson Miller said that approximately 15 -20% of the landscaping might be impacted. A U.S. 41 Berm Workshop and what to construct along it to solve noise and security issues is scheduled for January 6 at 1 p.m. This should not delay installation. Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Dr. Raia authorizing staff to proceed with installing the $11,000 worth of 'would plants as selected by Mr. Lukasz, along the D.S. 41 berm to fill in the gaps. The $11,000 cost of plant material would be reimbursed by the Foundation, but the Services Division would incur the cost of labor, in -house with no additional impact to the Services Division's budget. The Board voted unanimously to approve the motion. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN Ms. Womble made a motion, second by Mr. Gibson authorizing staff to obtain engineering quotes and bring a proposed contract back for construction and design services of crosswalks for a joint project between the Services Division and Pelican Bay Foundation. The Board voted unanimouslv to approve the motion. FOUNDATION AD HOC CLAM BAY COMMITTEE UPDATE Chairman Dallas reported that it seems that the County is debating its own position on the red /green navigational markers. . Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 1, 2010 1611 1--1 INDEPENDENT DISTRICT UPDATE Chairman Dallas reported that conversations regarding Pelican Bay becoming an independent district have stalled since talk of a "City of North Naples" and they should not expect any new communication until winter of 2011. CANOE TRAIL MARKERS Mr. Domenie said they already discussed this item and could move on to the next item. ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Dallas said the Landscape Committee meets on December 6 at 1 p.m. There is U.S. 41 berm workshop on January 6 at 1 p.m. There is a Community Improvement Plan Town Hall meeting on January 18 at 1 p.m. The Coastal Advisory Committee meets December 9 at 1 p.m. and January 13. He encouraged applicants for the three Services Division Board openings. An announcement would be placed in the early January edition of the Pelican Bay Post. COMMUNITY ISSUES Ms. Womble said Ridgewood Park is showing signs of security problems. There are unauthorized trucks there. Mr. Hoppensteadt would ask the Foundation's security to coordinate with the Collier County Sheriff's office and investigate. Mr. Hall said the Vizcaya neighborhood approached Turrell, Hall & Associates to obtain a permit to maintain mangroves along the seawall within their community. He asked this Board if it would be a conflict of interest if Turrell, Hall & Associates was to take the job and the Board consensus was that no conflict exists. COMMITTEE REPORTS /REQUESTS BUDGET COMMITTEE Mr. Levy requested that staff schedule a budget meeting in January. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE INITIAL MEETING UPDATE Mr. Cravens reported that the Landscape Committee met on November 16 and discussed landscaping best management practices and ways to implement, training and supervision of employees, educational outreach within the community, a demonstration project, and alternatives to control duckweed and algae in water bodies. The Committee meets December 6 at 1 p.m. FOUNDATION'S NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE Mr. Cravens made a presentation that summarized Turrell, Hall and Associates' proposal to the Foundation for professional environmental services to proactively improve the management of stormwater and reducing nutrients and other contaminants into the water management system within the Pelican Bay community. Mr. Hoppensteadt said the study would take baseline measurements, as well as incorporate a way to follow up and address the problem areas by educating specific landscaping companies and hold them responsible for best management practices over a five- year timeline. Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Gibson that the Pelican Bay Services Division endorses the general concept of the Foundation developing professional environmental services to monitor the water management system in Pelican Bay. The Board voted unanimousl in favor of the motion. 8419 16 1 1B 1 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 1, 2010 OLD BUSINESS Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Dr. Raia that the Board include in the resolution to the Board of County Commissioners that was discussed earlier, Mr. Cravens' October 6 motion that was tabled that states, "The Pelican Bay Services Division reaffirms the traditional boundaries of Clam Pass and Clam Bay Estuarine System Natural Resource Protection Area. This system is made up of Clam Pass, three bays, (Upper, Inner and Outer) and the creeks connecting them and the adjacent preserve areas that are located entirely within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of Pelican Bay in Collier County, Florida. This system is shown on the Clam Pass Unit FL -64P map, which was adopted by Congress on October 15, 2008 by public law 100- 419. " The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. NEW BUSINESS No discussion MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE No discussion AUDIENCE COMMENTS No discussion ADJOURN Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Domenie to adjourn. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion and the meeting adjourned at 4:01 p.m. i I K . ei Dallas, airman :M Minutes by Lisa Resnick \12/8/2010 1:49:40 PM 161 14821 LANDSCAPE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Landscape Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Monday, December 6, 2010 at 1:00 p.m. at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples. Landscape Subcommittee Members Tom Cravens, Chairman Johan Domenie Geoffrey S. Gibson absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W. Neil Dorrill Mary McCaughtry Kyle Lukasz Lisa Resnick Also Present Keith J. Dallas, Chairman, Pelican Bay Services Division Board Tim Hall, Senior Biologist & Principal, Turrell, Hall & Associates James Hoppensteadt, President, Pelican Bay Foundation Molly Moffatt, Chair, L'Ambiance Association Landscaping Committee AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Audience Participation 3. Discuss Institute for Food and Agricultural Science (IFAS) Best Management Practices 4. Discuss Suggested Amendment to Existing Residential and Commercial Landscaping Contracts as they Pertain to Fertilization 5. Discuss Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) Guidelines for Permitted Acquisition of Grass Carp & Tilapia 6. Discuss Turrell, Hall & Associates' Proposal for Environmental Services & Demonstration Project 7. Educational Outreach to Members Regarding Best Management Practices Update 8. Audience Comments 9. Adjournment ROLL CALL With the exception of Mr. Gibson, all Landscape Subcommittee members were present. DISCUSSION OF RFP FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Chairman Cravens discussed the selection process for the RFP for environmental services in Clam Bay. The proposal was modified to include additional County projects. Next, the County appointed two additional non - Pelican Bay members to the selection committee due to a "dubious historical precedent" of having five members to a selection committee. The current structure has three Pelican Bay representatives (Mr. Dorrill, Mr. Cravens, and Mr. Lukasz) and two non - Pelican Bay representatives who will decide how to spend Pelican Bay funds. It seems to him that if the County wants to select an environmental consultant for its own projects that they should do so without any interference from the Services Division and co- mingling the two does not make any sense. He suggested that if the selection committee must have five members, that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board appoint the other two and they be Pelican Bay representatives. Mr. Lukasz said the RFP is for any environmental services related to Clam Bay. Currently they use Turrell Hall and Associates. Chairman Cravens said an environmental impact study (EIS) component is in the proposal. Mr. Lukasz said there is boilerplate language in the RFP for an EIS, but that does not necessarily require the Services Division to perform one, it just gives the Services Division an opportunity. Chairman Cravens said, "This whole thing smells like a fish that is rotting. What started out to be a simple Pelican Bay thing has been changed, modified, expanded, and other people have been put on this committee and I am just not happy with it." 3 161118211 Landscape Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board Meeting Minutes December 6. 2010 Mr. Dorrill said he is trying not to read too much into this, because the County takes a "macro approach to everything," but he is genuinely concerned that the "Coastal Zone Management (CZM) people have their little tentacles in what we are trying to do." The people who have been appointed to the Selection Committee "do not appear to be CZM people or moles," but they need to "stay in the game." Chairman Cravens suggested that if the original selection committee of three (Mr. Dorrill, Chairman Cravens, Mr. Lukasz) is not sufficient, then they should request that two more people be added from Pelican Bay. Mr. Dorrill agreed. At the end of the day, they need to select the consultant that is best representative of the Services Division's needs. Chairman Cravens said it is his understanding that the selection committee would short list three candidates and bring a recommendation to the Pelican Bay Services Division Board, who would then vote and make the final decision. Mr. Dorrill said correct, however the Board of County Commissioners would ratify what the Services Division Board wants to do. He reiterated that he shares Chairman Cravens' concerns and they should proceed cautiously. holidays. The next selection committee meeting is December 14 and Chairman Cravens said he would like to reschedule after the Mr. Dorrill agreed and tasked Kyle to contact Mr. Curran to reschedule due to a scheduling conflict. Mr. Dorrill would contact the County Manager to discuss additional Pelican Bay residents to the selection committee. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Ms. Moffatt said she is Chair of L'Ambiance Landscaping Committee and was attending to learn more about the direction that new landscaping is going in Pelican Bay and provide input. Mr. Hall said he was here to answer any questions and distributed one copy of the "Florida Yards and Neighborhoods Handbook - A Guide to Environmentally Friendly Landscaping" and an electronic copy of the "Green Industries Best Management Practices." DISCUSS INSTITUTE FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE (IFAS) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Chairman Cravens reviewed the agenda packet that included the "Florida Friendly Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries" booklet and "Create a Florida Friendly Yard brochure." The Committee discussed how they would use the information and enforce BMPs. Mr. Dorrill said the Foundation is well underway to engage a nutrient management plan for the community so they have a basis upon which to make decisions going forward. They do not yet know if they have a nutrient loading problem in Pelican Bay, but they will find out. In advance of that, any further governmental regulatory efforts that they would initiate or encourage the Foundation to legislate through their covenants would be very poorly received. However, the Services Division Board, for those areas that the Services Division is responsible for could take a BMP proposal to the Services Division Board to consider adopting with coinciding operating parameters. DISCUSS SUGGESTED AMENDMENT TO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPING CONTRACTS AS THEY PERTAIN TO FERTILIZATION Mr. Dorrill said they prepared a suggested amendment to each association's current landscaping contract that would put the obligation on the landscape contractor to have either a principal of the firm or senior management employee of the firm on site on the occasions when fertilizer is applied. In summary, they should encourage and endorse the nutrient management plan 4 1611 821+ Landscape Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board Meeting Minutes December 6, 2010 and the Services Division Board should take the initiative to be the first in line to formally adopt the BMP guidelines and develop some public education initiatives and tangible -type things that can be done at the association level. Chairman Cravens said the Services Division Board endorsed the nutrient management proposal at the December 1 meeting. BMPs. Mr. Domenie asked if BMPs includes how they treat water bodies. Chairman Cravens said the idea is if they practice BMPs, then their water should be better than if they do not practice Mr. Domenie asked if there was a difference between liquid fertilizer and granulated fertilizer. Mr. Lukasz said that granulated fertilizer is slower release. DISCUSS FLORIDA FISH & WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION (FFWCC) GUIDELINES FOR PERMITTED ACQUISITION OF GRASS CARP AND TILAPIA Chairman Cravens said at the November 16 meeting they discussed using grass carp and tilapia to control duckweed in water bodies. He suggested they experiment in one lake. Mr. Lukasz said they do not really have a problem with duckweed in lakes, it is more in the water bodies along the berm. Mr. Dorrill said that any aquatic plant that has a root is a perfect opportunity to use grass carp and suggested they discuss with the full Board in January. He does not know that they would allow using permitted carp on a trial basis, but they would explore. He suggested they do a pilot project of enhanced littoral plantings instead. Mr. Lukasz said in order to use grass carp littoral plantings have to be well established because the carp will go after the fresh plants. There may not be enough vegetation to support grass carp in the lakes. They would have to reevaluate. He added that at Grey Oaks, they stocked a lake with tilapia with minimal effect and many died last winter from the cold. It would cost approximately $300 per acre to stock tilapia. Chairman Cravens said there are mechanical means or skimmers used to remove duckweed. DISCUSS TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES' PROPOSAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES & DEMONSTRATION PROJECT Chairman Cravens said at the November 16 meeting they had discussed a test demonstration project, however he agreed with Mr. Dorrill to wait until the Foundation's nutrient management plan is implemented and they have some baseline data. Mr. Hall said they would have baseline data in a year, but it would take three years before they would have results that they could count on. EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH TO MEMBERS REGARDING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES UPDATE Mr. Dorrill said they have some upcoming opportunities in January for public education and outreach regarding BMPs within each of the condominium and homeowners associations within Pelican Bay. Chairman Cravens said January 18, Doug Caldwell and Cathy Feser will speak about BMPs at the Men's Coffee. He would inquire with the President's Council whether they would be interested in a presentation regarding BMPs and the Foundation's nutrient management proposal. He asked if the Florida Friendly landscaping brochures are available from the IFAS extension office and suggested they obtain and have available to distribute at the Commons. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No discussion 5 1611 6211 Landscape Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board Meeting Minutes December 6, 2010 WRAP UP Mr. Dorrill suggested they take some of today's agenda items to the full Board in January to formally adopt the BMP guidelines and get some direction on an assessment or survey of lake vegetation for purposes of supporting grass carp. The Committee agreed. Chairman Cravens suggested they inventory the types of fish that are in water bodies in Pelican Bay. Mr. Dorrill tasked Mr. Lukasz to take photos of recent littoral plantings to include in the PowerPoint on January 5, to show the inventory of existing conditions of aquatic plants. Mr. Domenie referred to the discussion at the last meeting of field employees taking a refresher course to apply fertilizer. Mr. Lukasz said field employees would take refresher courses in March at the time of ornamental plantings. Chairman Cravens suggested that when day laborers apply fertilizer, they should be supervised. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 2:03 p.m. Tom Cravens, Chairman 0 Minutes by Lisa Resnick \12/20/2010 11:06:42 AM 1611 g21 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A Florida- Friendly Landscape Publication 1611+1 B21 I am pleased to present this new edition of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) guide for the professional turf and landscape industry. In the past six years, more than 100,000 books were distrib- uted, in both English and Spanish, and thousands of workforce members have received formal training. Florida Friendly Best Management Practices for the Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries reflects the collaborative efforts of DEP, the University of Florida, several state and local agencies, as well as numerous stakeholders and private industry partners. The guide represents a collective commitment to assist the turf and landscape industry to protect the environ- ment through the implementation of educational pro- grams. I encourage you to follow the recommendations contained in the publication; they will help conserve water, protect our natural resources, minimize the need for regulation, and continue Florida's commitment of sound environmental stewardship. MICHAEL W SOLE, SECRETARY Florida Department of Environmentol Protection FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources 6y the Green Industries 1611 B21 � GOALS OF THE MANUAL This manual provides information and guidance on turfgrass and landscape management practices to minimize Nonpoint Source Pollution in order to conserve and protect Florida's water resources. These practices cover both the establishment of new turf and landscapes and the care of existing turf and landscapes, including construction activities, irrigation, nutrient management, and pest management. This manual is designed to be an educational guide for professional service providers and other interested parties. It does not substitute for the services of a landscape architect, engineer, or other design professional. Design issues are dis- cussed as they apply to the service industry and their clients. This document is intended to enhance the professional knowledge and judgment of turfgrass and landscape workers. Plants are living systems, and these practices should not be rigidly applied in all cases. Workers should use the guidance provided, but measures that are more restrictive may be required in specific situations to protect sites that are at particularly high risk for adverse effects on surface water and ground water. State laws and local ordinances always take precedence. More information on Stormwater Management, Low Impact Development, and Florida Friendly Landscape Maintenance Practices is available from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, water management districts, universities and community colleges, and professional associations. Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 1 b�i a "2 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors of this document owe a debt of gratitude to the Professional Landscape Network (PLANET), in allowing us to use its document on Best Management Practices for Turfgrass as a guide, and to Tom Delany, the association's representative on the committee. The PLANET docu- ment was based on a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency grant. Particular gratitude is due to Erica Santella, Regional Technical Director for TruGreen and past president of the Florida Turfgrass Association, who served as committee chair for the original development of this manual. Special thanks are also due to our editor, Mike Thomas, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), who has taken the group through the process and guided us down the right path. We would like to thank Bryan Cooksey of McCall's Pest Control and former president of the Florida Pest Management Association; Geri Cashion of FMC Corp; Mark Roberts of Toro; Joel Jackson of the Florida Golf Course Superintendents Association; Joe Welch of Middleton Lawn and Pest Control; Sidney Hinson, Gary Cook, and Scott Sincerbeau of Lesco; Norm Smith, Mel Edelstein (deceased), and Ed Minor of the Certified Pest Control Operators Association; Jennifer Leggett of Lindsey Pest Control; Toni Caithness of the Florida Pest Management Association; John Thatcher of TruGreen; Nick Dennis of Prolawn; Jeff Michel of Massey Services, Inc.; Gene Yearty (deceased); Marylyn Bales of Douglass Fertilizer; Ben Bolusky and Tom Tumbleson of the Florida Nursery, Growers and Landscapers Association; and Barry Troutman of Valleycrest Landscape. Staff of the following agencies provided invaluable support for this project: Mike Scheinkman (FDEP); Mark Jennings and Steve Dwinell, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS); Richard Deadman, Florida Department of Community Affairs; Katherine Pordeli, St. Johns River Water Management District; Peg McPherson, South Florida Water Management District; and Ron Cohen and Jay Yingling, Southwest Florida Water Management District. Cover photo is provided courtesy of the South Florida Water Management District. Final editing was done by Linda Lord (FDEP). Finally, our thanks to Laurie Trenholm, Gary Knox, Christine Kelly - Begazo, John Cisar, George Snyder, Jerry Sartain, Terril Nell, Michael Dukes, Robert Black, Pam Mattis, Ed Gilman, and a host of other research and extension faculty, staff, and county agents with the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), and the innumerable other citizens who con- tributed comments. This publication was funded in part by FDEP with a Section 319 Nonpoint Source Management Program Grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. DISCLAIMER The mention of a specific product or company is for information purposes only and does not con- stitute an endorsement of that product or company. Copyright 2008, Florida Department of Environmental Protection. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries GOALS F THE MANUAL ............ ............................tit ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............. ............................... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS .................. ..............................v CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ........... Using Best Management Practices to Reduce Pollution and Conserve Water ........................1 Environmental Issues .......................... ..............................1 Importance of Maintaining Healthy Landscapes and Turf .............. ..............................2 Cultural Practices for Healthy Landscapes ......................2 Employee Training .............................. ..............................4 CHAPTER 2: BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPES .. ..............................6 Site Evaluation and Landscape Design ............................6 Florida Friendly Landscape Design Standards ..................6 PlantSelection .................................... ..............................7 Selecting a Turfgrass for a Florida Lawn ....................7 Selecting Trees, Shrubs, and Ground Covers ..............8 Planting.............................................. ..............................8 15 Preparing To Plant a Lawn ............ ..............................8 Landscape Plant Installation ........ ..............................8 Care During Plant Establishment ..............................8 Environmental Stresses on Lawns ...... ..............................9 Shade Considerations for Turf ............ ..............................9 CHAPTER 3: IRRIGATION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ....... .............................11 Permitting and Regulations ............... .............................11 Reclaimed Water Use ......................... .............................12 Irrigation System Design ................... .............................12 Microirrigation for Landscape Plants ......................13 Irrigation System Installation ............. .............................15 Irrigation Management... ................................................. 15 Irrigation System Maintenance ......... .............................17 Irrigation System Errors ..................... .............................18 Sources for Irrigation Standards ......... .............................18 CHAPTER 4: MULCHING, MOWING, AND PRUNING ......... .............................20 Landscape Mulches ........................... .............................20 Benefits of Mulching ................... .............................20 Mowing the Florida Lawn ................. .............................21 Pruning of Landscape Plants ............. .............................22 1611 821 Mangroves................................... .............................23 Disposing of Landscape Material ....... .............................23 CHAPTER 5: FERTILIZATION ....... .............................25 Fertilizer Terms ................................. .............................25 Fertilizer Analysis ............................... .............................25 Urban Turf Fertilizer Rule ................. .............................25 Turf Fertilization Management ........... .............................25 Nitrogen Management ................. .............................26 Phosphorus Fertilization ............. .............................30 Potassium Fertilization ............... .............................31 Secondary Nutrient Fertilization . .............................31 Micronutrients............................. .............................31 Fertilizing Grass for Establishment or Recovery ......... .............................32 Untreated Buffers Near Bodies of Water ........................32 Impervious Surfaces.. ...................................................... 33 Fertigation......................................... .............................33 Fertilizing Landscape Plants ............. .............................33 WhyFertilize? ............................. .............................33 Recommendations and Basic Principles for Fertilizing Landscape Plants . .............................34 When To Fertilize ....................... .............................34 How Much To Fertilize ............... .............................34 Where and How To Fertilize ....... .............................35 Fertilizer Storage and Loading ........... .............................35 Storage......................................... .............................35 Loading....................................... .............................36 SoilTesting ......................................... .............................36 Soil Sampling Methodology ......... .............................36 Soil Test Interpretation ................. .............................37 TissueTesting ..................................... .............................37 Tissue Sampling Methodology ..... .............................38 Sample Contamination ............... .............................38 Interpretation of Results ............. .............................38 Summary........................................... .............................38 CHAPTER b: PEST CONTROL ..... .............................40 LegalIssues ....................................... .............................40 Definitions................................... .............................40 Licensing Requirements for Pesticide Use in Lawn and Landscape Maintenance ................40 Pesticide Record Keeping ............. .............................40 Restricted Use Pesticides ............. .............................41 Integrated Pest Management ............. .............................41 PesticideUse ..................................... .............................42 Pesticide Selection ....................... .............................43 PesticideStorage ............................... .............................44 Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 Mixing and Loading Activities ........... .............................46 Pesticide Equipment Calibration and Loading ..............46 Pesticide Application Equipment Wash Water ..............47 Pesticide Spill Management ............... .............................47 Spill Reporting Requirements ..... .............................48 Management of Pests in the Landscape ..........................49 Weed Management ....................... .............................49 Insects and Other Organisms ....... .............................49 Plant Nematodes ......................... .............................50 Plant Diseases ............................... .............................50 Diagnostic Assistance ................... .............................50 REFERENCES............................. .............................51 Design & Installation References ....... .............................51 Preparation................................... .............................51 Selection....................................... .............................51 Environmental Stresses ............... .............................51 Irrigation References ......................... .............................51 Standards..................................... .............................51 Guidance..................................... .............................52 Mulching, Mowing, and Pruning References ..................52 Fertilization References ..................... .............................53 Pesticide References ........................... .............................53 APPENDIX A: IMPORTANT TELEPHONE NUMBERS ............... .............................55 Emergency Reporting Telephone Numbers ....................55 Help Line Telephone Numbers ......... .............................55 Nonemergency Telephone Numbers . .............................56 APPENDIX B: FLORIDA COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE TELEPHONE NUMBERS ............ 57 16I 1 iB214 APPENDIX C: RULE 5E-1.003(2) LABELING REQUIREMENTS FOR URBAN TURF FERTILIZERS ........59 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Comparison of lawngrasses available for use in Florida .................. ..............................7 Table 2. Irrigation spacing ................. .............................13 Table 3. Irrigation Association Distribution Unifonnities ................... .............................17 Table 4. Suggested mowing heights and mower types for Florida home lawns ............................21 Table 5. Fertilization guidelines for established turfgrass lawns in three regions of Florida ....................29 Table 6. Landscape plant nitrogen fertilization rates ............................... .............................34 Table 7. Suggested ranges for Mehlich -1 extractable soil nutrient levels for Florida turfgrasses ......................37 Table 8. Sufficiency ranges of tissue N concentration for selected lawn turfgrasses ................38 Table 9. Sufficiency concentration ranges for selected macro and micronutrients in turfgrass tissue ............................... .............................38 Table 10. Reportable quantities for certainpesticides ............................... .............................48 FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries 161 18 211".4 USING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES TO REDUCE POLLUTION AND CONSERVE WATER The protection of water resources is enhanced through turf- and landscape -care practices that make the best use of technology and the practical experience of profession- als. These practices address specific concerns, including the protection of water resources where pesticides and nutrients enter ground water and surface water as a result of nonpoint source pollution. University studies throughout the country, including Florida, have shown that properly managed turfgrass and landscapes do not significantly contribute to nonpoint source pollution. Pollution occurs when less- than -ade- quate management techniques are used. Developing low - risk irrigation, fertilizer, and pesticide programs, and ensuring that these programs are properly administered and periodically reviewed, reduces the possibility of nutrient movement off -site. Whenever possible, profes- sionals should educate their clients on landscape best management practices (BMPs) that encourage water con- servation and pollution prevention. The goals of the FDEP Green Industry BMPs are to reduce nonpoint source pollution and promote the effi cient use of water, as follows: • Reduce the off -site transport of sediment, nutrients, and pesticides through surface water or ground water. • Use appropriate site design and plant selection. • Use appropriate rates and methods of applying fertilizer and irrigation. • Use integrated pest management (IPM) to minimize pests and apply chemicals only when appropriate. BMPs should integrate selection, irrigation, fertilization, and pest management in a manner that minimizes envi- ronmental impacts, yet meets clients' and customers' expectations. Irrigation practices influence how often we need to fertilize and this can affect the occurrence of pest problems. Weigh these and other factors when making landscape management decisions. The first edition of this manual was published in the sum- mer of 2002. By the end of 2007, more than 80,000 manu- als had been distributed, in both English and Spanish ver- sions. More than 50,000 glove box sized summary book- lets have also been distributed. In the first five years, more than 2600 people obtained fonnal certification through DEP or OF -IFAS sponsored training, and many of these people have taught others about the BMPs, but they did not obtain formal certification through the University. Figure 1. With proper BMPs, our water resources can successfully coexist with residential landscapes. Since the original publication of this BMP manual, sever- al new laws have been passed, new research completed, and new products developed. Therefore, this 2008 ver- sion contains new information in many areas, especially concerning irrigation systems and fertilizer use, along with many other suggestions received from dozens of landscapers and others seeking to improve this book. This revision would not be as good without their ideas and contributions. This manual provides specific examples of how BMPs might work in typical situations. These examples are not meant to minimize concerns associated with other turfgrass or pest problems. Although certain rules are mentioned, this publication is an educational, not a regulatory, document. Always check with state and local authorities, because local ordinances may be more restrictive than federal or state regulations. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Many areas of the state are running low on freshwater supplies. Water conservation is one of the most crucial issues facing Florida in the future, and applying the BMPs described in this manual will help to conserve our pre- cious fresh water. Since the passage of the Clean Water Act and the forma- tion of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, tremendous strides have been made in cleaning up our air and water. Most of this cleanup has been accomplished through permitting and the regulation of point sources of pollution such as factory smokestacks and sewage dis- charges. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 In contrast, nonpoint source pollution comes from diffuse sources and is associated with the long -term effects of everyday activities. It is carried primarily by rainfall and irrigation water, which cause pollutants that have accu- mulated on the land surface to run off into surface waters or to leach into ground water. Water is the primary mech- anism for the transport of dissolved chemicals through the soil. Nonpoint source pollution may not be obvious until a rainfall event occurs, leading to stormwater runoff from roads, parking lots, suburban areas, and farms. As Florida's population has soared, this type of pollution has become an increasingly important issue in the state. Many of Florida's water resources are particularly suscep- tible to pollution because of the state's unique geology and climate. Floridians obtain most of their drinking water from ground water via wells. Ground water sup- plies often lie near the surface and may be covered by nothing but sandy soil. Surface waters in Florida are very sensitive to even small additions of pollution, which have caused widespread ecosystem changes in our sensitive estuaries, lakes, rivers, and the Everglades. In order to prevent potential leaching and runoff, users of fertilizers and pesticides need to consider the weather conditions, proper application rates of products and cali- bration of equipment, soil properties, the distance to the water table, the slope of the land, and the distance to sur- face waters and storm drains; all of this, in addition to plant nutrition, disease, and pest factors. Remember, an ounce of prevention is worth many dollars of cure. Fi ;.: t 2 Grassy stormwater retention areas can add to a lawn and protect our environment. IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING HEALTHY LANDSCAPES AND TURF Well- planned, healthy landscapes designed with Florida - friendly landscape practices usually include trees, ornamentals, and a lawn of turfgrass or other ground 1611 621�I cover. Native and well- adapted, noninvasive ornamentals contribute beauty and balance to a property, provide shade and wildlife habitat, and help to control erosion by diminishing the force of rainfall. Both the lawn and other landscape plantings reduce noise and glare, and modify temperatures. A healthy and vigorous turf with good plant density pro- vides many benefits. Healthy grass is viewed as an aes- thetic asset, and a growing body of evidence points to the positive health and environmental contributions made by lawns and other turf areas. Turfgrass plays a significant role in reducing water runoff in urban and suburban environments that have significant areas of impervious surfaces such as parking lots, sidewalks, and driveways. Dense turf reduces the velocity of runoff and allows greater infiltration into both the thatch and root zone, where microbes can begin breaking down the water con- taminants. The turfgrass root zone is a unique soil sys- tem. A healthy root zone does the following: • Improves soil structure and reduces soil compaction, allowing greater infiltration of rain or irrigation water; • Improves soil processes that facilitate the biodegrada- tion (breakdown) of various types of organic pollutants, air contaminants, and pesticides used in lawn care; • Encourages soil - building processes through the decom- position of organic matter and formation of humus, and contributes to easier lawn care with fewer weeds and insects and less disease. CULTURAL PRACTICES FOR HEALTHY LANDSCAPES Plant selection and location are the most important factors in planning a lawn and landscape. After weather, cultural practices are the biggest factors in determining how well an agronomic or horticultural program per- forms. The amount of pesticides, fertilizers, and water required often directly correlate with cultural practices and how well they are carried out. Landscape professionals have a responsibility to supply their customers with educational material on their role in keeping turf and other landscape plants healthy. This includes (as appropriate) information on irrigation, mow- ing, plant selection, aeration, and traffic control. Few landscaping and lawn care companies have total control over all aspects of the properties they maintain. It is not uncommon for mowing, fertilization, pest management, and irrigation maintenance to be performed by two or more companies, or the homeowner may do one or more jobs themselves. It is of the utmost importance to educate customers about wise cultural practices so they can see that they are performed properly. Cultural practices include irrigation, fertilization, mowing and pruning, aeration and dethatching. When each of FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries these is performed properly, the need for pesticides is reduced because plants and turfgrasses are healthier and more resistant to pest problems. The concept of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) emphasizes proper cultural practices along with selecting plant species, varieties and cultivars that are less suscepti- ble to insects, nematodes, and diseases, and best adapted to the environmental conditions of the site and geograph- ic part of the state. Mowing height has a tremendous impact on the severity of weed, insect, and disease pests. In general, lowering the height increases weed, insect, and disease pressure on turfgrasses by causing turf stress. There are exceptions: dwarf varieties, centipedegrass and improved bermuda- grasses have lower mowing heights than the standard often used for lawn and commercial turfgrasses. Still, even these lower - growing varieties will suffer stress if mowed too short. Pruning is an important task in maintaining a landscape. Through the selective removal of shoots and branches, pruning a plant can improve its health, control its growth, and enhance its fruiting, flowering, or appear- ance. Improper pruning, on the other hand, may weaken a plant, open it to invasion by disease or insect pests, or even lead to premature death of the plant. Incorrect dis- posal of material may lead to the spreading of diseases or pests, or of the spreading of invasive species. Time fertilizer applications to maximize plant use and minimize adverse environmental impacts. Plants use the most nitrogen during periods of high growth, and less when dormant. However, it is important to avoid fertiliz- er applications if heavy rain is expected before the nutri- ents are immobilized. In theory, frequent, very light appli- cations or "spoon feedings" of turf and landscapes are ideal to avoid leaching a large amount at one time due to a heavy rain event, but this is difficult to achieve safely without special management, such as for golf course greens. Slow release fertilizers attempt to match this ideal profile. Both quick- and slow - release fertilizers have a place in a sound management program. Fertilization of plants can result in additional growth and production of leaves, stems, branches and roots. However, additional growth can result in more mainte- nance and yard trimming, so it is important to deter- mine if heavy growth is the desired result. Fertilization is usually desirable when trying to establish newly installed landscape plants. In addition, adding fertilizer can help plants get off to a quick start so they fill the planted area. Inadequate nutrition results in thin, weak plants that may be more susceptible to insects, weeds, and diseases. In addition, weakened plants do not hold the soil as well as 1611 g211 healthy dense stands and can lead to soil erosion and water pollution. Certain diseases, such as rust and dollar spot, can occur in turf maintained under low- nutrient conditions. Under - fertilized landscape plants may require a higher than normal rate of nitrogen or other nutrients in order to return to a healthy condition. Over- fertilization can also enhance plant susceptibility to pests and diseases. Several pesticide applications may be required to alleviate problems that would not have been as prevalent under a proper nutrition program. Remember that plants don't waste water, people do. In a typical urban environment where soils and habitat have been modified, supplemental irrigation is necessary for the survival of many turf and ornamental plants during periods of severe moisture deficiency. However, overwa- tering may increase insect, weed, and disease pressures. For example, excessive moisture encourages the develop - ment of dollarweed and fungal pathogens. Conversely, some weeds such as spurge and Florida pusley thrive under dry conditions and can outcompete turfgrass suf- fering from drought stress. A balance is necessary to keep the landscape strong and healthy. The average volume of rainfall in Florida ranges from 40 inches annually in Key West to about 53 inches in the central and northern peninsula and over 60 inches in the Panhandle west of Tallahassee and along the southeast Figur Poor fertilization technique wastes fertilizer, causes unsightly stains, and pollutes our waterbodies. coast below Lake Okeechobee. In parts of the central and southern peninsula, more than half of Florida's total annual rainfall is concentrated between June and September. During the winter and spring, or during Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 severe drought years, the lack of rainfall may seriously compromise plant health. Landscape plants, including turfgrass, that are growing in soils with a limited capaci- ty to retain moisture can benefit from supplemental irrigation during periods of low rainfall. Even during the rainy season, evapotranspiration (water loss from plants and soil) occurs between showers and may neces- sitate supplemental watering while plants are becoming established. Determining and controlling the rate, amount, and tim- ing of irrigation can minimize soil erosion, runoff, and fertilizer and pesticide movement. The irrigation system should be designed to have an application rate that is less than the infiltration capacity of the soil so that no surface pooling occurs and water percolates with maxi- mum efficiency. Rain sensors or soil moisture sensors eliminate irrigation when nature has supplied sufficient water. A correctly installed and operating rain sensor, which is required by law on all systems installed after 1991, can save up to 30% or more over a timer -only sys- tem. If you notice a defective rain sensor while perform- ing other work on a property, try to notify the owner so they can get it repaired. The use of pesticides for controlling pests remains an important part of landscape plant management in Florida. The key to reducing pesticide use is to combine genetic, cultural, and biological management practices into an IPM program that focuses on the prevention of pest problems. When suppression is necessary, it is easier to suppress a pest when conditions exist that do not favor its development. For example, diseases can be hard to manage during periods of heavy rains but if over - watering is promoting disease, cutting back irrigation will help suppress fungus much more effectively than fungicide applications alone. BMPs to protect water quality can be affordable and easily implemented, and are effective in reducing the off -site transport of sediment, nutrients, and pesticides. Select pesticides that are the least toxic, least water soluble, least volatile, and most effective. The best defense against the movement of pesticides and fertilizer nutrients off -site or through the soil is a thick, vigorously growing stand of turf or other landscape plants. Pesticides must be correctly applied. Spray when condi- tions for drift are minimal, avoid application when heavy rain is expected, and irrigate with appropriate volumes of water per label instructions. Granular applications should be targeted away from impervious surfaces and bodies of water. The landscape manager should check the proper calibration of equipment before every pesti- cide application. Always follow the label directions for disposing of pesticide containers. 1611.621) EMPLOYEE TRAINING The effectiveness of any program is only as good as the understanding of the personnel responsible for final application. BMPs are no exception. For BMPs to be effec- tive, the technicians in the field must understand their role in protecting our water resources. This understand - ing can only come from the development and implemen- tation of employee- training programs. Employees should be given pertinent information relating to their job duties, especially job safety. The Green Industry is very diverse. Companies range in size from one or two individuals to very large corporations. Firms of any size may choose to avail themselves of horticultur- al and practical training available through professional associations, governments, or the county Cooperative Extension Service. In addition to the BMPs, it is recommended that managers, salespeople, and supervisors take advantage of Florida Yards and Neighborhoods (FYN) training events where they are provided by their local IFAS Extension office. While consistent with the Green Industry BMPs, FYN training is geared to homeowners, and in some areas to retailers and homebuilders. While FYN is the "homeowner" BMP guide and applies to maintenance of all types of yards found in Florida, it also addresses design of diverse landscapes that mini - mize use of irrigation, supplemental fertilizers, and cor- rective pest control. FYN classes also focus considerable attention on specific plant selection, placement, and care. This information is tailored to local conditions and soils, topics beyond the scope of this manual. There is a growing demand for people to install and service these yards properly, and this may provide an opportunity to expand your client base. If you are doing planting or irrigation work, or any other digging, find out where utility lines are buried before you dig in order to protect yourself and your crew from injury and prevent damage to underground utility lines. Train your employees that a call to 811 starts the process of getting underground utility lines marked for free. Calling 811 in Florida routes you to Sunshine State One Call. Utility companies then send a professional locator to the location to mark underground lines within two full business days. Once the lines are marked, you will know the approximate location of the utility lines and can dig more safely. However, One Call member utilities typically locate only those underground facilities they own. Customer wiring and piping within the lot are not marked by One Call. Employees whose job duties include activities related to BMPs should be properly trained to perform those activi- ties before going in the field. Applicable personnel at all levels of responsibility should receive refresher training annually on the general components and goals of the FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries BMPs, job safety, and the specific BMPs that apply to their jobs. Documenting an employee's participation is an integral part of a successful training program. Employee training should be documented in an employee training log. This documentation provides the business with a tool to ensure the effective delivery of BMPs. It not only allows the company to track an employee's education and com- petence, but also provides a record in case of accident to show that the company provided the employee with the proper training to do his or her job. Records should have the name and signature of the employee, the provider or trainer, subject, date, and hours (time in/time out). As time goes on, some local governments are passing ordinances to regulate the Green Industry. Many of these ordinances may require education in order to obtain an occupational license or to provide services to the public. Maintaining training records shows that your business meets these requirements. Remember ... 161 1 B21 • Train employees about BMPs and job safety. • Retrain annually and when changes are made. • Train employees to document and retain records of activities. Finally, consider real nature of your business. It is proba- bly not the sale of pesticides, fertilizers, or gasoline. It is more likely that your real business is maintaining your customers' yards at a level that pleases them, at the lowest expense to you. Do not spend money applying materials that are not needed, or that are wasted by poor applica- tion practices or improper equipment calibration. Do not waste materials and time fighting the symptoms of prob- lems you have no control over. Collaborate with other trades that have expertise you do not provide, such as an irrigation contractor. Then, if the irrigation system is causing fungal problems and dry spots, you can provide the customer with repairs; fix the real cause of the trou- ble; and save money on fungicide, insecticide, fertilizer and labor. Using Best Management Practices minimizes both the environmental and financial costs of maintaining a healthy and attractive landscape. Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 1611 3211 Bare soils and slopes without proper plant cover are highly susceptible to erosion. Sediment resulting from erosion is the leading cause of waterbody impairment and pollution. Sediment destroys fish- spawning beds, reduces useful storage volumes in reservoirs, and increases filtra- tion costs for municipal water supplies. Pesticides and nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus can bind with sediments and be moved by running water. A healthy stand of turf and/or other landscape plants can help to control erosion and reduce runoff, but must be properly established and maintained to protect water quality. It is important to design the landscape before installing the irrigation system. This allows the irrigation system to be designed to meet the needs of the plants instead of the other way around. Florida Statutes 125.568(3), 166.048(3), and 373.185(3) provide that a deed restriction or covenant entered after October 1, 2001, or local government ordinance, may not prohibit any property owner from implementing Xeriscape or Florida - friendly landscape practices on his or her land. Any restrictions created after this date are void. In many communities, construction and design docu- ments and permits require the signature and seal of a design professional. To protect the public, landscape architects and professional engineers are licensed by the state. Contact your local authorities if you are not sure what is required. For more information on landscape architecture, see http: //wwwmyfloridalicense.com/dbl2 12ro/larc , or to learn more about engineering services go to http: / /www.fbpe.orgZ. SITE EVALUATION AND LANDSCAPE DESIGN The long -term value of a landscape depends on how well it performs for its particular objectives. Performance is often directly related to matching a site's characteristics and a client's desires with plant requirements. Therefore, the first step in selecting plants for a landscape is to conduct a site evaluation, which may consist of studying planting site characteristics such as the amount of sun or shade, salt spray exposure, soil type, pH, soil compaction, slope and water drainage. These characteristics will most likely differ between areas on the same property. For example, the area on one side of a structure may have significantly different light conditions than an area on the other side. Construction activities may have produced severe compaction, and non - native soils may have been used as fill in some areas. Such soils may need aerifica- tion or amendment to be suitable for planting. The sec- ond step is to select plants with attributes that match the Figure 4. Narrow strips are difficult to maintain. characteristics of the planting site. The design profes- sional should always provide the owner with a record drawing identifying each plant or bed and the recom- mended irrigation requirements. For more information, see IFAS Circular 536, Basic Principles of Landscape Design, at http: //edis.ifas.ufl. edu/MG086. FLORIDA FRIENDLY LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS In 2004, the Florida legislature created section 373.228 Florida Statutes, directing the Department of Environ- mental Protection, the Water Management Districts, and several stakeholder groups to devise standards for Landscape Irrigation and Florida - Friendly landscape design. These standards were adopted in December 2006. Local governments must use these standards when adopting local ordinances after that date. The nine principles of Florida - friendly landscaping include planting the right plant in the right place, efficient watering, appropriate fertilization, mulching, FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries These landscape and irrigation design Standards shall be used by local governments when developing landscape irrigation and xeriscape (Florida - Friendly) ordinances, pursuant to section 373.228, F.S. I. Landscape and Xeriscape (Florida - Friendly) Design Standards A. Low impact site design practices, such as preserv- ing existing native trees and vegetation, shall be used if feasible. Where established natural vegeta- tion is incorporated into the landscape design, irrigation of those areas shall not be required. B. The plant palette and irrigation system shall be appropriate for site conditions, taking into account that, in some cases, soil improvement can enhance water use efficiency. C. Plants shall be grouped together by irrigation demand. D. The percentage of landscaped area in irrigated high water use hydrozones should be minimized. Local government ordinances shall address the percentage of irrigated landscaped area that may be included in high water use hydrozones. These high water use limits should not apply to land- scaped areas requiring large amounts of turf for their primary functions, e.g., ballfields and play- grounds. attraction of wildlife, responsible management of yard pests, recycling yard waste, reduction of stormwater runoff, and waterfront protection. Additional components of Florida - friendly landscape include planning and design, soil analysis, the use of solid waste compost, practical use of turf, and proper maintenance. 1611 821 This BMP manual for professionals and the Florida Yards and Neighborhoods (FYN) programs for homeowners, homebuilders and developers, and retailers are based on these nine principles, differing only in focusing on the needs of their target audience. All are part of the Florida Friendly Landscapes program, a partnership between the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the OF -IFAS Environmental Horticulture Department and Center for Landscape Conservation and Ecology, and the five water management districts. PLANT SELECTION Because many of the plants used in Florida vary widely in their adaptation, consideration should be given to choos- ing grasses and other plants that are suited to their partic- ular environment. SELECTING A TURFGRASS FOR A FLORIDA LAWN Selecting the correct grass is critical to maintaining a lawn successfully. Table 1 can help you choose the grass that is best suited to a particular customer, location, and use. To select the right grass, the following questions should be asked: • What type of lawn is desired or expected and what level of maintenance can be provided? The level of mainte- nance required is closely related to cost and time, with high- maintenance turf costing the most and taking the most time to maintain. Homeowners should under- stand realistically what their options are and what each entails. • What are the environmental conditions at the planting site? Most importantly, what are the soil type, pH, drainage, and other soil characteristics? Has it been Table 1: Common lawn grass species used in Florida. Some of the species may vary by cultivars for characteristics listed. Environment Bahiagrass Bermudagrass Centipedegrass Seashore Pospalum St. Augustinegrass Zoysiagrass Area Adapted To Statewide Statewide N. Florida and Panhandle (one cultivar adapted to South Florida) Statewide Statewide Statewide Mowing Height 3 " -4" Cultivar Dependent 0.5 " -1.5" 1.5 " -2.0" 0.5 " -2" Cultivar Dependent 1.5 " -4" Cultivar Dependent 0.5 " -2" Soil Acid, sandy Wide range Acid, infertile Wide range Wide range Wide range Leaf Texture Coarse- medium Cultivar Dependent Fine - medium Medium Fine - medium Cultivar Dependent Coarse - medium Cultivar Dependent Fine - medium Salt Tolerance Poor Good Poor Excellent Good Good Shade Tolerance Poor Poor Fair Poor Good Good Wear Tolerance Poor Good- excellent Poor Good - excellent Poor Good - excellent Nematode Tolerance Very good Poor Poor Good Good Good Maintenance Level Low Cultivar Dependent Medium -High Low High Medium Medium -High Establishment Methods Seed, sod Sod, sprigs, plugs, seed Seed, sod, sprigs, plugs Sod, plugs, sprigs, seed Sod, plugs, sprigs Sod, plugs, sprigs, seed Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 compacted by construction activity? Does the site con- tain low fertility subsoils brought in for fill? Is the site irrigated? Can it be easily mowed? Is it shaded or in full sun? Will it be shaded in a few years? What is the quality and the expected quantity of the water available for irrigation? What pests are prevalent in the area? Are pest- resistant cultivars available? Reclaimed water may contain high levels of chloride, leading to salt accumu- lation in the soil. When planning or renovating a land- scape, check with the reclaimed water provider regard- ing chloride levels, and if necessary choose plants that are salt - tolerant. SELECTING TREES, SHRUBS, AND GROUND COVERS The plants selected should be suited to the characteristics of the site that were determined during an earlier site analysis. Good landscape design requires that plants serve particular functions. They should reduce cooling and heating costs and improve the appearance or usefulness of the landscape. Plants should be selected and positioned to provide a transition between the structure and the landscape, a screen for privacy, shade for comfort, and wildlife habitat, or to direct traffic flow onto and within the property. Select plants that will not outgrow their allotted space. Even though smaller cultivars of landscape plants may take longer to reach the desirable size, they will not have to be pruned as frequently and are less like- ly to need replacing in a few years. See http• / /hort .ifas.ufl.edu /woody/index.html for informa- tion on individual plants. PLANTING PREPARING TO PLANT A LAWN Proper soil preparation before grass planting is critical to ensure the establishment of quality turf. Preparation determines how quickly the lawn becomes established and its long -term maintenance requirements. The general guidelines for preparing to plant a lawn are as follows: • Call 811 before you dig (or 800 - 432 -4770 or www.callsunshine.com)— before installing any and/or all plant material. • Clean and rough grade— remove debris and level the area to make it suitable for mowing. • Install irrigation —if you are including an irrigation system, install it prior to planting. • Soil analysis— determine soil pH and phosphorus and potassium concentrations. Contact your county Cooperative Extension Service for information on how to do this. • Soil amendments —add these prior to planting if you need to improve the soil's physical and chemical properties. 1611 821+ • Deep tillage —this loosens compacted soil and improves the establishment of turf. Tilling sand is unnecessary. • Weed control —use a nonselective herbicide such as glyphosate to aid in weed control before planting. Several applications may be necessary. • Final grading —a final leveling makes mowing easier and safer. For more information, see Preparing To Plant a Florida Lawn, IFAS Publication ENH -02, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl. edu/LH012. LANDSCAPE PLANT INSTALLATION Before digging the hole, 1) remove all soil from above the topmost root, and 2) measure the distance between the topmost root and the bottom of the root ball. Dig the hole about 10 percent shallower than this depth and as wide as possible (at least one and a half times the width of the ball and even wider in compacted soils). The root ball should be positioned in the hole shallowly enough so that the finished grade of the backfill soil and land- scape soil is lower than the top of the root ball. In other words, leave the upper portion of the sides of the root ball exposed to the air. Then apply mulch so that it covers the sides of the root ball. Be sure that when you are finished planting, there is NO SOIL, and little or no mulch, over the top of the root ball. Soil (as well as thick mulch layers more than 3 or 4 inches deep) over the root ball can prevent water and air from entering the root ball. When finished planting, you should be able to see the topmost root in the root ball originating from the trunk at the soil surface. In other words, the trunk flare (root flare) should be visible. Soil should be packed firmly between the root ball and existing soil to eliminate air pockets where roots can dry out. Air pockets can be removed when planting large specimens by inserting a running hose between the root ball -soil interface several times until all the soil settles around the root ball. CARE DURING PLANT ESTABLISHMENT Even the healthiest landscape plants installed in the most ideal circumstances may need a substantial amount of time, care, and proper irrigation to become established. During the establishment period, the roots are expanding out into the landscape soil, and the shoots and trunk grow more slowly than they did before transplanting. In most instances, established, drought - tolerant landscape plants have a root system substantial enough to keep them alive with little or no supplemental irrigation. Establishment occurs more rapidly when irrigation is supplied in the correct quantity and frequency. In addition to requiring special attention to irrigation, during their establishment period trees benefit from FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries mulching and may require staking or guying. Pruning and fertilizing may also benefit landscape plants while they are becoming established. For more information, see the following: IFAS Publication ENH 860, Fertilization and Irrigation Needs for Florida Lawns and Landscapes, at http: / /edis.ifas. ufl.edu/EPIIO. IFAS Publication ENH 857, Irrigating Landscape Plants During Establishment, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EPI13. IFAS Circular 853, Pruning Landscape Trees and Shrubs, at htti): / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/MG087. IFAS tree pruning website, Pruning Shade Trees in the Landscape, at http:Hhort.ifas.ufl.edu /wood)L /pruning[. ENVIRONMENTAL STRESSES ON LAWNS Florida lawn grasses are subjected to many environmen- tal stresses as a result of prolonged exposure to shade, drought, nutrient deficiency, the effects of vehicle and foot traffic, salinity, and occasional cold temperatures. Biotic stresses result from living organisms such as insects, diseases, or nematodes. Environmental stresses can be managed in two ways: 1) choosing the most stress - tolerant species or cultivar for a particular area, and 2) using proper cultural and man- agement practices to alleviate the effects of the stress. Practices that reduce environmental stresses include the following: Moderating nitrogen fertility. Nitrogen encourages the plant to form new tissue and grow. When nitro- gen is applied in excess, more energy reserves are used to form new tissue than can be replaced by pho- tosynthesis, and the grass becomes more vulnerable to stresses. Less reserves are then available for recovery from, or avoidance of other problems. • Mowing at proper heights. Mowing below recom- mended heights removes a large portion of the shoot tissue available for photosynthesis. This leaves the grass less able to support itself or recover from injury. • Irrigating when the grass needs water. Over irrigat- ing leads to the failure of many lawns by increasing fungal problems and limiting the root system to the top few inches of soil. Many environmental stresses lead to increased disease or insect problems, which are often treated chemically without changing the cultural practices that initially caused the problem. Chemical treatment in these cases will not take care of the problem until the cultural fac- tors are handled correctly. 1611 621 SHADE CONSIDERATIONS FOR TURF Most landscapes include shaded areas, with shade coming from either trees or buildings. This shade can drastically affect turfgrass growth, depending on the degree and duration of shade. In many landscape settings, grass receives a minimum amount of light for enough of the day to maintain adequate growth, even if an area is shad- ed for other portions of the day. In some situations, how- ever, a grassed area may be shaded for most or all of the day, making it difficult for the grass to obtain either an adequate intensity or duration of light for growth. Under shaded conditions, turfgrasses have elongated leaf blades and stems as they attempt to obtain sunlight by outgrowing their neighbors. This reduces their overall health and vigor. Coverage is also reduced, and the bare ground that results is conducive to weed growth. It is generally not advisable to grow turfgrass in heavy shade. Other ground covers or mulch should be used in these sites. For areas receiving moderate amounts of shade, however, certain species and cultivars are able to main- tain suitable growth. Specific management practices also encourage better turfgrass health under shaded conditions. Some species are particularly well suited for use in shad- ed areas. Within these species, certain cultivars some- times maintain considerable advantages when grown in a shaded environment. These species and cultivars include the following: St. Augustinegrass is somewhat better than others for growth in partial shade, although it also performs well in full sunlight. Cultivars that exhibit the most shade toler- ance include `Seville' and `Delmar.' `Floratam,' `Floratine,' and `Floralawn' exhibit somewhat less shade tolerance. Zoysiagrass is another good choice for partially shaded areas. Like St. Augustinegrass, it also does well in full sunlight. Generally, any cultivar of zoysiagrass performs well in partial shade. Bahiagrass is not recommended for use in shaded condi- tions, but centipedegrass tolerates some partial shade. Seashore paspalum and bermudagrass do not do well in shaded situations. The following management practices produce better turf - grass growth in shaded situations: Increase the mowing height for grasses growing in the shade. For instance, if you normally cut St. Augustine - grass at a 3 -inch height, increase the cutting height to 4 inches. This allows for more leaf area to intercept as much available light as possible. In addition, leaf blades are longer and narrower in the shade, and a lower cut- ting height excessively reduces leaf length, which is not good for the grass. Increased mowing height also Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 promotes deeper rooting, which is one of the key mechanisms of stress tolerance for turfgrasses. Reduce fertilizer applications to turf growing in shade. The grass grows more slowly in a shaded envi- ronment, which reduces fertility needs. Too much nitrogen fertilizer depletes carbohydrates and produces a weaker turf system. If you normally apply 4 pounds of nitrogen per 1,000 square feet yearly, apply 2.5 to 3 pounds to turf growing in the shade. Limit any single fertility application to no more than 0.5 pounds of nitrogen per 1,000 square feet at any one time. Water use is substantially reduced under shaded con- ditions, so adjust irrigation accordingly. If the irriga- tion system covers an area that is partially shaded and partially in sun, consider removing the sprinkler heads from the shaded areas and irrigate by hand when rain- fall is inadequate. • Avoid the effects of vehicle and foot traffic. The grass is more easily injured by traffic if growing in shade, and may not be able to recover adequately. Also, traffic in shady areas may damage a tree's roots, resulting in the decline or death of the tree. 1611 B214 • Monitor for weed pressure. Weeds are able to outcom- pete turf in certain situations, and will seek out those opportunities. In a shaded environment, lateral turf- grass growth and ground cover may be sparse, leaving bare ground suitable for certain weeds. Treatment with a pre- or post- emergence herbicide may be necessary. Use caution, however, when applying any chemical treatment to a shaded lawn, as there is a greater chance of phytotoxicity (toxicity to plants) when a grass is under stress. Also, many herbicides can damage land - scape trees and shrubs. • Monitor for disease pressure. In many shaded environ- ments, there is less air movement and more humidity, which may increase the possibility of disease. Again, use caution if applying pesticides to a turf that is already under environmental stress. In particularly troublesome areas, consider other ground covers besides turf. Examples include ivies (Hedera spp.), liriope (Liriope spp.), mondo grass (Ophiopogon spp.), and Asiatic jasmine (Trachelospermum asiaticum). Remember, the key to a successful landscape is "Right Plant, Right Place." I FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries Using proper irrigation system design, installation, management, and maintenance practices provides a multitude of benefits. These benefits include saving money, using irrigation efficiently, a healthy and more drought and pest- resistant landscape, and protecting the state's water resources. Green Industry workers need to be aware of the different irrigation processes and system components because irrigation is a major factor in the success of their industry. By understanding the irriga- tion system, they can save the company and the client money and help protect ground water supplies and water quality. This section of the document includes background infor- mation and irrigation BMPs for the Green Industry. Some of the BMPs mentioned are not usually considered the responsibility of mowing and trimming services or route based service businesses. However, many Green Industry workers, who may be directly employed by property owners, associations or municipalities, are often responsible for operation and maintenance of an irriga- tion system. For complete BMPs specific to the Irrigation Industry please refer to: • Florida Irrigation Association (www.fisstate.org) • Irrigation Association (www. irrigation. org) • The University of Florida's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) (http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /) Irrigation is an age -old art and is defined as the applica- tion of supplemental water to a soil for plant growth. It also provides a mechanism for nutrients to move from the soil into a plant. Other uses include salt leaching, chemi- gation, system flushing, seed germination, and climate modification. On average, Florida receives more than 50 inches of rain per year. However, the distribution and amounts of this rainfall are not always adequate to meet a plant's water demands. Providing the amount of water that a plant needs at the correct time is the key to resource conserva- tion, reduced pollutant loading, and optimum plant growth. This chapter describes irrigation concepts to help explain the fundamentals of good irrigation. The green industry can use this information to assist them in their daily operations and to help their clients to save water, improve plant health and reduce the flushing of fertilizer nutrients from a plant's root zone. In addition, this chapter identi- fies specific irrigation BMPs for the Green Industry. Throughout the chapter, the term "plant" refers to both turf and landscape plants, including trees. 1611 g21 PERMITTING AND REGULATIONS Many agencies have jurisdiction over an irrigation project before, during, and after construction. For example, Florida's five water management districts, Florida Department of Health, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, or local governments may require well permits. Typically, for large projects the water management districts issue water use permits, which are usually calculated for drought conditions rather than for normal irrigation. To prevent potential fines, it is important to identify and abide by all regula- tory requirements. Besides water use permits, some water management districts have special year -round water conservation measures and drought/water shortage restrictions that govern the amount and timing of irrigation. It is impor- tant to know the restrictions for a site and to set timers /controllers to those conditions. Since water shortage restrictions change with the severity of a drought, it is important to be aware of and to abide by current restrictions. If a site's irrigation system cannot be adjusted to meet the restrictions, the system should be upgraded as soon as possible, but in the interim, there are methods to obtain variances. These variances need to be obtained in writing, before irrigating. Since 1991, Florida Law has required an operating rain - activated cutoff switch on all automatically controlled irrigation systems. In 2004, the Florida legislature created section 373.228 Florida Statutes directing the Department of Environmental Protection, 373.62 Water conservation; automatic sprinkler systems. Any person who purchases and installs an automatic lawn sprinkler system after May 1, 1991, shall install, and must maintain and operate, a rain sensor device or switch that will override the irrigation cycle of the sprinkler system when adequate rainfall has occurred. the Water Management Districts, and several stakeholder groups to devise standards for Landscape Irrigation and Florida- Friendly landscape design. These standards were adopted in December 2006. Local governments must use these standards when adopting local ordinances after- that date. The irrigation standards are based on Appendix F of the Florida Building code. See the shadow box in the Irrigation Design section for more details. The following permitting and regulatory guidelines should be followed for all irrigation projects: • Contact local and state regulatory agencies (such as the county, city, Florida Department of Environmental Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 Protection, water management districts, and health department) to determine current irrigation regula- tions and criteria. • Obtain all permits before construction. • Abide by all permit conditions and current water restrictions when operating the irrigation system. • Obtain any desired regulatory variances before irrigating. The use of irrigation BMPs promotes proper irrigation system design, construction, and management. This leads to reduced water use, the protection of aquatic resources, better plant development, economic savings to the end user, and efficient fertilizer use. Irrigation knowl- edge and education is a critical part of meeting the intent of the Green Industry's irrigation BMPs. RECLAIMED WATER USE Many urban areas use reclaimed wastewater for their irri- gation water source. While this offers many benefits, it also can lead to landscaping and pollution problems if not properly managed. Nutrient levels in reclaimed water may vary by a factor of 10 or more, depending on the treat- ment plant supplying the water. Contact the supplier to get information on nutrient content. When applying fer- tilizers to a site that irrigates with reclaimed water, con- sider the amount of nutrients in the water, and reduce fertilization appropriately. Reclaimed water may contain high levels of chloride, leading to salt accumulation in the soil. Additional considerations, such as water for flushing salts, may be needed. Nutrient pollution may occur if the user over - irrigates, because both reclaimed water that runs off on the surface, and the water and nutrients that move below the root zone, are lost. Maintenance of a high level of distribution uniformity is critical to prevent leaching of these nutri- ents. Irrigation managers should also pay close attention to all cross - connection controls and backflow prevention devices. All reclaimed water piping, heads, valves, fix- tures, etc. are required by law to be color -coded purple, and labeled "Do not drink this water." As long as field capacity is not exceeded when irrigating, reclaimed water is a safe and reliable irrigation source. IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN Irrigation system design is a complex issue and should be performed by trained professionals. These profession- als should use existing standards and criteria, as well as the manufacturer's recommendations, to design the most appropriate system for a location. In addition to the Landscape Irrigation and Florida - Friendly Design Standards, a list of sources for current standards and criteria can be found at the end of this chapter. Many communities require construction and design docu- 1611 B 21�1 ments and permits that require the signature and seal of a registered design professional. Members of the Green Industry should be able to visually identify system design problems to help their clients irrigate more efficiently, save water, reduce the need to add fertilizers or other chemical treatments, and improve plant health and water quality. The irrigation design for a site depends on a number of factors including location, soils, landscape vegetation, water supply, and water quality. An irrigation system needs to be designed to meet a site's peak water require- ments. In addition, to prevent irrigation runoff, a system's application rate must not exceed the ability of the soil to absorb and retain the water applied during any one application. The irrigation system should also have enough flexibility to adapt to various water demands and local restrictions. Design operating pressure must not exceed the source pressure. The design operating pressure should account for low pressure during periods of high use (i.e., morn - ings) and for project buildout when all of a develop - ment's landscaping is in place. Plants should be grouped in irrigation zones based on similar water use require - ments. Irrigation systems designed to service both turf and landscape areas should have enough zones to meet each area's individual water needs. In some regions, the irrigation design should account for the extra water required to periodically leach salt buildups that may accumulate due to high chloride levels in some sources of irrigation water. An irrigation system consists of three main components: water supply (consisting of a water source, pump, fil- ters, and valves), water conveyance (made up of a main- line, manifold, lateral, and spaghetti tubes) and a distri- bution device (such as an impact sprinkler, oscillating sprinkler, rotary sprinkler, spray, or drip emitter). The proper design and installation of these components opti- mizes their use and decreases any off -site impacts. Irrigation design must also account for different site characteristics, such as soils and topography. Hand -moved irrigation systems should have enough flexibility to provide sufficient coverage (see the manufacturer's recommendations) after each move. Microirrigation systems for shrubs and other landscape plants should be designed to cover at least 50 percent of the root systems. Microirrigation is rarely used for turf in Florida, and is prohibited in some places, but if used should be designed to cover 100 percent of the grass's root system. To provide for peak water demands and have enough flexibility to reduce supply for different demand require- ments, irrigation systems need to be designed with vari- ous control devices, rain shut -off devices, and backflow FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries a prevention. Water conveyance systems should be designed with devices to protect against blowouts. The water conveyance pipelines should provide the system with the appropriate pressure required for maximum irri- gation efficiency, uniformity, and the distribution devices should be designed for optimum uniform coverage. In addition, the distribution system should not include the irrigation of non - planted areas (such as driveways, park- ing lots, roads, sidewalks, underneath roof overhangs, and natural buffer zones). To ensure optimum uniformity, permanent irrigation sprinklers, spray jets, and other distribution devices should be spaced according to the manufacturers' recommendations. Typically, this spacing is based on average wind conditions and operating pressures during irrigation. Figure 5. Sprinkler layouts. If site - specific wind conditions are different than pub- lished averages, check with the local IFAS extension office, USDA NRCS or the Florida Irrigation Society for their recommendations. Table 2 is provided as a general guideline. Spacing should not exceed the percentages in 161 1 a21 the table below. After the system is constructed and operating, periodic "catch can" uniformity tests should be performed (see the section on Irrigation Maintenance later in this chapter) to ensure that the system is continu- ing to function as designed. Table 2. Irrigation Spacing Wind Square Coverage I Triangular Coverage Miles Per Hour Percentage of Diameter of Coverage 0-5' 55% 60% 5 -10 50% 55% 10+ 1 45% 50% ` For many locations, the 0 -5 mph wind condition occurs very infrequently and this spacing recommendation should only be used after careful consideration and site investigation. MICROIRRIGATION FOR LANDSCAPE PLANTS When designed and operated correctly, microirrigation, also known as drip or low- volume irrigation, is one of the most efficient methods of irrigation. It is highly manageable and provides small quantities of water directly to the plant's root zone. Low - pressure sprin- klers, sprayers or drippers are also known as emitters, and they slowly release water into the soil around a plant. This saves water because only the main feeder roots receive water, and less water evaporates from the surface of the soil. Typically, with drip irrigation in a sandy soil, water moves laterally only 10 to 12 inches. Drip irrigation is ideal when such precision is desirable or for narrow strip plantings, such as hedgerows. Because of the nature and location of drip irrigation it is difficult to determine if the emitters are providing enough water. Visual inspection of the landscape may identify clogging (dry spots, dead plants, and wilted plants) or excessive watering (soggy soil, weeds, excessive plant growth) problems from a drip irrigation system. Overall, spray -jets (either microsprayers or microsprin- klers) are more desirable than drip emitters for most landscape applications. This is because they cover larg- er areas and have fewer clogging problems. Clogging and excess water problems can be seen either by careful examination of the irrigation system or by looking at the landscape. Spray jets should not be designed or operated to irrigate non - planted areas Regardless of the type of microirrigation system, clogging can be a problem if the water supply is not filtered before entering the irrigation system or if the filtration system is not cleaned. The safest and easiest way to maintain the emitters in a microirrigation system is to keep a small supply of clean backups on hand. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 J 16I 1 B 2 1 PA Clogged devices can be easily replaced with clean units, IFAS Fact Sheet AE -254, Microirrigation in the Landscape, then placed in a small container of the cleaning fluid at htW: //edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AE076. appropriate for the clogging material. Replacement emitters should always have the same operating charac- IFAS Bulletin 333, Flushing Procedures for Microirrigation teristics (i.e., operating pressure and discharge rate) as Systems, at htLp://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/WI013. the original emitters. Turf and Landscape Irrigation Best Management For more information, see the following: Practices, April 2005. The Irrigation Association, at btLp://www.irrigation.or From the December 2006 publication Landscape Irrigation and Florida- Friendly Design Standards: Pursuant to section 373.228, FS, these landscape and irrigation design Standards shall be used by local governments when developing landscape irrigation and xeriscape (Florida - Friendly) ordinances. II. Irrigation System Design Standards A. Irrigation systems shall be designed to meet the needs of the plants in the landscape (not the other way around). B. When feasible, irrigation systems shall be designed to separately serve turf and non-turf areas. C. The irrigation system plans and specifications shall identify the materials to be used and the ccnstruction methods. D. The design shall consider soil, slope, and other site characteristics in order to minimize water waste, including overspray, the watering of impervious surfaces and other non - vegetated areas, and off -site runoff. E. The system shall be designed to minimize free flow conditions in case of damage or other me, hanical failure. F. The system shall be designed to use the lowest quality water feasible. G. Rain switches or other devices, such as soil moisture sensors, to prevent unnecessary irrigatior . shall be incorporated. (Section 373.62, F.S.) H. A recommended seasonal operating schedule and average precipitation rates for each irrigat Dn zone for both establish- ment and maintenance conditions shall be provided. I. Control systems shall provide the following minimum capabilities: 1) Ability to be programmed in minutes, by day of week, season and time of day, 2) Ability to accommodate multiple start times and programs, 3) Automatic shut off after adequate rainfall, 4) Ability to maintain time during power outages for a minimum of three days, and 5) Operational flexibility to meet applicable year -round water conservation requirements an I temporary water shortage restrictions. J. Recommended maintenance activities and schedules shall be included. K. Precipitation rates for sprinklers and all other emitters in the same zone shall be matched, except that microirrigation emit- LV may be specified to meet the requirements of individual plants. L. Irrigation systems shall be designed to maximize uniformity, considering factors such as: 1) Emitter types. 2) Head spacing. 3) Sprinkler pattern. 4) Water pressure at the emitter. M. Irrigation systems with main lines larger than two inches or designed to supply more than sev� my gallons per minute shall incorporate a means to measure irrigation water use, at a minimum of ninety-five percent acs uracy across the flow range. N. Irrigation system plans and specifications shall require the system installer to conduct final test ng and adjustments to achieve design specifications prior to completion of the system and acceptance by the owner >r owner's representative. O Irrigation system plans and specifications shall require that the installer provide property own rs and users with post -con- struction documentation, including as- constructed drawings, recommended maintenance attic ties and schedules, opera- tional schedule, design precipitation rates, instructions on adjusting the system to apply less v.ater after the landscape is established, maintenance schedule, water source, water shut -off method, and the manufactur, is operational guide for their irrigation controller. To the extent feasible, similar information should be made availabl for subsequent property transfers. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries IRRIGATION SYSTEM INSTALLATION Only professionals who are trained, certified, appropriate- ly licensed for irrigation installation by the appropriate agency, bonded, and insured should handle irrigation installation. These individuals must follow the designer's plans and use recognized standards and criteria such as those promulgated by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE, formerly ASAE), Florida Irrigation Society (FIS), Irrigation Association (IA), U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), or the manufac- turer's recommendations. The designer must approve any changes to the design. To prevent system failures, waste, and property damage, construction materials must meet appropriate standards, such as those from ASABE, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), or the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM). Plan all construction practices accord- ing to standard safety practices. Before construction, the contractor should identify and flag all underground pipes, cables, and other elements. Call before you dig. Call 811 (or 800 - 432 -4770 or www.callsunshine.com) for free Sunshine State One Call locator service. The contractor should clean the site of any construction materials before the job is complete and at the end of construction, pro- vide the owner with a copy of the as -built plans, operat- ing manuals, recommended operating schedules for both plant establishment and supplemental irrigation of mature plants, and warranties. For new construction, the job should include a follow -up site visit to reset the con- troller, rain shut off device, and soil moisture sensor (if installed) after the landscape is established. IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT Irrigation management (knowing when and how much to irrigate) is the cornerstone of water conservation and reducing nonpoint source pollution. It encompasses the amount of water applied and the frequency of applica- tion. To prevent excess water use that could lead to chemical leaching and runoff, fungal infestation, and disease; irrigation scheduling should take into account plant water requirements, recent rainfall, recent temper- ature extremes, and soil characteristics. In addition, the irrigation system must be properly designed and main- tained, so that all of the plants in a given zone receive the same amount of water. See the Irrigation Maintenance section of this chapter for information about measuring distribution uniformity. Under ideal conditions, the water required for a plant is equal to the water used during plant growth. This water goes to soil evaporation and plant transpiration. Typically, both processes are combined and called evapotranspira- tion (ET). A plant's water requirements (ET) vary with its growth cycle and climatic conditions. The limiting ET factors are 1611 B211 the amount of soil moisture to be transpired by the plant, solar energy reaching the plant (affected by latitude, season, cloud cover, and shade), the temperature and relative humidity of the air, and wind speed. If a soil is at field capacity, 100°/% canopy coverage is present to absorb radiation, and other factors are equal, the amount of water transpired varies little between plant types. Plant irrigation requirements will differ based on a plant's ability to extract soil moisture (i.e., root zone depth) and its physiological ability to deal with reduced availability of moisture. Plants require more water during seed, flower, and fruit production, but will not require very much when they are dormant. During the colder months, or those with shorter periods of daylight, most turfgrasses and landscape plants are not actively growing, thus use less soil moisture and may not require irrigation. Many established, drought - tolerant landscape trees and shrubs require little or no irrigation, provided the soils do not obstruct root development. Plants such as azaleas, copperleaf, impatiens, or other bedding plants that lack drought tolerance may require irrigation during extended drought periods. In humid regions such as Florida, irrigation is considered supplemental because it supplements natural rainfall. Proper irrigation management must account for rainfall. Since rainfall varies from location to location, the proper use of rain gauges, rain shut -off devices, flow meters, soil mois- ture sensors, and/or other irrigation management devices should be incorporated into the site's irrigation schedule. Using an irrigation schedule can help prevent wasteful over - irrigation, the leaching of fertilizers/pesticides, and promote root development for drought conditions. No more than 1/2 to 3/4 inch of water should be applied for a single irrigation event. The exact amount of irrigation needed for each event will depend on a plant's needs for growth, fruiting, dormancy for that time of year and soil characteristics (soil moisture, infiltration rates, soil root zone depth and water holding capacities). In addition, water management districts and local requirements should be considered before irrigating. A properly working, installed and calibrated rain shutoff device prevents the irrigation system from turning on if adequate rainfall has occurred. Rain shutoff devices are required by law on all automatic irrigation systems built after 1991. Irrigation management and control devices need to be installed correctly for proper irrigation management. Rain shut -off devices and rain gauges should be placed in open areas to prevent erroneous readings. Flow meters should have a straight enough run of pipe both down- stream and upstream to prevent turbulence and bad readings. Soil moisture sensors and other irrigation management tools should be installed in representative locations and be maintained to help make good irrigation Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 management decisions. When mechanical/electronic devices are not available for irrigation management, the following visual indicators should be used as guidelines to determine the need for irrigation: • The grass has a dull, bluish -gray coloring. • Foot tracks remain in the grass. • Leaf blades are folded in half on at least one -third of the site. • Soil samples from the root zone are dry and crumbly. • Indicator landscape plants (such as impatiens and azal- eas) have drooping leaves. There are several ways to prevent excess irrigation. Visual observations of runoff or puddles are simple indi- cations. A system's timer /clock/controller can be adjusted to meet a plant's seasonal water requirements. Flow meters can be used to determine how much water is applied and when to turn off the irrigation system. Rain gauges, cans, or other containers can be used to measure how much water has been applied. Rain shutoff devices, which, as mentioned earlier, are already required by law on all automatic systems installed since 1991, can save up to 30% or more over a timer -only system. However, many systems that should have sensors do not, either because they were not installed as required or because they have failed or been removed. Those who are responsible for overseeing an irrigation system should check the operation of the rain shutoff device at least once per year, and replace the unit if it is not operating correct- ly. Other workers who may notice a system irrigating shortly after a good rain event should attempt to notify their client of a possible problem with the rain shut off device so they can have it repaired. One of the most effective and efficient methods of irrigation control is the use of properly installed and maintained soil moisture sensors with a specialized controller. There are two basic types of systems, direct control, where soil moisture sensors actually call for irrigation; and bypass control, where regularly scheduled irrigations are bypassed if sufficient moisture is present. Direct control systems are more expensive and require considerable management expertise, such as may be present at a golf course. Bypass systems are much less expensive and easier to install. Most bypass systems work with the existing controller. Although soil moisture levels are the preferred method to determine irrigation quantities, in the absence of soil data, calculated ET methods may be used. Current calculated potential evapotranspiration (ETp) rates are available at htip:Hfawn.ifas.ufl.edu. This site also includes 161,1 821 a landscape irrigation scheduling tool and rainfall data. Rainfall can make up some or all of the ET, especially during the cooler months. Total rainfall is not the same as effective rainfall. Florida soils generally have low water holding capacity, so a two -inch rain may have little more effect on reducing landscape irrigation than a typical irri- gation event in any given month. An alternative irrigation scheduling method often used by homeowners and on some commercial landscapes is to assume that on average 1 inch of water wets the top 12 inches of a sandy soil. Typically most roots grow in the top 6 -12 inches of soil, and 1/2 to 3/4 inch is needed for replenishment of moisture every 2 to 3 days during warm periods of active growth, and every 10 to 14 days during less active growth periods. This water can come from rainfall or be provided by the irrigation system. Again, soil characteristics (infiltration rates and water holding capacities) water management districts and local require- ments should be considered before irrigating. Another method of irrigation scheduling and timer or controller adjustments for sites without specific informa- tion is to use the weekly ET values in Figure 6 as a general guideline. The graph divides the state into north- ern and southern regions roughly around Interstate I -4. Figure 6. Approximate weekly evapotranspiration (ET). Although irrigation management is a complex process, it can be boiled down to a simple checkbook (or water balance) process, where the irrigation amount consists of the difference between a plant's need for water and the effective rainfall (rainfall stored in a plant's root zone, for plant use). When possible, the timing of an irrigation event should be planned to increase irrigation efficiency, by reducing evaporative losses due to climatic conditions (for example, high temperature, low humidity, windy con - ditions) and by maintaining high irrigation uniformity. Several irrigation management techniques help to improve a plant's health and reduce water use. Delayed irrigation and deficit irrigation promote root development and provide a level of drought tolerance. Delayed irriga- FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries tion promotes deeper root development by postponing irrigation until wilt is observed. Deficit irrigation calls for managing irrigation quantities so that there is always soil storage to take advantage of any possible rainfall. When leaching salts, which is necessary in some soils due to poor water quality, always wait until the nutrient level in the soil is depleted to avoid leaching of fertilizer nutri- ents with the salt. For more information, see the following IFAS Publication ENH 158, Tips for Maintaining Landscapes During Drought, at httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu /EP091. IFAS Circular 807, Managing Your Florida Lawn Under Drought Conditions, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP078. Field Guide to Soil Moisture Sensor Use in Florida, at htty: /hvww.sirwmd .com/floridawaterstar /odfs /SMS field guide.pdf IRRIGATION SYSTEM MAINTENANCE Proper maintenance extends the life of an irrigation system and helps it to perform optimally. Maintenance begins with a visual observation of the system and the plants. Check for proper functioning of rain sensors and controllers, leaks, broken/cracked lines, proper rotation, and damaged sprinkler heads. Also, check for obstacles that may interfere with irrigation uniformity. Brown spots, unnaturally green grass, certain types of weeds, and soggy spots are indicators of problems. Many types of business- es do not have control over the irrigation system, nor the expertise or contractual duty to address irrigation issues, but every effort should be made to inform the client when problems are noted and to explain the importance of proper operation and prompt repairs. Damaged or defective systems should be repaired as soon as possible. Replacement parts should always have the same characteristics (that is, discharge - pressure rela- tionship, jet size /colors) as the original components. Otherwise, the replacement might cause more harm than the bad component. Evaluating a system's uniformity and efficiency (an irriga- tion audit) reduces water use and fertilizer /pesticide leach- 16�1 $21 ing. There are many procedures (such as NRCS, IFAS, ASABE, IA, and FIS) for irrigation system evaluation, all of which can be traced to a process published by Miriam and Keller. By following any of these methods, you can ensure that a system is operating at optimum levels. Common irrigation efficiency problems include leaks, sprinkler head plugging, poor irrigation uniformity caused by nozzle wear, and poor system pressure. Some problems (such as repairing leaks and replacing nozzles) can be repaired at a minimal cost, while others (such as poor sys- tem design) might, at first glance, be very costly, but will pay off in the end. Problems need to be corrected as soon as possible to prevent wasted water and the leaching of fertilizers and other chemicals. In the long term, the investment made to improve the irrigation system pays off in reduced fertilizer, chemical and water bills. Distribution Uniformity is a measurement of how evenly water is distributed over a given area, and should be con- sidered when managing irrigation. This measurement is an indication of the system's hydraulic performance and can be used to identify deep percolation. Typically distri- bution uniformity is identified with the infiltration of the lowest 25% (low quarter) of irrigated area and can be determined by a "catch can" test. Baby -food jars, tuna cans, or other straight -sided containers are evenly placed around sprinklers. The system is turned on for a fixed amount of time, and the water collected in each container is measured and recorded. The Distribution Uniformity, which is a percentage, is cal- culated by dividing the average depth of water collected in the lowest 25% of containers with the average depth of water in all the containers. This is multiplied by 100 to convert the value into a percentage. The Irrigation Association has published a range and rating of distribu- tion uniformities for different irrigation methods. Recent work in Florida indicates that most landscape irrigation systems are below these published values. Higher uniformities occur when spacing is adequate and sprinkler nozzles are matched. Poor application unifor- mity leads to localized over irrigation or under irrigation, brown spots in the grass, fertilizer or pesticide leaching or runoff, and the waste of irrigation water. Many of these problems can be solved and the site's owner can Table 3: Irrigation Association Distribution Uniformities Rating Lower Quarter Distribution Uniformity (DULQ) for Sprinkler Zones Type of Zone Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor M M M M M Fixed Spray 75 65 55 50 40 Rotor 80 70 65 60 50 Impact 80 70 65 60 65 Predicting and Estimating Landscape Water Use. The Irrigation Association, Oct. 2001. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 reduce water costs. Distribution uniformity is not a measurement of irrigation efficiency. For more informa- tion, see IFAS Publication AE 144, Turf Irrigation for the Home, at httn: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AE144. For micro irrigation systems, Emission Uniformity is used instead of Distribution Uniformity to determine the uniformity of irrigation. Emission Uniformity is calculat- ed by comparing the volume of water from the emitters to the statistical differences in the total volume. An Emission Uniformity of 90% or higher is considered excellent. For more information, see IFAS Publication AE094, Field Evaluation of Microirrigation Water Application Uniformity, at httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/AE094. Water Application Efficiency is a component of irrigation system efficiency and indicates how well a system is providing water to the plant's root system. Irrigation Application Efficiency is another form of irrigation system efficiency and it compares the amount of water delivered to an area by the amount of water beneficially used. To help with irrigation efficiency, water management dis- tricts or other local agencies may provide mobile irriga- tion lab (MIL) services. MIL staff will evaluate an irriga- tion system and make recommendations to improve sys- tem efficiency and help with irrigation scheduling. Contact your local water management district for more information about these services in your area. Irrigation requirements represent the amount of water an irrigation system needs to apply to meet a plant's water needs. This quantity is a function of the plant's water requirements, soil moisture, and the system's efficiency. For more information, see IFAS Publication AE110, Efficiencies of Florida Agricultural Irrigation Systems, at htW://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AEI 10. IRRIGATION SYSTEM ERRORS The following figures depict some examples of improper irrigation system design or installation. Figure 7. Poor design; sprinkler does not match area. 1611 B21 i Figure 8. Poor design; system does not match irrigation requirements. The area needs to be rezoned with landscape and turf separated. Figure 9. Overirrigation, runoff. Small turf area should be irrigated with spray heads, not sprinklers. Figure 10. Object is interfering witl spray pattern, resulting in poor distribution uniformity SOURCES FOR IRRIGATION STANDARDS The following publications contain current irrigation standards: • Landscape Irrigation and Florida - Friendly Design Standards, December 2006, Florida Department of Environmental Protection. http: / /www.dep.state.fl.us/ water/ waterpolic y/ docs/LandscapelrrigationFlorida FriendlyDesign.ndf. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries Figure 11. Water gushing from broken head. 16111321 The principal BMPs for all of the Green Industry include: Call before you dig. Call 811 for free Sunshine State One Call locator service. When possible, the application of fertilizers, herbi- cides, or other chemicals that needed to be watered, should coincide with an irrigation event. Proper cultural practices (such as mowing) to promote healthy, deep root development and reduce irrigation requirements. Account for the nutrients in reclaimed water when making fertilizer calculations. Knowing the nitrate lev- els in reclaimed water can reduce your fertilizer pur- chases. The application of 1 inch of reclaimed water containing 20 ppm nitrate - Nitrogen adds about 4.5 pounds of nitrogen per acre Ob. N /acre) to the soil. If you irrigate 40 inches per year, that works out to a little over 4 lb. per 1,000 square feet. Repair any irrigation devices broken while servicing a site. Replacement parts should have the some charac- teristics as the original components. Visually observe site problems associated with irriga- tion (i.e., wet, dry spots, excessive weeds in specific location) or system components (leaks, broken equip- ment) and report problems to the client. When leaching salts, which is necessary in some soils ASABE Standards -2007. Standards, engineering due to poor water quality, always wait until the nutri- practices, and data developed and adopted by the ent level in the soil is depleted to avoid leaching of American Society of Agricultural and Biological fertilizer nutrients with the salt. Engineers. 2007. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 2950 Niles Rd., St. Joseph, MO Additional BMPs for those with ownership /management responsibility: 49085. Telephone (269) 429 -0300. http:/ /ww. wasabe. org/standards /searchpur.html. Group plants by similar water requirements (i.e., Hydrozones) • Florida Building Code — Plumbing, Appendix F. International Code Council 900 Montclair Rd. Birmingham AL, 35213 -1206 (205) 599 -9871 htti)://NN,ww.floridabuilding.org/BCISOld/bc/default.aSD or http: / /www.iccsafe.org. • National Engineering Handbook Series 210 -VI. November 1997. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington D.C., 20013. httl2://directives.sc.egov.usdL.gov/. • Standards and Specifications for Turf and Landscape Irrigation Systems, Fifth Edition. December 2005. Florida Irrigation Society, (800) 441 -5341, Address: 9340 56th Street N. Suite 105, Temple Terrace, FL 33617 , Florida. httl2://www.fisstate.orgLstandardsrevision3.pdf. • Turf and Landscape Irrigation Best Management Practices, April 2005. The Irrigation Association. (703) 536 -7080, 6540 Arlington Blvd., Falls Church, VA 22042 -6638 http://vvww irrigation. org. Irrigation controllers /timers should be reset seasonally to account for plant growth requirements and local cli- matic conditions. Properly calibrated flow meters, soil moisture sensors, rain shut -off devices, and /or other automated meth- ods should be used to manage irrigation. Irrigation rates should not exceed the maximum ability of the soil to absorb and hold the water applied in any one application. Implement a preventive maintenance program to replace worn components before they cause water, fertilizer and chemical waste. Perform weekly (or at each site visit) visual inspections to identify leaks, broken rain sensors or sprinkler heads, and other system malfunctions. g Replace or repair all broken or worn components before the next scheduled irrigation. 1 Distribution uniformity should be checked annually. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 r LANDSCAPE MULCHES Mulch is any material applied to the soil surface to pro- tect or improve the area covered. Mulches are frequently applied around plants to modify the soil environment and enhance plant growth. They may consist of organic mate- rial such as bark, wood chips, leaves, pine needles, or grass clippings; or they can be inorganic material such as gravel, pebbles, polyethylene film, or woven ground cloth. Mulch can be applied to the soil surface but should not rest against the stems of landscape plants. BENEFITS OF MULCHING Mulching has the following beneficial effects on the soil and plants: • Mulches can prevent the loss of water from the soil by evaporation. Moisture moves by capillary action to the surface and evaporates if the soil is not covered by a mulch. • Mulches suppress weeds when the mulch material itself is weed -free and applied deeply enough (2 to 3 inches after settling) to prevent weed germination or to smother existing small weeds. Figure 12. Mulch, not grass, should be used here. • A more uniform soil temperature can be maintained by mulching. The mulch acts as an insulator that keeps the soil cool under intense sunlight and warm during cold weather. 1611 621 Figure 13. Never build volcanoes. This crown will rot and the roots are smothered. • Most mulches prevent crusting of the soil surface, thus improving absorption and percolation of water into the soil and, at the same time, reducing erosion. • Organic materials used as a mulch can improve soil structure and tilth. As mulch decays, the material becomes topsoil. Decaying mulch may also add nutri- ents to the soil. • Mulches add to the beauty of the landscape by provid- ing a cover of uniform color and an interesting surface texture. • Mulched plants produce roots in and directly under the mulch that surrounds them. The plants produce these roots in addition to the roots in the soil. As a result, mulched plants have more roots than plants that are not mulched. For more information, see IFAS Publication ENH 103, Mulches for the Landscape, at http: / /edisJfas.ufl.edu/MG251. When feasible, use mulch :s made from environmen tally friendly sources or re ::ycled materials. Do not pile mulch against a tree or around the bases of shrubs. Burying the crc .vns can lead to crown and root rot. Leave a clear sp( ce for air to reach the trunk. Maintain a 2 " -3" depth c mulch after settling. s FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries MOWING THE FLORIDA LAWN Mowing is an important maintenance operation. Mowing at the correct height increases turf density and root health and suppresses weeds. A dense turf impedes stormwater runoff. A healthy root system ensures that water and nutrients are absorbed and not wasted. Fewer weeds mean less need for herbicides. Clippings contain nutrients and should be recycled on the lawn. The nutrients in clippings are pollutants when they end up in stormwater systems and waterbodies. Figure 14. This is BAD! Never direct clippings into the street where they can enter the storm drain system. Growth rates and mowing height have the most influence on mowing frequency. As a rule of thumb, mowing should be done often enough so that no more than one -third of the leaf blade is removed at any one mowing. For exam- ple, if a St. Augustinegrass lawn is mowed at a height of 3 inches, it should be mowed when it grows to a height of 4 to 4.5 inches. Following this practice minimizes the effect of mowing on photosynthesis and helps to maintain the high percentage of leaf surface necessary for healthy root development. Research shows that returning grass clip- pings to the surface, sometimes referred to as grass recy- cling, does not increase thatch buildup on turf. Clippings have significant nutrient value and decompose rapidly, returning some fertilizer and organic matter to the soil. 161.1 B21 Figure 15. Always remove clippings from impervious surfaces. These nutrients are going straight to a water body. Mowing equipment and string trimmers can damage trees. Tree trunks that are bumped by mowers, or trees that are used as pivot points for turns, are injured via contact. Mechanical damage to trees can cause progres- sively bigger wounds, since the trees are hit in the same general area repeatedly over time. The damage eventually progresses through the phloem, cambium, and xylem of the tree. In a worst -case scenario, the tree is girdled and dies. Those trees not killed are stressed and the wounds end up as an entry point for disease and insect infesta- tion. The whipping action of the nylon string on a trim- mer can debark a young tree quickly, causing its demise. The careful use of string trimmers and mowers in the landscape is imperative, and there is no reason to use them around trees. Replacing the grass around the base of trees with mulch provides a buffer zone. The larger the mulched area, the less the turf near the tree is stressed by shade, the more room the lawn mower has to maneuver with ease, and the less the string trimmer needs to be used. Mulch also confers other benefits, such as reduced competition from weeds and water conservation. The growth habit and leaf width of a turfgrass species determines the optimum cutting height, frequency, and preferred mower type (Table 4). A grass that spreads Table 4: Suggested mowing heights and mower types for Florida home lawns Turfgrass Species Optimal Mowing Height (inches) Mowing Frequency (days) Preferred Mower Type Bahiagrass 3.0 -4.0 7 -17 Rotary/flail Bermuclagrass 0.5 -1.5 3 -5 Reel Centipedegrass 1.0 -2.0 10 -14 Rotary Seashore Paspolum 1.0 -2.0 5 -10 Rotary/reel St. Augustinegrass "Dwarfs" 3.0 -4.0 1.5 -2.5 5 -14 5 -14 Rotary Rotary Zoysiagrass 1.0 -3.0 10 -14 Reel Dwarf varieties of St. Augustinegrass ('Seville; 'Jade; 'Palmetto; 'Delmar') are the only cultivars of this species that should be mowed at less than 3 inches. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 161,1 X621 , ­7)1AT_11r_'1 Qll­�� Adjust the cutting height by setting the mower on a driveway or sidewalk and using a ruler to mea .ure the distance between the ground and the blade. Do not mow wet turf because it can promote disease and fungus, and clippings can clog the mach ie. Mow only when the turf is dry. Sharpen the mower blade frequently enough to prevent a ragged appearance to the turf. Mow in a different direction every time the lawn is cut. This prevents wear patterns, reduces the gr iin (grass laying over in the same direction), and reduces the possibility of scalping. Use the highest acceptable mowing height for the grasses being grown. Do not remove more than one -third of the foliage at one time. Do not direct clippings into bodies of water or onto impervious surfaces. Remove any clippings that are blown onto sidewalks, driveways, and other impervious areas. Do not remove clippings. If clumping occurs, distribute the clippings by re- mowing or by lightly ral ing. You can also use a leaf blower to distribute clippings. Clean the mower after use to reduce rusting and weed seed movement. Practice grass recycling and return nutrients to the soil. If you must collect clippings, compost them. Use the compost as a soil modifier or mulch. Avoid mechanical damage to trees and shrubs from string trimmers, mowers, and other equipmem. horizontally can usually be mowed shorter than an upright - growing, bunching grass. Grasses with narrow blades can generally be mowed closer than grasses with wide blades. Bermudagrass is mowed at very low heights because of its numerous narrow leaf blades and low growth habit. On the other hand, bahiagrass needs to be mowed higher because of its open, upright growth habit. Turfgrass undergoes physiological stress with each mow- ing, particularly if too much leaf tissue is removed. The effects of this "scalping" can produce long -term damage to the turf and leave it susceptible to numerous other stresses, such as insects, disease, drought, and sunscald. It is always important to leave as much leaf surface as possible for photosynthesis to provide food for regrowth For mowing safety, be sure to follow these tips: • Pick up all stones, sticks, and other debris before mow ing to avoid damaging the mower or injuring someone with flying objects. • Never fill a hot mower with gasoline. • Always wear heavy leather shoes when mowing the lawn. • Check your mower every time it is used. Follow the manufacturer's recommendations for service and adjustments. PRUNING OF LANDSCAPE PLANTS Pruning is another important landscape maintenance task. Through the selective removal of shoots and branches, pruning a plant can improve its health, reduce the risk of failure, control growth, and enhance fruiting, flowering or appearance. Pruning should be a part of routine maintenance and should not be delayed until the landscape is overgrown. However, close attention should be paid to proper timing, depending on the needs of various plants. Proper plant selection can eliminate man), pruning requirements, especially for shrubs. Trees should not be pruned without a clearly defined objective. Objectives can include 1) reducing the risk of failure by improving structure and removing dead branches, 2) raising or reducing the crown to provide clearance, and 3) thinning the crown to increase air and light penetration. Removing the correct stems and branches to accomplish the specified objectives is as important as making the correct pruning cuts. If the wrong branches, or too many branches, are removed even with proper pruning cuts, nothing of merit has been accomplished. For more information, see the following: IFAS Circular 853, Pruning Landscape Trees and Shrubs, at httl2://edis.ifas.uft.edu/MG087 or Pruning Shade Trees in the Landscape, at httl2://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/woodyZl2runin FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries MANGROVES Three species of mangroves are native to Florida: red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove (Avicennia germinans), and white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa). Red mangroves are easily identified by their "prop roots," which are tangled, reddish, aerial roots that originate from the trunk and branches. Their leaves are 1 to 5 inch- es long, broad and blunt on the tip, shiny deep green on top, and paler on the underside. Black mangroves can be identified by numerous fingerlike projections, called pneumatophores, that protrude from the soil around the tree's trunk. Black mangrove leaves are oblong, shiny green on top, and very pale on the underside. Black mangroves are usually found at slightly higher elevations, upland from red mangroves. White mangroves have no visible aerial root system, as do red and black mangroves. The easiest way to identify white mangroves is by their leaves. These are up to 3 inches long, elliptical (rounded at both ends, often with a notch at the tip), and yellowish in color, with two distin- guishing glands at the base of each leaf blade where the stem begins. White mangroves are usually found at high- er elevations and farther upland than either red or black mangroves. The 1996 Mangrove Trimming and Preservation Act, Sections 403.9321- 403.9333, Florida Statutes, governs the trimming and alteration of mangroves. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and several delegated local governments implement the mangrove program. Mangrove trimming and alteration The mangrove preservation act's major provisions include the following: The difference between "trimming" and "alteration" of mangroves is defined. -- Mangroves may not be reduced to a height below 6 feet from the substrate and often may not be legally trimmed down to 6 feet. Mangrove roots, including aerial and prop roots (red mangroves) and pneumatophores (black mangroves), may not be trimmed. Under certain conditions, a professional mangrove trimmer must conduct or supervise the trimming. Dead mangrove trees are covered by the same regu- lations as living mangrove trees; contact the closest Florida Department of Environmental Protection office for specific information on dealing with dead man- grove trees on your client's property. 1614 B21 may be done by property owners under certain exemp- tions, as specified in Section 403.9326, Florida Statutes. Other trimming requires the services of a professional mangrove trimmer and may require an FDEP permit. Section 403.9329, Florida Statutes, governs who may be considered a professional mangrove trimmer. It is especially important that Green Industry profession- als understand that, under the act, homeowners and the individuals they hire to trim their mangroves are jointly and severally responsible for the appropriate trimming of mangroves. All trimming should be done in a manner that does not result in the removal, defoliation, or death of the mangroves. Red mangroves are particularly sensitive to inappropriate trimming. In general, the canopy of red mangroves should not be trimmed, and no more than 25 percent of the canopy of black and white mangroves should be removed. Preferably, views should be obtained by thinning the canopy; creating "windows," and "uplift- ing," compared with hedging (which can be particularly damaging to red mangroves). The booklet Mangrove Trimming Guidelines for Homeowners is available at FDEP's district offices throughout the state. You may wish to obtain several copies to give your clients. Before trimming man- groves, homeowners and landscapers should read the publications cited in this section, or call the Environmental Resource Permitting staff at FDEP's district offices to avoid violating the mangrove preservation act. For more information about the mangrove program, call (850) 245 -8482 or go to http: /hvww.dep.state.fl.us /water/ wetlands /mangroves /. DISPOSING OF LANDSCAPE MATERIAL Never sweep grass clippings, leaves, or other debris into a storm sewer. This pollutes our waterbodies and may, in some cases, clog the system and contribute to flooding. Be careful with yard waste! Careless disposal may spread invasive non - native plants to areas where they don't belong. Lawn and landscape maintenance involves the removal of leaves, clippings, whole landscape plants, and even unwanted houseplants. Given contact with soil and sufficient water, these materials may become established at the disposal site. Dispose of them carefully, so plants that are unwanted in one location don't unintentionally become established elsewhere. Contact your county waste management utility or Cooperative Extension Service agent for information about local disposal sites in your area that are designated for plant waste. Educate your customers about proper plant disposal and how it enhances the protection of natural areas. Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 0 Figure 16. Illegal clumping of plant material Sometimes landscape waste materials are disposed of in accessible locations on someone else's property, either public or private. Illegal dumping has allowed several species to become established in natural areas. Wax begonia, pothos, heavenly bamboo, ardisia, golden bam- boo, and arrowhead vine are among the species that have moved into wild areas through this mechanism. This spread of non - native species into protected sites is threatening the plant and animal species those sites were purchased to conserve. 1611 BZ'.' Awareness of how a species is likely to become estab- lished is important. A plant's relative ease of propagation may provide valuable insight into its potential to spread. Pruned material from a species that is quickly propagated from cuttings, such as wedelia or lantana, may take root without appropriate precautions. The timing of mainte- nance activities can reduce the potential for discarded plants to become established where they shouldn't. Depending on the situation and local ordinances, several options are available to dispose of plant material. Living plant tissue can be destroyed on -site through burning, composting in bins, or putting it in or under heavy plastic. Material may also be dumped in designated disposal areas. The following tips can reduce the accidental propagation of non - native species: • Plants can be pruned before the fruit is mature, and leaf raking can be done before the seeds of surrounding plants have dropped. • Whenever practical, and if the homeowner is amenable, yard wastes should be composted on -site and retained for use as mulch. This also avoids transportation and disposal costs and reduces the need for purchased materials. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES For Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries FERTILIZER TERMS "Fertilizer" means any substance that contains one or more recognized plant nutrients and promotes plant growth, or controls soil acidity or alkalinity, or provides other soil enrichment, or provides other corrective measures to the soil. "Fertilizer grade or analysis" is the percent nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium guaranteed by the manufac- turer to be in the fertilizer. For historical reasons, nitro- gen is expressed as Total N, available phosphate as P205, and soluble potash as K20. The percent sign is not used, but instead the numbers are separated by dashes, and the order is always N, P205, and K20 (for example, 15- 0 -15). In this chapter, the abbreviations N, P, and K, respectively, are used for nitrogen, phosphate, and potash. Many fertilizer terms are officially defined by the Association of American Plant Food Control Officials (AAPFCO), http: / /www.aapfco.ore /. FERTILIZER ANALYSIS The Florida fertilizer label is detailed and intended to be highly informative. By law, the product's label is required to provide the following basic information: the brand and grade, manufacturer's name and address, guaranteed analysis, sources from which the guaranteed primary and secondary nutrients are derived, and net weight. In addition to the grade of the fertilizer, the label also identifies the breakdown of Total N as either Nitrate -N, Ammoniacal -N, Water Soluble or Urea -N, and Water Insoluble -N. This N breakdown supplies information on the immediate availability and/or leachability of the N in the bag. Slow- or controlled - release fertilizer is defined by the Association of American Plant Food Control Officials (AAPFCO) as a fertilizer containing a plant nutrient in a form that delays its availability for plant uptake and use after application, or that extends its availability to the plant significantly longer than a reference "rapidly avail- able nutrient fertilizer" such as ammonium nitrate or urea, ammonium phosphate, or potassium chloride. Such delay of initial availability or extended time of con- tinued availability may occur by a variety of mechanisms. These include the controlled water solubility of the mate- rial (by semipermeable coatings, occlusion, or the inher- ent water insolubility of polymers, natural nitrogenous organics, protein materials, or other chemical forms); by the slow hydrolysis of water - soluble, low molecular weight compounds; or by other unknown means. In most cases, the higher the Water Insoluble -N percent- age in the mix, the longer lasting the fertilizer. This is the portion where most of the N from natural organic and slow- release N sources appears. A fertilizer that 1611 821 contains all of its N as Nitrate -N, Ammoniacal -N, and/or Water Soluble N is referred to as a soluble N fertilizer, which has a high potential for leaching and should not be applied at rates greater than 0.5 lbs. N /1000 square feet. A fertilizer label also contains a "derived from" section that identifies the materials from which the fertilizer was formulated. For more information, see IFAS Circular CIR -1262, Selected Fertilizers Used in Turfgrass Fertilization, at htW: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /SS318. Secondary and micronutrients are identified in the lower portion of the label and are expressed in the elemental form. Sulfur (S) is expressed as "combined" (usually expressed as SO4) and as "free" (elemental S form). The reason for this distinction is that "free" S is very acidify- ing when placed in the soil. Magnesium (Mg), Iron (Fe), Copper (Cu), Manganese (Mn), and Zinc (Zn) must be expressed as Total and/or Soluble or Water Soluble depending on the source materials formulated in the fer- tilizer. Chelated elements are guaranteed separately when a chelating agent is denoted in the derivation statement below the guaranteed analysis. For additional informa- tion, see IFAS Publication SL -3, The Florida Fertilizer Label, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /SS170. URBAN TURF FERTILIZER RULE In 2007, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services adopted rule 5E- 1.003(2), labeling requirements for urban turf fertilizers. The complete rule, as first adopted in 2007, is presented in the Appendix. The rule limits the amount of nitrogen and phosphorus that the manufacturer may recommend for application on urban turf and lawns in Florida. It also directs the manu- facturer to recommend the use of BMPs for professional applicators and golf course or athletic field managers. While this rule only applies to the manufacturer's label for fertilizer, many local government ordinances, and future state requirements, may require that applicators abide by the recommendations on the label. In addition, weed and feed products are legally pesticides. For pesticide — fertilizer combination products the label recommendation carries the full force of state and federal law. TURF FERTILIZATION MANAGEMENT One of the first steps in developing a trfgrass fertiliza- tion management program involves a basic knowledge of the soils on which the turfgrasses are being grown. This knowledge can be acquired by observing and evaluating the soil's physical and chemical properties. Most Florida Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 Figure 17. Streaking on a lawn caused by poor application technique. soils are sands and therefore retain limited quantities of water and nutrients. Individuals with only limited train- ing in soils can discern whether a soil is mostly sand or predominately clay, and whether the soil contains flakes of free calcium carbonate or shell. These properties may significantly affect a turfgrass fertilization management program. Chemical properties such as soil pH, lime requirement, extractable levels of P, K, calcium (Ca), Mg, and selected micronutrients such as Mn, Cu, and Zn can be determined through soil testing. Florida soils are not analyzed for N because it is highly mobile in sandy soils. Since reliable correlations between turfgrass growth and soil test N have not been developed, turfgrass N fertilization is based on the requirements of the individual turfgrass being grown. Additional information on soil testing for turfgrasses can be found later in this chapter or in IFAS Publication SL 181, Soil Testing and Interpretation for Florida Turfgrasses, at htip:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS317. NITROGEN MANAGEMENT Fertilizer Sources Matching the fertilizer source and rate with the growth phase of the turfgrass is one of the keys to nutrient man- agement. For example, you may shift from 1 lb total N of 15 -0 -15 slow release to a 1/2 lb N of 5 -0 -20 for a fall fer- tilization as dormancy approaches. Leaching losses of nitrogen can be minimized by using controlled - release nitrogen sources, making frequent, low -rate applications of soluble fertilizers, or applying a combination of the two fertilizer materials. Low -rate applications are usually made using soluble fertilizers, whether applied as a liq- uid or granular product. Quick Release Sources One of the most common nitrogen fertilizers is urea (46 percent N), which is a water - soluble, synthetic organic 161 1 +8214 nitrogen fertilizer with quick N- release characteristics. Urea can be applied as either liquid or granules, and is subject to volatilization, or loss of nitrogen to the atmos- phere. If urea is applied to a turfgrass surface and not incorporated through proper irrigation, significant quan- tities of N can be lost through volatilization. Therefore, it is imperative that the proper quantity of water be applied following the application of urea fertilizer, unless rainfall is anticipated within 8 to 12 hours. Recall that one inch of applied water moves the water front 12 inches through a Florida sandy soil; therefore, do not apply excessive irri- gation. Application of 1/4 inch of water should be suffi- cient to solubilize most of the urea and move it into the turfgrass root zone. If urea is applied and followed by rainfall of an inch or greater within 8 to 12 hours after application, urea -N may move below the turfgrass root zone because of its non - ionic nature and be lost through leaching. Although urea does not leach as rapidly or uniformly as nitrate -N signif- icant loss of N can occur if excessive irrigation or rainfall occurs shortly after application. Once the urea has been exposed to soil or turfgrass thatch layer for a short time, it is converted by the enzyme urease to the ammonium -N form, which is more likely to be retained by the soil. This conversion of urea is usually complete within the first 24 hours after application. Thus, a heavy rainfall 2 to 3 days after an application of urea should not be as influential on N movement. Figure 18. Weigh fertilizer to get accurate results. Recently some new types of stabilized N fertilizer materi- als have been commercialized. These products contain urease inhibitors, which slow the conversion of urea to ammonium and reduce the volatilization loss of N. Therefore, these products can be left on the surface longer without significant loss of N through volatiliza- tion. This delay in urea conversion is usually 3 to 5 days, which means that the N remains in the urea form for a longer period of time and subjects the urea to leaching losses if heavy rainfall occurs during this period. In most FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries cases, these stabilized N materials also contain nitrifica- tion inhibitors, which slow the nitrification process as well. Recent research suggests that these stabilized N materials extend the N availability to turfgrass for 10 to 14 days over that of quick release products. Recent research has shown that some slow - release N materials may leach more urea than applications of quick release urea. This is thought to be due to the slow - release urea product leaching through the soil without being degraded by urease. Small quantities of urea (less than 10% of the total released N) have been detected in the leachate from some slow - release N sources during the first 7 to 10 days after application. However, by 14 days after application no urea was detected in the leachate regardless of the N source applied; only nitrate N remained after this period. Ammonium Nitrate (AN) and Ammonium Sulfate (AS) are two other soluble, quick- release N sources commonly used by professional lawn -care services. These two mate- rials are not as high in N as urea. AN (33.5 percent N) and AS (21 percent N), however, have a higher salt index and burn potential than urea on a per - pound -of -N basis. AS is also a very acidifying N source. For each pound of N applied as AS, 5.35 pounds of acidity are produced due to the ammonium -ion content. AS is often the pre- ferred N source on high pH soils due to its acidifying properties. Urea and AN are often formulated as liquid N sources for application in solution form through the irrigation sys- tem (fertigation) or direct application. Lawn -care profes- sionals often use solution fertilizers because of applica- tion uniformity and efficiency. Solution fertilizers do not leach more readily than similar granular fertilizers once they have reacted with the soil components. Slow Release Sources There are many sources of slow release nitrogen. Several of the definitions provided by AAPFCO are listed below. Slow or controlled release fertilizer is a fertilizer containing a plant nutrient in a form which delays its availability for plant uptake and use after application, or which extends its availability to the plant signifi- cantly longer than a reference "rapidly available nutri- ent fertilizer" such as ammonium nitrate or urea, ammonium phosphate, or potassium chloride. Such delay of initial availability or extended time of contin- ued availability may occur by a variety of mechanisms. These include controlled water solubility of the mate- rial (by semi - permeable coatings, occlusion, or by inherent water insolubility of polymers, natural nitrogenous organics, protein materials, or other chemical forms), by slow hydrolysis of water soluble low molecular weight compounds, or by other unknown means. ( AAPFCO, Official 1985) 1611 821 1 • Enhanced Efficiency is a term describing fertilizer prod- ucts with characteristics that allow increased plant uptake and reduce the potential of nutrient losses to the environment such as gaseous losses, leaching or runoff, as compared to an appropriate reference prod- uct. ( AAPFCO, Official 2008) • Ureaform Fertilizer Materials (sparingly soluble) are reaction products of urea and formaldehyde which contain at least thirty -five percent (35 %) nitrogen, largely in insoluble but slowly available form. The water insoluble content shall be at least sixty percent (60 %) of the total nitrogen. The water insoluble nitro- gen in these products shall have an activity index of not less than forty percent (40 %) when determined by the appropriate AOAC International method. (AAPF- CO, Official 1984) Urea - Formaldehyde Products (sparingly soluble) are reaction products of urea and formaldehyde which con- tain less than thirty-five percent (35 %) nitrogen, largely in insoluble but slowly available form. They shall have the percentage of total nitrogen as part of the product name; for example: 20% N Urea - Formaldehyde. The water insoluble nitrogen (AOAC Int. Method 945.01) shall be at least sixty percent (60 %) of the total nitro- gen. The activity index of the water insoluble nitrogen shall be either (1) not less than forty percent (40 %) by the AOAC International method for Urea - formaldehyde Products ( #955.05) or (2) not less than fifty percent (50 %) by the AOAC International alkaline perman- ganate method (#920.07) or eighty percent (80 %) by the neutral permanganate method(#920.06). (AAPF- CO, Official 1984) Isobutylidene Diurea(IBDU) is a condensation product of isobutyraldehyde and urea having a minimum total nitrogen content of thirty percent (30 %). It is a source of slowly available nitrogen by virtue of particle size, solubility decreasing with increase in particle size. Material conforming to the description of a "granular fertilizer" will have ninety percent (90 %) of its nitrogen content in the water insoluble form prior to grinding as tested by AOAC International Method 945.01 (15th Edition). ( AAPFCO, Official 1986) • Sulfur Coated Urea (SCU) is a coated slow release fertilizer consisting of urea particles coated with sulfur. The product is usually further coated with a sealant (2% to 3% of total weight) and a conditioner (2% to 3% of total weight). It typically contains about thirty percent (30 %) to forty percent (40 %) nitrogen and about ten percent (10 %) to thirty percent (30 %) sulfur. ( AAPFCO, Official 1980) • Urea - Formaldehyde Products (water soluble) are reac- tion products of urea and formaldehyde which contain at least thirty percent (30 %) nitrogen, largely in water Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 0 soluble form. Some slowly available nitrogen products are present. Stable aqueous solutions may be prepared from these materials. The reaction products shall con- tain a maximum of fifty -five percent (55 %) free urea, with the remainder of the urea being chemically com- bined as methylolureas, methylolurea ethers, and/or methylenediurea (MDU) and dimethylenetriurea (DMTU). (AAPFCO, Official 1984) Methylenediurea (MDU) is a water soluble condensation product resulting from the reaction of one molecule of formaldehyde with two molecules of urea, with the elimination of one molecule of water. It has a mini- mum total nitrogen content of forty-two percent (42 %) and is a source of slowly available nitrogen. (AAPFCO, Official 1984) Dimethylenetriurea (DMTU) is a water soluble conden- sation product resulting from the reaction of two mole- cules of formaldehyde with three molecules of urea, with the elimination of two molecules of water, and having a minimum total nitrogen content of forty -one percent (41 %). It is a source of slowly available nitro- gen. (AAPFCO, Official 1984) • Dicyandiamide (cyanoguanidine) is a water soluble organic compound of formula C2H4N4 which contains at least sixty -five percent (65 %) nitrogen. It is a source of slowly available nitrogen. It is a nitrification inhibitor.( AAPFCO, Official 2000) • Polymer Coated Urea (PCU) is a coated slow release fer- tilizer consisting of urea particles coated with a poly- mer (plastic) resin. It typically contains about forty percent (40 %) nitrogen. It is a source of slowly avail- able nitrogen. (AAPFCO, Official 1990) • Triazone is a water soluble compound of formula C5H11N502 [5- (N- methyl)- urea - 1,3,5- triazin -2 -one or 5- methyleneureido -2- oxohexahydro- s- triazine) which contains at least forty percent (40 %) total nitrogen. (AAPFCO, Official 1989) • Urea - Triazone Solution is a stable solution resulting from controlled reaction in aqueous medium of urea, formaldehyde, and ammonia which contains at least twenty-five percent (25 %) total nitrogen. The solution shall contain no more than forty percent (40 %) nor less than five percent (5 %) of total nitrogen from unreacted urea and not less than forty percent (40 %) from tria- zone. All other nitrogen shall be derived from water soluble, dissolved reaction products of the above reac- tants. It is a source of slowly available nitrogen. (AAPFCO, Official 1990) • Methylene Urea(s) (MU, polymethylene urea(s)) is a product obtained by the reaction of urea with formalde- hyde and contains oligomers of urea bonded together 161 i 821A Figure 19. Slow or quick release, th ; fertilizer is going to a water body. Keep fertilizer away from impervioL surfaces and water bodies. by methylene ( -CH2 -) linkages. It is chiefly composed of cold -water soluble fractions from methylenediurea (MDU) and dimethylenetriurea (DMTU), hot water soluble fractions from trimethylenetetraurea (TMTU) and tetramethylenepentaurea (TMPU) and hot -water insoluble fractions from longer chain oligomers. It is generally free of methylolureas and methyol ethers. It is a source of slowly available nitrogen. (AAPFCO, Official 2001) Urea is often formulated using a chemical reaction or coating to produce fertilizers with slow- release character- istics, such as ureaformaldehyde (UF or Nitroform), isobutylidene diurea (IBDU), and sulfur- or polymer -coat- ed urea. These fertilizers depend on microbial action, soil moisture, and/or a chemical reaction for the release of N for use by turfgrass. It is important to know when to use a given slow - release N source in order to obtain maxi- mum effectiveness from the material. This is due to envi- ronmental influences on the N- release mechanisms of slow- release N sources. The N- release mechanism for methylene urea —type products ( Ureaformaldehyde, UF, Nitroform, Nutralene, Methex, or CoRon) is microbial. Because temperature FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries influences the activity of the soil microbial population, these materials release N more slowly and are less effec- tive during the cool season. Particle size and rate of hydrolysis control the N release from IBDU; thus, this product should not be used during periods of heavy rainfall. However, it is one of the more effective materials in the cool season when precipitation levels decrease. N release from sulfur - coated urea (SCU) products is con- trolled by the coating thickness and the degree of imper- fection in the coating. SCU products typically induce a somewhat mottled appearance when used during the cool season, but are generally very effective during the high - rainfall, warm- season growth period. Because of the frag- ile nature of the sulfur coating on most SCU materials, they should not be applied using a drop -type spreader. Other products include polymer- coated, controlled - release fertilizers that use a polymer coating to encapsu- late nutrient granules. A polymer membrane is chemically bonded to the substrate resulting in a fertilizer with release governed largely by soil temperature, provided adequate moisture is present. The release mechanism is osmotic diffusion. Some systems consist of multiple layers of polymer, and may include other intermediate coatings. Product longevity may be controlled by coating thickness and blending ratios. Organic fertilizers are another source of nitrogen that is slowly made available through microbial degradation. In this case, the release rates depend on nature of the product and the prior treatment that it has received as well as temperature and moisture. Organic fertilizers, including biosolids from wastewater treatment plants, generally have low N:P2O5 ratios, which means that it is difficult or impossible to meet the nitrogen needs of the turf without exceeding the annual maximum allowable P205, unless other nitrogen sources are added. Some manufacturers do blend in other N sources to overcome this and provide a more balanced product that preserves the benefits of nutrient recycling. 1611 g21 In conclusion, a wide variety of slow - release materials is available. Under typical Florida conditions, slow - release N sources are likely to leach less than an equal amount of soluble N sources. However, leaching can still take place and some slow - release products may be subject to runoff of the nutrient - containing slow release particles. judicious use of professional judgment and a mixture of soluble and slow - release N sources are recommended. For more information on N sources for lawn fertilization, see IFAS Publication CIR -1262, Selected Fertilizers Used in Turfgrass Fertilization, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /SS318, or Publication SP141, Florida Lawn Handbook: An Environmental Approach to Care and Maintenance of Your Lawn, Second Edition. Nitrogen Rate and Frequency The rate of nutrient application, particularly N, depends on a number of factors: turfgrass species, turfgrass maintenance level goals, the location in the state where the turfgrass is being grown, time of year, and type of fertilizer source being used (soluble or slow release). Thus, a single rate of application cannot be recommended. The frequency of fertilization also depends on all the factors listed above for N rate. To limit the environmental impact of your fertilization program, it is recommended that no more than 0.5 pounds of water - soluble N per 1,000 square feet be applied in a normal application. Total N should be limited to 1 lb. /1000 ft2, per the Urban Turf Rule. Table 5 is from the Florida Fertilizer Rule, 5E- 1.003(2). In areas irrigated with reclaimed water, check with the reclaimed water supplier for estimates of the N applied per year in the reclaimed water, and recommendations to adjust the fertilization. A study for the Tampa Bay Estuary program (April 2008) estimated 0.6 to 5.3 lb N /1000ft2 was applied annually to lawns from several different wastewater treatment systems. For a detailed fertilization guide for Florida turfgrasses, see IFAS Publication SL -21, General Recommendations for Fertilization of Turfgrasses on Florida Soils, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH014. Table 5: Fertilization guidelines for established turfgrass lawns in three regions of Florida Nitrogen recommendations (lbs N / 1000 ft2 / year)' Species North Central South Bahia 2 -3 2 -4 2 -4 Bermuda 3 -5 4 -6 5 -7 Centipede 1 -2 2 -3 2 -3 St. Augustine 2 -4 2 -5 4 -6 Zoysia 3 -5 3 -6 4 -6 North Florida is north of Ocala. Central Florida is defined as south of Ocala to a line extending from Vero Beach to Tampa. South Florida includes the remaining southern portion of the state. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 Timing and Season The timing of fertilization is tied to the turfgrass species, maintenance level goal, season of the year, the location in the state where the turfgrass is being grown, and the fer- tilizer source being used. One of the most important prin- ciples of fertilization timing is avoiding fertilizer applica- tion to dormant or non - growing turfgrass. During dor- mancy, turfgrasses take up very small quantities of nutri- ents, and applied nutrients are more likely to leach or run off site in the next thunderstorm. Slow- release sources also influence the timing of fertilization, in that fertiliza- tion is required less frequently. Rainfall that exceeds the ability of the soil to retain mois- ture in the root zone may lead to runoff into surface waters or leaching through the soil to ground water. Do not apply fertilizer when the National Weather Service has issued a flood, tropical storm, or hurricane watch or warning, or if heavy rains' are likely. While only about 3 to 5% of Florida rain events exceed two inches,2 cau- tion should always be used to avoid runoff or leaching from saturated or compacted soils or in other high -risk situations. Additional information on storms and weather may be found at http/ /severe.worldweather.org/rain/, htip://www.wrh.noaa.gov/sew/MediaGuide/TermsOutlooks Watches Warnings.ndf, and htW: / /wwwdel2.state.fl.us/ water /nonpoint/docs /nonpoinUSW TreatmentRelortFinal 71907.pdf. Location in the State Based on seasonal differences, changes in soil types, and the predominant turfgrass species used on lawns, the state is divided into three regions: south, central, and north. The dividing line between north and central Florida is a straight east -west line from coast to coast through Ocala, and the dividing line between central Florida and south Florida is a line from coast to coast through Tampa and Vero Beach. For tables providing fertilization guidelines for the vari- ous turfgrass species by maintenance level in a given region of the state, see IFAS Publication SL -21, General Recommendations for Fertilization of Turfgrasses on Florida Soils, at htip: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LHO14. Soil Types and Turfgrass Species Most of the soils in Florida are classified as sands (96 per- cent), but within these soil types the chemical properties of the soils vary according to the region of the state in which they occur. Soils in south Florida tend to contain higher levels of free calcium carbonate (lime or shell) and have a higher pH than the rest of the state. Generally speaking, St. 1611 +621+ Augustinegrass grows better on high pH soils than do bahiagrass or centipedegrass; thus, one finds more lawns with St. Augustinegrass in south Florida. In fact, approxi- mately 85 percent of the residential and commercial lawns in Florida use one of the several cultivars of St. Augustinegrass. For the recommended soil pH for the various turfgrasses used in Florida, see IFAS Publication SL -181, Soil Testing and Interpretation for Florida Turfgrasses, at httl2: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /SS317. Due to the potential for ammonia volatilization, the sur- face application of ammonium -N and/or urea - containing fertilizers to these high pH soils without watering in (with 0.25 inch of irrigation) is not recommended. Central Florida soils contain less calcium carbonate and tend to be more acidic, with a pH of between 5.5 and 7.5. Except for areas where limestone outcroppings occur, most of the turfgrass species can be grown. Since bahia- grass and centipedegrass do not grow well on high pH soils, their establishment on soils with a pH of greater than 7.0 should be avoided. Soils in north Florida tend to contain higher quantities of clay and to be more acidic than soils in the rest of the state. Therefore, bahiagrass and centipedegrass are used more commonly for lawns in this part of the state. Zoysiagrass is not used extensively as a lawn grass in Florida, but when used it grows best under the same soil and fertilization conditions as St. Augustinegrass. Bermudagrasses require high maintenance and specialized equipment, but can be grown under a broad array of soil conditions. They are typically grown under intensively managed golf course conditions. Bermudagrass mainte- nance is not covered in this manual but is included in Best Management Practices for Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses, published by FDEP in 2007. Available: htip://www.del2.state.fl.us/water/non 12oint/docs /nonpoint/glfbmp07 pdf. Seashore paspalum produces a high quality turfgrass with minimal fertility requirements and a high tolerance for salinity. This is a relatively new grass in Florida and may be very sensitive to cultural practices. For up -to -date information, contact your cooperative extension service or see Seashore Paspalum for Florida Lawns at: httn: / /edis.ifas.afLedu/ EP059. PHOSPHORUS FERTILIZATION Because P has been implicated as a cause of increased algae growth in surface water impoundments, proper P fertilization management is imperative. Therefore, the goal in P management should be to apply the correct amount based on soil test recommendations. Since the first publication of this manual, the Urban Turf Fertilizer Rule, 5E- 1.003(2) has been enacted. In addition to the World Meteorological Organization definition of heavy rain: Rainfall greater than or equal to 50 mm (2 inches) in a 24 hour period z Data from "Evaluation of Current Stormwater Design Criteria within the State of Florida' (Harper and Baker, 2007, FDEP Contract S0108). • FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries nitrogen restrictions discussed earlier, there are changes to phosphorus application limits. The rule limits phos- phate application to no more than 0.25 lb. P205 /1000ft2 per application, not to exceed 0.5 lb. P205 /I000ft2 per year, without a soil test. A one -time only application of up to 1.0 lb. P205 /1000ft2 is permitted for establishment of new turf. This BMP manual strongly recommends soil testing before any initial P205 application and annually if applications are being made based on previous testing. Where subdivisions have been determined to have rela- tively similar soils, this may be reduced to testing 1/2 to 1/3 of the customers each year, rotating the testing so all are tested every 2 or 3 years. For more information, see IFAS Publication SL -181, Soil Testing and Interpretation for - Florida Turfgrasses, at httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS31/. Turfgrasses use significantly less P than N and/or K. Some Florida soils are high in native P, and turfgrasses grown on these soils require only limited P fertilization or none at all. Soil or tissue testing should always be used in these situations. Responses to P fertilization are most typically observed for rooting enhancement during estab- lishment and where soils have a P deficiency. The off -site transport of P is often associated with soil erosion from unvegetated and thin turfgrass areas. Research shows that runoff from a healthy turfgrass area is minimal, but thin and/or poor quality turfgrass has much a higher erosion and runoff potential. Because P can be a significant contributor to eutrophication, the proper management of P on turfgrass is just as important to the environment as N management. Another source of P is in reclaimed water. Turf irrigated with reclaimed water may receive an excess of P, compared to the maximum amounts recommended in the Urban Turf Rule. Do not add phosphorus to a site irrigated with re- claimed water without a soil test recommendation to do so. By using the following simple measures, you can properly manage the P fertilization of your turfgrasses: • P fertilization should always be based on reliable soil or tissue test recommendations. Many Florida soils are high in extractable P and may never require P fertiliza- tion for optimum turfgrass growth. Never exceed the amounts allowed by the Florida Fertilizer Label with- out a soil or tissue test recommendation. • Since unvegetated slopes or thin, low- quality turfgrass areas are more likely to produce runoff and off -site P contamination than healthy, well- maintained turfgrass areas, it is important to properly maintain your turfgrass. POTASSIUM FFRT1117ATION Of the three primary nutrients (N, P, and K), K is second only to N in utilization by turfgrasses. Large responses in turfgrass growth are not typically observed in response to 1611 g21 K fertilization, but K has been linked to reduced disease incidence, drought and cold tolerance, and enhanced root growth. The K fertilization rate is often tied to the N fer- tilization level, generally in a 3:1, 2:1, or 1:1 ratio. Recent research on Bermudagrasses suggests that opti- mum growth and tissue K levels can be attained at a 3:1 or 2:1 ratio. Ideally, turfgrass K fertilization should be based on soil test recommendations. Because of high mobility in sandy soils, K fertilization should be made as soon after soil testing as possible. However, K is often applied without a prior soil test, based on the requirements of the turfgrass. Fortunately, K is not considered a pollutant, but prudence in K fertilization is essential for economic and resource conservation reasons. Excessive K fertilization can con- tribute to high soil electroconductivity (EC) levels that may limit root growth and turfgrass tolerance to drought. SECONDARY NUTRIENT FERTILIZATION Ca, Mg, and S are referred to as secondary plant nutrients, not because they are of secondary importance, but because they are typically used in smaller quantities than the pri- mary nutrients. Of these three, the Extension Soil Testing Laboratory (ESTL) makes recommendations only for Mg. Mehlich -1 extractable Mg levels are typically low, and responses have been observed when the soil Mg status drops below 40 pounds per acre. For more information, see IFAS Publication SL -181, Soil Testing and Interpretation for Florida Turfgrasses,at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /SS317. Due to the presence of apatite and/or residuals from pre- vious P fertilizations, the Mehlich -1 extractant may dis- solve higher levels of Ca than are plant available; there- fore, no interpretation is made for the extracted soil Ca. Generally, plant - available Ca levels of Florida soils are high and no responses to applied Ca have been observed. You may increase Ca levels by applying irrigation water containing high levels of Ca. Consistent and reliable correlation data do not exist for soil test S levels and turfgrass growth; thus, the ESTL does not analyze or make recommendations for S. Fortunately, S is often an accompanying anion in N, K, Mg, and micronutrient sources and is not often deficient for turfgrass growth. MICRONUTRIENTS The ESTL analyzes and makes recommendations for Cu, Mn, and Zn. Of these three micronutrients, turfgrass responses have only been observed for Mn. In most Florida soils, extractable Cu and Zn levels are adequate for optimum turfgrass growth, except for Cu on organic soils under sod production. No analysis or recommendation is made for Fe in Florida soils due to limited information on the correlation between soil and tissue levels, and turfgrass growth response. A greening in response to the application of Fe and/or Mn will most Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 likely be obtained on turfgrasses grown on soils having a pH of 7.0 or greater or irrigated with alkaline water. The application of 2 ounces of iron sulfate per 1,000 square feet as a foliar spray usually produces the desired response. This response is generally short - lived, however, and reapplication may be required. For additional information, see IFAS Publication SL -181, Soil Testing and Interpretation for Florida Turfgrasses,at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS317. FERTILIZING GRASS FOR ESTABLISHMENT OR RECOVERY Establishment and recovery are special situations. The goal is to get the environmental benefits of a solid cover of turfgrass as quickly as possible and this may require fertil- ization above what established turf requires. N and K are used to promote a thick, vigorous stand of turf. Use P only when a soil test indicates there is a need. The BMP for retaining nutrients on the lawn is a dense stand of turf. The following measures can be used to fertilize grass for establishment or recovery: • New sod should not be fertilized with nitrogen for the first 30 days, until it has firmly rooted into soil. Plugs can be fertilized at the time of installation to encourage the runners to spread. A quick, complete ground cover is the ultimate goal. • Newly seeded areas should not receive nitrogen fertil- ization until a cover has been established and roots have pegged down, usually about 30 days. • For new turf establishment only, soil test results may indicate a one time application of up to 1 lb. P205 /1000ft2 is needed to encourage root growth. This should not be applied until 30 days after planting. • Newly established turf often requires a different fertility schedule to grow and develop a dense stand. Both rates and timing may be different. • Weakened turf may be stimulated back to health by N fertilization. • N rates should be adjusted to meet the needs of the turf. • Soluble fertilizer may be necessary to provide a rapid response on weakened turf. • Lower total rates of soluble fertilizer can produce desired turf improvement when applied frequently. • Fe and Mn can be used to supplement lower rates of soluble fertilizer. Micronutrients provide an initial color response, while soluble N thickens the turf and improves root development. 1611 8.21 1 • Slow- release fertilizer may be an advantage when nutri- ents cannot be applied as frequently. There is no significant difference between liquid or dry applications. Turfgrasses take up N in the form of nitrate and ammonium, and all dry fertilizers have to be dissolved by water before they benefit the turf. In terms of BMPs for environmental protection, the proper application of fertil- izer is more important than the type of product. UNTREATED BUFFERS NEAR BODIES OF WATER Except when adjacent to a protective seawall, always leave a "Ring of Responsibility" around or along the shoreline of canals, lakes, or waterways, so that you do not get fertilizer into a body of water. When fertilizing, it is important to ensure that fertilizers and other lawn chemicals do not come into direct contact with the water or with any structure bordering the water or a storm drain such as a sidewalk, brick border, driveway, or street. If any materials do get onto these impervious surfaces, sweep them into the vegetated landscape or otherwise clean them up. Ficu;m 20 . Leave a "Ring of Respon ibility" to prevent pollution. Also note the swale and berm. This untreated buffer protects the water quality of the waterway by ensuring no prills or droplets enter the water. When applying liquid fertilizers, the Ring of Responsibility should be at least 3 feet from the edge of the water. The same is true for applying granular fertilizers with a broadcast fertilizer spreader that features a deflector shield. A deflector shield only allows fertilizer to be dis- tributed on one side. This half - circle application (instead of the typical full - circle application of most fertilizer spreaders) allows for a more accurate fertilizer application. If you are broadcasting fertilizer without a deflector shield, the Ring of Responsibility should extend at least 10 feet from the edge of the water, since the prills may be thrown up to 7 feet. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries Figure 21. Spreaders with deflector shields. The "Ring of Responsibility," is a preventative buffer, which protects against accidental direct contamination when fertilizing, and is the responsibility of the applica- tor. Some communities may require larger treatment buffers, which are intended to absorb pollutants from stormwater flowing across the land. Land development codes in these communities require developers and builders to leave native vegetation or other riparian buffers or filter strips to protect the water from the broad- er effects of upland development. These areas usually do not require fertilization, or need it only during an initial establishment period. The applicator should understand and respect the nature of these areas. IMPERVIOUS SURFACES Most urban landscapes are surrounded by impervious surfaces such as sidewalks, driveway and streets. An Figure 22. Fertilizer on sidewalks runs off into storm drains. Sweep it into the grass. 1611 B21 impervious surface that drains to a water body or the stormwater system is called a Directly Connected Impervious Area (DCIA). Fertilizer inadvertently applied on these surfaces has ready access to our water resources through storm drains. This is why it is so important to keep fertilizer off impervious surfaces and to remove any that is spilled on them and deposit it back into the landscape. If using a broadcast spreader, deflector shields should always be used when applying fertilizer adjacent to these surfaces. FERTIGATION Fertigation is the application of liquid fertilizer thorough irrigation systems. While fertigation is not widely practiced in residential or commercial lawn and landscape care, some systems are available. For effective nutrient management to be achieved, a fertigation system should be designed, installed, and maintained by a qualified irrigation specialist. Proper and legal backflow prevention devices must be used so that fertilizer does not back - siphon into the water supply. Apply minimum quantities of fertilizer. Due to the hazards of direct deposition on streets, driveways, and sidewalks; and potential over - application by misadjusted irrigation systems; FDEP does not recommend use of fertigation for residential use unless the entire system is under an operation and maintenance contract with a reputable contractor who is fully responsible for any pollution due to improper operation of the fertigation equipment or the associated irrigation system. FERTILIZING LANDSCAPE PLANTS FER'il I ise Clearly, plants grow in the wild without any help from humans. However, our modern urban landscape is not the same as the one where our native plants evolved. Subdivisions filled with subsoils, forests cut down, and drainage modifications all combine to make an urban landscape a very different environment. In addition, we have learned that some plants respond to fertilizers in ways that we may consider desirable, such as faster growth or improved appearance. The value of these out- comes is subjective. For example, faster growth may be desired in one circumstance but may lead to unwanted pruning in another. Improved appearance is important to some and unimportant to others. Thus, the reason for fertilizing plants should be to supply nutrients to achieve a clearly defined objective, such as the following: Increasing shoot growth, root growth, flowering, or fruiting; • Establishing newly planted trees and shrubs; Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 0 • Enhancing foliage color and plant appearance; • Correcting or preventing nutrient deficiencies. RECOMMENDATIONS AND BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR FERTILIZING LANDSCAPE PLANTS The recommendations in this section do not pertain to products containing insecticides, herbicides, or other pesticides. By law, such products are considered pesticides. For -hire applicators must be licensed and the label instructions must be followed (see Chapter 6 on pest control for more information). Important recommendations and principles for fertilizing landscape plants are as follows: • Prior to fertilizing, a soil and/or foliar nutrient analysis should be used to determine whether any need exists for phosphorus fertilizer. • Before fertilizing, pests may need to be controlled and/or soil modified to improve nutrient uptake or plant responses to fertilizer. • Plants with pests or other problems that could increase to damaging levels with fertilization should be fertilized only in conjunction with a treatment program. Without a treatment program, fertilizer may increase the severity of the damage. • Soil pH should be considered when selecting a fertilizer. • The amount of fertilizer applied should be the minimal amount needed to achieve the defined objective. • Read and follow all label instructions and safety precautions. 1611 B 21d WHEN TO FERTILIZE Fertilization MAY be justified in the following situations: • If trees and shrubs are newly planted (thus justifying fertilization until established); • If homeowners or clients desire more or faster growth; • If landscape beds have been leached of nutrients by flooding or over-irrigation; • If trees and shrubs are NOT near fertilized turfgrass; • If established plants are lacking in foliage color or density for the homeowners' or clients' purposes; • If plants exhibiting nutrient deficiencies are in situations where they cannot be replaced with better - adapted species. Fertilization may NOT be required in the following situations: • If homeowners or clients are pleased with the appear- ance of their landscape plants; • If plants are established; • If plants are flowering or fruiting, since exposure to high nitrogen at this stage may impede development; • For tees, unless nutrient deficiencies exist. If landscape plants exhibit nutrient deficiency symptoms, they may not be suited to the site due to soil pH, soil drainage, soil salts, limited soil volume, irrigation water quality, or mineral content of the soil. Consider replacing such plants with others adapted to the site's conditions. • The types and rate of fertilizer should be specified, HOW MUCH TO FERTILIZE aswell as the timing, method, and location of applica- tion. Slow- release fertilizers are often preferred. High General Recommendations levels of nitrogen fertilizer may reduce flowering in When it has been determined that fertilization is neces- some plants. sary, most established landscape plants should be fertil- ized at rates within the ranges shown in Table 6. Table & Landscape plant nitrogen fertilization rates. Level of Maintenance Amount of Nitrogen Fertilizer pounds N /1000 ft2 /year per 3' diameter plant /yr* Oz. ** Tablespoons ** Basic 0 -2 0 -2 0 -4 Moderate 2-4 2 -4 4 -9 High 4 -6 4 -6 9 -13 * Typical, assumes 15% N 50% slow release, Approx 7 sq. ft. root zone. `* 1 lb. N rate is about 1.5 oz. or 3 Tablespoons per 10 ft2 per application. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries The P content of the fertilizer should be zero unless a soil or tissue test indicates a need for additional phosphorus. Historically, the ratio of N to K for landscape plants has been in the range of 1:1 to 2:1. Since magnesium (Mg) deficiency occurs in certain landscape plants in many parts of the state, up to 2.5 pounds Mg/1000 ft2 /year may be applied to address this problem. Micronutrients can be applied at specified rates and timing to achieve fertiliza- tion objectives. In general, slow release fertilizers are horticulturally and environmentally preferable for landscape plantings. Water - soluble fertilizers should be applied at a rate of no more than 0.5 pounds N /1000 ft2 per application. The maximum application rates for controlled - release fertilizers depend on the percent that is water soluble and the release rates of the product. Never broadcast fertilizers on newly bedded plants. Apply the appropriate amounts to the individual plant within the area under the plant canopy, which usually indicates the major root area. For additional information on landscape plants grown in soil, see IFAS Publication SL -141, IFAS Standardized Fertilization Recommendations for Environmental Horticulture Crops, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /CNO11. Palms Palms have different nutritional requirements than most other landscape plants. In Florida's rock, muck, and sandy soils, palms may be especially prone to K, Mg, Mn, Fe, and B deficiencies. If you suspect deficiencies in a palm tree, take a leaf to your Cooperative Extension Service agent for assistance. In general, fertilizers or sup- plements should be applied to supply N, P, K, and Mg at about an 8:2:12:4 ratio. The N, K and Mg should be in a slow - release form. In addition, 1 to 2 percent Fe and Mn, and trace amounts of Zn, Cu, and B, may be needed. For more information on palms and palm deficiencies, see Fertilization of Field -grown and Landscape Palms in Florida, httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP261 or Nutrient Deficiencies of Landscape and Field -grown Palms in Florida, http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP273. WHERE AND HOW TO FERTILIZE Fertilizer should be broadcast uniformly over the desired areas of the landscape. Root location, fertiliza- tion objectives, and plant species should be considered. Areas where tree or shrub fertilization zones overlap with lawn fertilization zones should receive one, not two, fertilizations. Start with the lowest recom- mended rate and slowly increase to amount up to the maximum recommendation only if the plant requires it. Foliar applications, injections, or implants should only be used when the soil application of fertilizer is imprac- tical or ineffective in achieving fertilization objectives. When applying foliar fertilizer, the fertilizer solution should be thoroug ycover 1 B ZI foliage at the proper stage of growth to achieve objectives. Make sure your fertilizer spreader is properly calibrated and on the correct setting to deliver the desired amount of fertilizer for the area being treated. This is discussed in more detail in the section on calibrating pesticide spreaders in the next chapter and in the publication below. For more information, see the following: IFAS Publication How to Calibrate Your Fertilizer Spreader, IFAS Publication ENH 62, 2003. Available at: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH024. IFAS Publication Fertilization Recommendations for Landscape Plants, G.W. Knox, T. Broschat, and R.J. Black, IFAS Publication ENH 858, 2002. httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/EPI 14. FERTILIZER STORAGE AND LOADING If not handled properly, fertilizers can alter or degrade the environment. Nutrients such as N and P in fertilizers can lead to the excessive growth of algae and noxious plants in estuaries, lakes, and streams. Mishandling of fertilizers containing nitrates may result in excessively high levels of nitrate in drinking -water supplies (greater than 10 parts per million [ppm]of NO3 -N). This has been linked to health problems such as blue baby syndrome (methemoglobinemia) in infants. Because the state's aquifers and surface waters are exten- sively interconnected, Florida requires all potentially potable ground water to meet drinking -water standards. For nitrate, federal and state regulations set the drink- ing -water standard at 10 ppm NO3 -N. Shallow wells (less than 50 feet in depth) and old wells with faulty casings are at the highest risk for nitrate contamination. STORAGE Always store nitrate -based fertilizers separately from solvents, fuels, and pesticides, since nitrate fertilizers are oxidants and can accelerate a fire. Ideally, fertilizer should be stored in a concrete building with a metal or other flame - resistant roof. Take care when storing fertilizer to prevent the contamination of nearby ground water and surface water. Always store fertilizer in an area that is protected from rainfall. Storing dry bulk materials on a concrete or asphalt pad may be acceptable if the pad is adequate- ly protected from rainfall and from water flowing across the pad. The secondary containment of stationary liquid fertilizer tanks is addressed in Florida Department of Environmental Protection Rules 62 -761 and 62 -762, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). Even where not required, the use of secondary containment is sound practice. Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 LOADING Load fertilizer into application equipment away from wells or surface waterbodies. A concrete or asphalt pad with rainfall protection is ideal, as it permits the easy recovery of spilled material. If this is not feasible, loading at random locations in the field can prevent a buildup of nutrients in one location. Fertilizers contaminated with pesticides may damage plants or generate hazardous wastes. Clean up spilled fertilizer materials immediately. Collected material may be applied as a fertilizer. At fixed sites, the area can be cleaned by sweeping or vacuuming (or with a shovel or loader, if a large spill), or by wash- ing down the loading area to a containment basin specif- ically designed to permit the recovery and reuse of the wash water. Wash water generated should be collected and applied to the target crop. Discharging this wash water to waterbodies, wetlands, storm drains, or septic systems is illegal. For more information, see Best Management Practices for Agrichemical Handling and Farm Equipment Maintenance, published by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, May 1998. SOIL TESTING Although it may not be an essential practice for the everyday maintenance of a healthy landscape, testing to determine the soil's chemical properties before installing turfgrass or landscape plants is a recommended practice. Through soil testing, the initial soil pH and P level can be determined. Soil pH is important in determining which turfgrass is most adapted to initial soil conditions (bahiagrass and centipedegrass are not well adapted to soil with a pH greater than 7.0). Since it is not easy to reduce the pH of soil on a long -term basis, you should use St. Augustinegrass or bermudagrass on high -pH soils. After initial soil testing, additional testing may only be required when fertility problems arise and the responses to fertilization are poor. Soil testing is an applied science and can be used as one of the tools in the maintenance of healthy turfgrass and landscapes. For the effective management of nutrients, soil testing should be used in conjunction with tissue testing. Soil test recommendations are based on a corre- lation between the level of a given nutrient extracted from the soil and the anticipated plant response. The amount of nutrients extracted by a particular extractant is only an index relative to crop response. It is not a direct measure of actual plant nutrient availability. The levels of extracted P, K, and Mg are divided into five categories: very low, low, medium, high, and very high. 1611 821,E Figure 23. Taking a soil sample. For more information, see your county Cooperative Extension Service agent or IFAS Publication SL -181, Soil Testing and Interpretation for Florida Turfgrasses, at httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS317. Place the plugs that have been collected into a FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries Fi�iji c � Soil Core. plastic container, mix them thoroughly, and send approximately 1 pint of the [nixed sample to the Extension Service Testing Laboratory (ESTL) for chemi- cal analysis. Several commercial laboratories also offer the same service in Florida. You should use the same laboratory on a continued basis to establish a historical log of your soil properties. Laboratories across the state do not use the same extractant, so if you change labs often you may be comparing results obtained by differ- ent methods. SOIL TEST INTERPRETATION A soil analysis supplies a wealth of information on the nutritional status of a soil and can detect potential problems that limit plant growth. A routine soil analy- sis supplies information on soil pH and the extractable P, K, Ca, and Mg status of the soil. The ESTL currently uses Mehlich -1 as an extractant on all the acidic mineral soils in the state and AB -DTPA (Ammonium Bicarbonate -DTPA) extractant on soils with pH above 7.3 (calcareous soils). The IFAS Everglades Extension Soils Laboratory currently uses acetic acid to extract nutrients from all organic soils. Therefore, the extractants are calibrated to different soil types. These extraction procedures must be ascertained when approaching any laboratory for a soil analysis. The routine analysis includes a lime requirement determination if the soil pH is below 6.0. N is not determined, because in most soils it is highly mobile and its soil status varies greatly with rainfall and irrigation events. Table 7 presents interpretation ranges for soil test levels of P, K, Mg, Mn, Zn, and Cu. For detailed expla- nations of soil tests and interpretation, see IFAS Publication SL -181, Soil Testing and Interpretation for Florida Turfgrasses,at httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu /SS317. Note that there is no interpretation made for soil test Ca or Fe. No interpretation is made for Mehlich -1 extractable Ca levels because the extractant dissolves Ca compounds, which may not be readily plant avail- able. Thus, the amount of plant - available Ca can be erroneously interpreted. In most cases, Ca levels are 1611 821 ; adequate for turfgrass growth because Florida soils are inherently high in Ca, have a history of Ca fertilization, or receive Ca regularly through irrigation with high -Ca water. The soil test level for Mehlich -1 extractable Ca is used only to determine the type of limestone needed when lime is recommended. For most soils and turf - grasses, liming to ensure an adequate soil pH ensures more - than - adequate Ca. Research has shown no turf- grass response to added Ca, from either liming materi- als or gypsum, when the Mehlich -1 extractable Ca level is above 250 ppm. The ESTL does not analyze for extractable Fe because definitive interpretation data are lacking. Significant correlation of soil test Fe levels with plant tissue levels is also lacking. The testing procedures tend to produce highly variable results. Most soils, except those having a pH greater than 7.0, generally contain adequate levels of Fe for optimum growth. Turfgrasses grown on soils with pH greater than 6.5 exhibit a greening response to Fe applied as a foliar spray Unfortunately, reapplication may be required on a frequent basis to sustain the desired color. For more information on fertilizing landscape plants, see IFAS publication SL -141, Standardized Fertilization Recommendations for Environmental Horticulture Crops, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /CNOI I. TISSUE TESTING Because of the mobility of most essential nutrients for landscape plant and turfgrass growth in Florida soils, one of the best indicators of appropriate fertilization and plant health is tissue analysis. Since turfgrass is a perennial crop, historical logs of tissue composition can be used to fine -tune a turfgrass fertilization program for optimum plant growth and minimum environmental impact. Leaf analysis, along with appearance and soil analysis, can be used to diagnose the problems and the effectiveness of a fertilization program, especially for micronutrient deficiencies. Soil analysis for some nutri- ents, because it is a snapshot of what is present at the time of sampling, does not always indicate their avail- ability to plants. Potential nutrient deficiencies can be detected with leaf analysis before visual symptoms Table 7: Suggested ranges for Mehlich-1 extractable soil nutrient levels for Florida turfgrasses. Macronutrients' Micronutrients" P K Mg I Mn Zn Cu Parts per million (ppm) 16-30 36-60 20-30 1 3 -9 0.5-3 0.1 -0.5 Medium ranges of Mehlich -1 extractable P, K, and Mg when in 25 percent of the cases a response to applied fertilization would be expected. Soils testing below these levels of micronutrients are expected to respond to applied micronutrients. The interpretation of soil test micronutrient levels is based on soil pH. The smaller number is For soils with a pH of less than 6.0, and the larger number is for soils with a pH of 7.0 or greater. Mehlich -1 extractable micronutrient levels are only determined when requested and require an additional charge. Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 appear. Leaf analysis may provide information on induced deficiencies and inferences on plant uptake. TISSUE SAMPIING7 MFTHODOLOGY Clippings can be collected during regular mowing practices for tissue analysis. It is essential that the clippings are free of sand and fertilizer contamination. Do not harvest clippings immediately after fertilization, top- dressing, or any other cultural practice that results in significant mower pickup. Place approximately a handful of well -mixed clippings in a paper bag. Do not place the clippings in a plastic bag because the clip- pings may begin fermenting prior to drying. If facilities exist at your location, dry the collected clip- pings at approximately 70 °C (158 °F) for 24 hours and then mail them to your favorite analytical laboratory for analysis. If you do not have dry facilities, ship them, preferably overnight, to the analytical laboratory. Even if placed in a paper bag, if the sample is allowed to sit for more than a couple of days the tissue will begin to ferment and the value of the sample for analytical pur- poses will be lost. SAMPLE CONTAMINATION Turfgrass clippings that have been recently sprayed with micronutrients for fungicidal or nutritional purposes should not be used for micronutrient analysis. Washing recently unsprayed clippings to remove soil and dust particles is recommended prior to sending the samples to the lab for analysis. If you wash one collection of clippings and not all, the nutritional analyses may not be comparable because the concentration of some nutri- ents in tissue, such as K, is highly mobile and a portion of the K may be removed during washing. Unwashed samples may appear to have a much higher concentra- tion than the washed samples, and you may suspect a deficiency in the washed samples when in fact an ade- quate supply of K exists. INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS Sufficiency levels of essential nutrients in the various turfgrass species do not vary much among the various 161.1 B211 species, except for N. The sufficiency tissue N concen- tration can vary from a low of 1.5 percent for cen- tipedegrass or bahiagrass to a high of 3.5 percent in cool- season, overseeded ryegrass. Table 8 lists the suffi- ciency ranges for tissue N concentration for the various turfgrasses used in lawns. In most cases, tissue N con- centrations below the minimum of the range would be deficient and above the range would be excessive. The concentration of other macro and micronutrients in the tissue does not vary greatly among the various species of turfgrasses. The sufficiency ranges in Table 9 are applicable to most of Florida's turfgrass species. All of these values are on a dry weight basis. These values represent the range over which a particu- lar nutrient might vary across the various species of turfgrasses. They represent sufficiency ranges, which suggests that levels below the range may indicate a defi- ciency or above the range may represent excessive fer- tilization or toxicity. The sufficiency ranges in the tables show the most current interpretation for nutrient concentrations in turfgrass tissue. If analytical test results are in the deficiency range or below the sufficiency range, an increase in fertilization for that nutrient is recom- mended. Alternatively, if test results fall above the sufficiency range, the fertilization program should be adjusted downward. If a change in fertilization is indicated, the adjustment should be reasonable. The intent is to find the correct nutrient management level that maintains turfgrass tissue nutrient concentration within the optimum range, but does not lead to over - fertilization and possible adverse environmental and economic results. SUMMARY Fertilization is one of the key management practices in establishing and maintaining healthy, actively growing turfgrass. The desires of the individual lawn owner or turfgrass manager often dictate the level of fertility management. Due to environmental concerns, some Table 8: Sufficiency ranges of tissue N concentration for selected lawn turfgrasses. Table 9: Sufficiency concentration ranges for selected macro and micronutrients in turfgrass tissue P St. Augustine Zoysia Bermuda Centipede Bahia Rye N ( %) 1 2.0-3.0 2.0-3.0 2.5-3.5 1.5-2.5 1.5 - 2.5 3.5-5.5 Table 9: Sufficiency concentration ranges for selected macro and micronutrients in turfgrass tissue P K I Ca Mg Fe Cu Mn Zn B Percent l %) PPM 0.15 -0.50 1 1.00 -3.00 1 0.5 -1.0 0.20 -0.50 50 -250 5 -30 25 -100 20 -250 5 -20 FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries think that less fertilization is always best, but research shows that fewer nutrients are lost from the surface or leached through a healthy, well- maintained turfgrass than an unhealthy, sparsely established turfgrass. The importance of proper irrigation during fertilization cannot be overemphasized. Excessive irrigation after fertilization may cause leaching or runoff, and a lack of 1611 821 irrigation may result in volatilization and inefficient use of fertilizer. Due to the prevalence of streets, driveways, and other impervious areas, it is very important to ensure no fertil- izers are left where they can run off into stormwater sys- tems or water bodies. Deflector shields should always be used near boundaries with water or impervious areas. BMPS FOR TLIRFr-PASS ANT) t ".t IDSC7ADr- FERTILIZATION Do not fertilize if a heavy rainfall is expected, especially tropical or frontal weather systems. Avoid both leaching and surface runoff. Match the product to the situation. Remember that all fertilizers, even slow release products, contain nutrients and can cause pollution if allowed to escape the root zone. Correct other deficiencies first. Be aware of the effects soil pH, shade, overwatering, or other stresses may have on the plants. Be sure fertilizer is the correct response to the problem. Remember that rate and timing of N fertilization depends on the turfgrass species, season of the year, level of maintenance desired, source of N applied, and location in the state. Limit water - soluble (quick release) Nitrogen applications to 0.5 lb. /1000 ft2. This includes the water soluble part of slow - release blends. Limit total N to 1 lb. /1000ft2 per the Urban Turf Rule. P application should be limited to soils that require additional P based on soil or tissue testing. Limit N and P fertilization at establishment to one time 30 days after seeding /sodding. Do not add N or P before installa- tion, but amend the soil as needed with lime or organic matter. Always leave a Ring of Responsibility near water bodies or impervious surfaces. Always use deflector shields on broadcast or rotary spreaders when applying fertilizer near water or sidewalks, driveways and streets. Sweep any fertilizer left on impervious areas back into the vegetated area. Become proficient in reading and understanding the fertilizer label. Know the exact square footage of the area where fertilizer is being applied and make sure the spreader /application equip- ment is properly calibrated and set to deliver the correct amount of fertilizer to that area. Become knowledgeable in soil sampling procedures and soil test interpretation. When fertilizing (other than when watering restrictions apply), irrigate with 114 inch of water following fertilization to avoid the loss of nitrogen and increase uptake efficiency. If water restrictions apply, you may irrigate as you are allowed, but more than 1/2 inch may cause some nitrogen to be leached past the root zone. Use Fe and /or Mn instead of N to enhance turfgrass color on soils having a pH greater than 7.0, especially during times of enhanced rainfall Maintain a healthy, actively growing turfgrass to minimize the environmental impact of fertilizer and pesticide application, erosion, and stormwater runoff. There is no significant difference between liquid or dry applications of similar products. In terms of BMPs for environmental protection, the proper application of fertilizer is more important than the type of product. Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 LEGAL ISSUES DEFINITIONS A pest is anything that competes with humans, domestic animals, or desirable plants for food or water; injures humans, animals, desirable plants, structures, or posses- sions; spreads disease to humans, domestic animals, wildlife, or desirable plants; or annoys humans or domestic animals. Types of pests include the following: • Arthropods such as insects and arachnids; • Microbial organisms such as bacteria, fungi, viruses, and Mycoplasma; • Weeds, which are plants growing in an area where they are not wanted; • Nematodes; • Mollusks such as snails and slugs; and • Vertebrate pests. Under Florida law (Chapter 482 Florida Statutes), integrated pest management (IPM) is defined as the following: ... the selection, integration, and implementation Of multiple pest control techniques based on pre- dictable economic, ecological, and sociological con- sequences, making maximum use of naturally occurring pest controls, such as weather, disease agents, and parasitoids, using various biological, physical, chemical, and habitat modification meth- ods of control, and using artificial controls only as required to keep particular pests from surpassing intolerable population levels predetermined from an accurate assessment of the pest damage potential and the ecological, sociological, and economic cost of other control measures. LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR PESTICIDE USE IN LAWN AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE Not only should pesticides be used carefully, existing laws regarding pesticide applications and licensing requirements for conducting a business should also be complied with. There are three categories of licenses, (local occupational license, limited certification for com- mercial landscape maintenance license, or a pest control business license and a certified operators certificate) that could apply to persons who practice landscape maintenance as a business. 1611 821 4 In most cases, if a person or company is providing services that only include mowing, edging, landscaping, and fertilizing, only a county or municipal occupational license is needed. (This does not apply to "weed and feed" or "insect control" applications.) • If a person or company also applies any herbicide (even a granular product of a pesticide coated onto fertilizer), fun - gicide, or insecticide, to residential lawns or plant beds, a license for pesticide application is required from the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services ( FDACS) Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control. Failure to obtain a license can result in fines up to $5,000. This includes the application of "weed and feed" or "insect control" pesticide/fertilizer mixtures to lawns. • If the only pesticides applied by a person or business are herbicides and "caution " - labeled insecticides applied to plant beds or along the edges of pavement, then a limited certification for commercial landscape maintenance license is needed from the Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control. For this category, each applicator must have a license. This does NOT allow the application of pesti- cides to turf or the use of insecticides labeled "Warning" or "Danger," or the application of "weed and feed" or "insect control" pesticide/fertilizer mixtures to lawns. • If any application of any pesticide is made to a lawn as part of a service provided by a person or business, then a pest control business license and a certified operators certificate are needed from the Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control. This includes the application of "weed and feed" or "insect control' pesticide/fertilizer mixtures to lawns. • Government employees and private business employees who are applicators also need a pesticide license to make any applications to lawns or ornamental plants. This includes the application of "weed and feed" or "insect control" pesticide/fertilizer mixtures to lawns. • Information on how to obtain these licenses can be obtained from FDACS Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control at (850) 921 -4177 or at http ://www.flaes.ore/ aes -en t/. • Applications of restricted use pesticides made to parks, cemeteries, and golf courses require a license obtained through FDACS Bureau of Compliance Monitoring at (850) 488 -3314 or at http://www.flaes. or /�complimonitoring/index.html. PESTICIDE RECORD KFFPING Proper records of all pesticide applications should be kept according to state or federal requirements. These records Mi FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries help to establish proof of proper use, facilitate the com- parison of results of different applications, or find the cause of an error. Records that provide this information may include the following: • The date and time of application; • Name of applicator; • Person directing or authorizing the application; • Weather conditions at the time of application; • Target pest; • Pesticide used (trade name, active ingredient, amount of formulation, amount of water); • Adjuvant/surfactant and amount applied, if used; • The area treated (acres or square feet) and location; • Total amount of pesticide used; • Application equipment; • Additional remarks, such as the severity of the infesta- tion or life stage of the pest; and • Follow -up to check the effectiveness of the application. P,ESTRICTED USE PESTICIDES Certain pesticides are classified as restricted use pesti- cides (RUPs). Very few pesticides in this category are rou- tinely used in turf maintenance, but if you happen to use one of them, certain record - keeping requirements apply. The Florida pesticide law requires certified applicators to keep records of all restricted use pesticides. To meet your legal responsibility and to document your treatment methods, you need to maintain accurate pesticide records. Florida regulations require that information on RUPs be recorded within 2 working days of the application and 1611 621 maintained for 2 years from the application date. Federal worker protection standards (WPSs) only apply to pesti- cide applications made by producers of agricultural prod- ucts and do not affect Green Industry pesticide applicators. NOTE: Florida law requires RUP record keeping. See FDACS Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control regula- tions for specifics on the regulation. In addition, record keeping is required to comply with the federal Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA, Title III), which contains emergency planning and community right -to -know legislation. INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT The philosophy of IPM was developed in the 1950s because of concerns over increased pesticide use, environmental contamination, and the development of pesticide resistance. The objectives of IPM include reducing pest management expenses, conserving energy, and reducing the risk of exposure to people, animals, and the environment. Its main goal, however, is to reduce pesticide use by using a combination of tactics to control pests, including cultural, biological, genetic, and chemical controls. The cultural component consists of the proper selection, establishment, and maintenance (such as mowing/prun- ing, fertilization, and irrigation) of turf and landscape plants. Keeping lawns and landscapes healthy reduces their susceptibility to diseases, nematodes, and insects, thereby reducing the need for chemical treatment. In the service industry, unfortunately, many of the cultural components of IPM are not under the control of the pesticide application professional. It is essential that customers be made aware of their responsibility for cultural factors, whether in doing their own work or in selecting qualified professionals for third -party activities such as irrigation and mowing. The biological component involves the release and/or conservation of natural enemies (such as parasites, predators, and pathogens) and other beneficial organ- isms (such as pollinators). Natural enemies (including Florida law requires that you record the following items to comply with the restricted use pesticide record - keeping requirement. • Brand or product name. } U.S. Environmental Protection Agency registration number. Total amount applied. Location of application site. Size of area treated. Crop /variety /target site. • Month /day /year /time of application. • Name and license number of applicator (if applicator is not licensed, record his or her name and supervisor's name and license number). a Method of application. Name of person authorizing the application, if the licensed applicator does not own or lease the property. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 ladybird beetles, green lacewings, and mantids) may be purchased and released near pest infestations. However, the landscape can also be modified to attract natural ene- mies, provide habitat for them, and protect them from pesticide applications. For example, flowering plants may provide parasitoids with nectar, or sucking insects (aphids, mealybugs, or soft scales) may provide a honey- dew source when growing on less - valuable plants. The genetic component relies on the breeding or genetic engineering of turfgrasses and landscape plants that are resistant to key pests. Such resistance could increase a plant's tolerance to damage and weaken or kill the pests. Pests may also develop more slowly on partially resistant plants, thereby increasing their susceptibility to natural enemies or "softer" pesticides. Selecting resistant cultivars or plant species when designing a landscape is a very important part of IPM. Although turfgrass and landscape managers often work with established plant material, they can still recommend changes. Every opportunity should be taken to educate builders, developers, landscape archi- tects, sod producers, and others on which plants are best suited to their areas. Chemical controls include a wide assortment of conven- tional, broad - spectrum pesticides and more selective, newer chemicals, such as microbial insecticides and insect growth regulators. IPM is not antipesticide, but it does promote the use of the least -toxic and most selective alternatives when chemicals are necessary. Pesticides are only one weapon against pests and should be used responsibly and in combination with other, less -toxic control tactics. To determine which pesticides are most appropriate for use, and when and how to use them, consult the appro- priate pesticide selection guides produced by IFAS. Whenever practical, limit treatment to infected areas. Spot spraying lessens pesticide use, saving the application service money and lowering risk to beneficial organisms, pets, homeowners, and the environment. Consult with county Cooperative Extension Service agents, chemical distributors, product manufacturers, or independent turf or landscape maintenance consultants. IPM is commonly used in agricultural crop production, where the economic thresholds for key pests have been determined. Using IPM in the urban environment, how- ever, has been more challenging. The Green Industry is sensitive to aesthetic damage, and customers are often intolerant of anything that could affect the appearance of ornamental plants. Increased education of growers, con- sumers, and maintenance personnel could raise the aes- thetic threshold and allow for minor damage without compromising plant health and beauty. Another important aspect of a successful IPM program is pest monitoring. This includes understanding the life 161 1. B21#i cycle of a pest and knowing which plants and condi- tions it may prefer. Monitoring populations, understand- ing historical trends, and knowing where a pest is most likely to occur can target control practices to a specific pest in a specific location. Maintaining records and his - tories of pest populations can help a manager forecast pest occurrence and apply pesticides wisely. The monitoring of pest populations presents special difficulties for the service industry, because the service professional may only be on -site one day per month or less. While spot applications are generally preferable, in certain situations preventative measures may be neces- sary. This is particularly true where experience has determined that less pesticide, or a less toxic pesticide, may be needed when a preventative control is used. The basic steps for IPM programs are as follows: • Identify key pests on key plants. • Determine the pest's life cycle, and know which life stage to target (for an insect pest, whether it is an egg, larva/nymph, pupa, or adult). • Use cultural, mechanical, or physical methods to prevent problems from occurring (for example, prepare the site, select resistant cultivars), reduce pest habitat (for example, practice good sanitation, carry out pruning and dethatching), or promote biological control (for example, provide nectar or honeydew sources). Decide which pest management practice is appropri- ate and carry out corrective actions. Direct control where the pest lives or feeds. Use preventative chemi- cal applications only when your professional judg- ment indicates that properly timed preventative appli- cations are likely to control the target pest effectively while minimizing the economic and environmental costs. • Determine if the "corrective actions" actually reduced or prevented pest populations, were economical, and minimized risks. Record and use this information when making similar decisions in the future. For more information on IPM, see IFAS Publication ENY -336, Integrated Pest Management in the Commercial Ornamental Nursery, at http: 1/edis.ifas.ufl.edu/IG144. PESTICIDE USE Pesticides are designed to kill or alter the behavior of pests. When, where, and how they can be used safely and effectively is a matter of considerable public inter- est. If they are not used wisely, pesticides may pose risks to pesticide applicators and other exposed people, and may create long -term environmental problems. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries The best way to manage pesticide storage and disposal is to reduce the amount of pesticide left over after applications through proper planning and equipment calibration. Faulty or improperly managed storage facilities may result in direct runoff or leaching of pesticides into surface water and ground water. Users may be held liable for damage caused by improperly stored or disposed pesticides. Pesticide spills can be especially problematic. Even pesticides designed for rapid breakdown in the environ- ment can persist for years if present in high concentra- tions. The results can be the contamination of drinking water, fish kills and other impacts to nontargeted organ- isms, and administrative fines and legal remedies. It is important that pesticide users protect themselves from all of these hazards. The most obvious method to reduce the risk from pesti- cides is to use them only when necessary. Determine which pesticides are the most useful and least environ- mentally harmful for a given situation. Apply them GENERAL PESTICIDE BM °S The following general BMPs should always be used for pesticides: Develop - and implement a quality IPM program. Labels - Observe all directions, restrictions, and pre- cautions on pesticide labels. It is dangerous, wasteful, and illegal to do otherwise. Storage - Store pesticides behind locked doors in original containers with label intact, separate from seed and fertilizer. Rate - Use pesticides at the correct application rate and recommended intervals between applications to avoid injury to plants and animals. Handling - Never eat, drink, or smoke when han- dling pesticides, and always wash with soap and water after use. Rinsing - Triple-rinse containers into the spray tank. Never pour pesticides down a drain or into an area exposed to humans, animals, or water. Disposal - Dispose of used containers in compliance with label directions so that water contamination and other hazards will not result. 1611 B21 properly and effectively to minimize costs and the effects on public health and the environment while max- imizing plant response. Give particular attention to the vulnerability of the site to ground water or surface water contamination from leaching or runoff. A pest - control strategy should be used only when the pest is causing or is expected to cause more damage than what can be reasonably and economically tolerated. A control strategy should be implemented that reduces the pest numbers to an acceptable level while minimizing harm to nontargeted organisms. The strategy of IPM is as follows • Prevention — keeping a pest from becoming a problem, and then, if needed, • Suppression— reducing pest numbers or damage to an acceptable level. Always follow the directions on the label. These direc- tions have been developed after extensive research and field studies on the chemistry, biological effects, and environmental fate of the pesticide. The label is the sin- gle most important document in the use of a pesticide. State and federal pesticide laws require following label directions! PESTICIDE SELECTION Identifying or recognizing pests is essential to proper pesticide application and selection. Once the pest has been identified, the best control method must be chosen. If a pesticide is to be used, the applicator must know the proper application technique and read the label thor- oughly. Pesticides should be evaluated on effectiveness against the pest, mode of action, life stage of the pest, personnel hazards, non - target effects, leaching or runoff potential, and cost. Develop and implement a quality IPM program. Train employees in proper pest identification and pes- ticide selection techniques. Choose the product most appropriate for the problem or pest. Mix only the quantity of pesticide needed in order to avoid disposal problems, protect non - targeted organ- isms, and save money. Spot treat pests whenever appropriate. Clothing - Always wear protective clothing when applying pesticides. At a minimum, wear a long- Read and follow all label directions. The label is a sleeved shirt, long- legged pants, rubber gloves, boots legal document. (never go barefoot or wear sandals), eye protection, and a wide - brimmed hat. Additional protective gear Make note of any ground water advisories on the may be listed on the pesticide label. label. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 PESTICIDE STORAGE If you store pesticides for your operation, this storage must be properly constructed and maintained to prevent problems or an expensive cleanup in the event of an acci- dent. The best way to minimize storage problems is to minimize the amount you store. Purchasing only small amounts that you can use quickly is the best approach for many turf management professionals. If you have to store pesticides, follow these guidelines: • Design and build pesticide storage structures to keep pesticides secure and isolated from the surrounding environment. • Store pesticides in a roofed concrete or metal structure with a lockable door. • Keep pesticides in a separate facility, or at least in a locked area separate from areas used to store other materials, especially fertilizers, feed, and seed. • Do not store pesticides near flammable materials, hot work (welding, grinding), or in shop areas. • Do not allow smoking in pesticide storage areas. Fir c 2'- Pesticide storage areas should be locked. Store personal protective equipment (PPE) where it is easily accessible in an emergency, but not in the pesticide storage area (since that may make it unavail- able during an emergency). Check the label and the 1611 821 Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) to determine the required safety equipment for each chemical used in the operation. Keep a written pesticide inventory and the MSDS file for the chemicals on site. Do not store this information in the pesticide storage room itself. Remember that PPE is specified for normal application and handling activities. Regular PPE may not be protec- tive in emergency situations, such as fires or reactions with other spilled chemicals. Depending on the products stored and the quantity, you may need to register the facility with the Florida Department of Community Affairs and your local emergency response agency. Check with your pesticide dealer about community right -to -know laws for the materials that you purchase. An emergency response plan should be in place and familiar to personnel before an emergency occurs, such as a lightning strike, fire, or hurricane. Individuals conducting emergency pesticide cleanups should be properly trained under the require- ments of the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). For reporting chemical spills, see the section on spill reporting requirements later in this chapter. Do not store large quantities of pesticides for long peri- ods. Adopt the "first in —first out" principle, using the oldest products first to ensure that the product shelf life does not expire. Store pesticides in their original containers. Do not put pesticides in containers that might cause children and others to mistake them for food or drink. Keep the containers securely closed and inspect them regularly for splits, tears, breaks, or leaks. All pesticide containers should be labeled. Arrange pesticide containers so that the labels are clearly visible, and make sure that the labels are legible. Refasten all loose labeling using non -water soluble glue or sturdy, transparent packaging tape. Do not refasten labels with rubber bands (which quickly rot and easily break) or nontransparent tapes such as duct tape or masking tape (which may obscure important product caution statements or label directions for product use). If a label is damaged, immediately request a replacement from the pesticide dealer or for- mulator. As a temporary supplement to disfigured or badly damaged labels, fasten a baggage tag to the con- tainer handle. On the tag write the product name, for- mulation, concentration of active ingredient(s), "signal word," the statement "Keep Out of Reach of Children," and the date of purchase. If there is any question about the contents of the container, set it aside for proper disposal. Dry bags should be raised on pallets to ensure that they do not get wet. Do not store liquid materials above dry materials. Store flammable pesticides separately from nonflammable pesticides. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries Segregate herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides to Prevent cross - contamination and minimize the potential for misapplication. Cross - contaminated pesticides often cannot be applied in accordance with the labels of each of the products. This may make it necessary to dispose of the cross - contaminated materials as wastes and could require the services of a consultant and hazardous waste contractor. Use shelving made of plastic or reinforced metal. Keep metal shelving painted (unless made of stainless steel) to avoid corrosion. If you use wood shelving, paint it with an enamel or waterproof paint to minimize any absorp- tion of spilled pesticide materials. It is best to replace wood shelving with metal or plastic. Construct floors of seamless metal or concrete sealed with a chemical - resistant paint. For concrete, use a water - cement ratio no higher than 0.45:1 by weight, and leave a rough finish to provide adhesion for the sealant. Equip the floor with a continuous curb to retain spilled materials. While a properly sealed sump may be included to help recover spilled materials, do not install a drain, as it can release spilled material into the environment. If you have a drain in a storage area, seal it as soon as possible to prevent uncontrolled releases. Provide sloped ramps at the entrance to allow handcarts to safely move material in and out of the storage area. When designing the facility, keep in mind that tempera- ture extremes during storage may reduce safety and affect pesticide efficacy Provide automatic exhaust fans and an emergency wash area. The emergency wash area should be outside the storage building. Local fire and electrical codes may require explosion -proof lighting and fans. The light/fan switches should be outside the building, and both switches should be turned on before people enter and should remain on until after they have left the building. The BMPs discussed in the next section often address the ideal situation of newly constructed, permanent facilities. However, you are encouraged to apply these principles and ideas to existing facilities. Plans and specifications for pesticide storage buildings are available from several sources, including the the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the Midwest Plan Service, and the IFAS Publications Office. These organizations' publications also contain recommended management practices for pesticide storage facilities. Note that cancelled, suspended, or unusable pesticides must be disposed of properly. Storage for long periods can lead to leaking containers or other costly problems. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer 1611 621 Services (FDACS) operate a program for the free disposal of these materials (Operation Cleansweep, ph. 877 - 851 -5285 toll -free, or 386 - 418 - 5525). For more information, go to www.dep.state.n.us /waste /categories/ cleansweep- pesticides. If this program is not available, a licensed waste disposal contractor should do the disposal. A good storage facility should have the following features: • A secure area where unauthorized persons are restrict- ed from entering. • Proper labeling on exterior doors, such as signs that say "NO SMOKING" and "WARNING: PESTICIDE STORAGE." No- smoking regulations need to be enforced. • No opportunity for water to enter. • Temperature control to avoid excessive cold or heat. PESTICID DISPOSAL The following BMPs should be used for storing and disposing of pesticides: • Maintain and follow labels on all pesticide containers. Store pesticides only in their original containers or make sure the new containers are properly labeled. Store similar pesticides together; for example, store herbicides with herbicides, and insecticides with insecticides. • Store dry pesticides above liquids. Keep containers closed tightly. Inspect inventory frequently and watch for damaged containers. Store separately any pesticides that may be flammable. Limit the amount of inventory, and purchase only the amounts needed. Triple- rinse, puncture, and crush empty containers. Clean all visible chemical from the container, including the container cap and cap threads. Follow the label directions for container disposal. Apply unused chemical mixtures or rinsate to a legal target at or below the label rate, or save it to use as make -up water for later applications of compatible materials. For cancelled, suspended, or unusable pesticides, con- tact the FDACS Bureau of Compliance Monitoring at (850) 488 -3314 or go to http:/Zwww.fIaes.orq/co[n- 121imonitoring/index.html for guidance. Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 0 • Nonporous floors. • Not located close to a body of water, sinkhole, or wellhead. • Adequate lighting and ventilation. • The ability to contain runoff from spills. • A source of clean water with prevention of backflow of chemicals into the water supply. • Freedom from combustible materials or debris. • Storage shelves and cabinets of nonporous material that will not absorb pesticides. • Shelves or other means of keeping chemicals off wet floors. • Materials and equipment to contain and clean up pesti- cide spills. • Clean, readily available personal protective equipment and emergency telephone numbers or other means of securing assistance in an emergency. • Appropriate fire extinguishers. MIXING AND LOADING ACTIVITIES In most cases, the mixing and loading of pesticides into application equipment should be done adjacent to the application site. If chemicals are routinely mixed and loaded at a shop or storage site, spilled material can accumulate and expensive cleanup procedures may be required. Use extreme caution when handling concentrated chemicals. Spills could result in an expensive hazard- ous waste cleanup. It is important to understand how mixing and loading operations can pollute vulnerable ground water and surface water supplies if conducted improperly and at the wrong site. Locate operations well away from ground water wells and areas where runoff may carry spilled pesticides into surface water - bodies. Areas around public water supply wells should receive special consideration and may be designated as wellhead protection areas. Before mixing or loading pesticides in such areas, consult with state and local government officials to determine if special restrictions apply. To prevent problems when mixing chemicals on -site, use a mixing tray or portable pad to avoid spillage that could be transported to non - targeted areas. Should a chemical spill onto the mixing tray, the material should then be rinsed into the applicator equipment and used according to the product label. 16 11 B21 For your own safety, always use all personal protective equipment required by the label. PESTICIDE EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION AND LOADING Keep application equipment properly calibrated and in good repair. Correct measurement keeps you in compli- ance with the label; reduces the risks to applicators, workers, and the environment; and saves you money. Figure 26. Calibrate spreaders frequently. Calibrate using clean water and do not calibrate equip- ment near wells, sinkholes, or surface waterbodies. Measure pesticides and diluents accurately to avoid improper dosing, the preparation of excess or insufficient mixture, or the preparation of a tankload of mixture at the wrong strength. The proper application of pesticides helps to reduce costs and increase profits. Improper application can result in wasted chemicals, marginal pest control, excessive carry- over, or damage to turf or landscape ornamentals. As a result, inaccurate application is usually very expensive. Be aware of the proper application methods, chemical effects on equipment, equipment calibration, and correct cleaning methods. Sprayers should be calibrated when new or when nozzles are replaced and recalibrated after a few hours of use, as new nozzles may wear and the rate of flow may increase rapidly. For example, wettable pow- ders may erode nozzle tips, causing an increase in appli- cation rates after spraying as few as SO acres. Recalibrate equipment periodically to compensate for wear in pumps, nozzles, and metering systems. The amount of chemical solution applied per unit of surface area depends on the forward speed, system FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries pressure, size of nozzle, and spacing of nozzles on the boom. A change in any one of these will change the rate of application. Consult the operator's manual for detailed information on a particular sprayer. Backpack sprayers and hand sprayers also can and should be calibrated, and applicators should be "calibrated" to determine how much chemical is being applied during a broadcast application while walking across a lawn. Calibration should be performed by measuring the amount of pesticide applied to a small area (for exam- ple, 1,000 square feet) and calculating how much would be applied to a large area. For equipment with more than one nozzle, be sure to check the flow rates of all nozzles on the sprayer so they are similar. Equipment suppliers and pesticide suppliers often supply calibra- tion equipment or assistance at low or no cost. If you calculate the return on investment for time spent calibrating equipment, you will see that even a small improvement in calibration accuracy can save a signifi- cant amount of money spent on pesticide that was wasted because it was over applied. Florida law requires an air gap or back - siphoning device between the water supply and the application equipment to prevent backflow into the water supply. Never sub- merge the end of a water supply hose in a tank. This can lead to the costly contamination of a water supply. PESTICIDE APPLICATION EQUIPMENT WASH WATER Wash water from pesticide application equipment must be managed properly, since it could contain pesticide residues. Ensuring that no pesticide spills occur on the vehicle by mixing all pesticides over mix- ing trays eliminates potential pesticide hazards. Sweep any granular products that have spilled onto the vehicle or non - targeted areas into labeled bags for later use. 161,1 621 Wash the vehicle in a designated wash area. The water hose should have an on/off valve and a water - reducing nozzle. Use the least amount of water possible to wash the equipment adequately. Motorized spray equipment can be rinsed of pesticides residues over turf areas at the job site where the rinsate will be used according to the product label. These practices prevent unwanted pesti- cide residues from being washed onto non - targeted areas. Avoid conducting such washing in the vicinity of wells or surface waterbodies. For most turf application equipment, the inside of the application tank should be rinsed. This is done by filling it with water and then applying the rinse water in the same manner and at the same site as the original pesticide. For larger equipment that is loaded at a central facility, the inside of the application equipment should be washed on the mix/load pad. This rinsate may be applied as a pesticide (preferred) or stored for use as make -up water for the next compatible application. Otherwise it mast be treated as a (potentially hazardous) waste. After washing the equipment and before an incompatible product is handled, the sump should be cleaned of any liquid and sediment. PESTICIDE SPILL MANAGEMENT Clean up spills as soon as possible. Unmanaged spills may quickly move into surface waters and injure plants and animals. It is essential to be prepared for major or minor spills. The sooner you can contain, absorb, and dispose of a spill, the less chance there is that it will cause harm. Always use the appropriate personal protec- tive equipment as indicated on the MSDS and the label for a chemical. In addition, follow the following four steps: • CONTROL actively spilling or leaking materials by setting the container upright, plugging leak(s), or shutting the valve. CONTAIN the spilled material using barriers and absorbent material. For small spills, use kitty litter, vermiculite, shredded newspaper, absorbent pillows, clean sand, or pads. Use dikes to direct large spills away from ditches, storm drains, ponds, sinkholes, or woods. You can also use products such as "Soak Up" to absorb spilled materials. These types of products allow the absorbed material to be diluted into the spray mixture and applied as usable pesticide. • COLLECT spilled material, absorbents, and leaking containers and place them in a secure, properly labeled container. Some contaminated materials could require disposal as hazardous waste. • STORE the containers of spilled material until they can be applied as a pesticide or appropriately disposed of. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 Small liquid spills may be cleaned up by using an absorbent such as cat litter, diluting it with soil, and then applying the absorbent to the target site as a pesti- cide in accordance with the label instructions. SPILL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Comply with all applicable federal, state, and local regula- tions regarding spill response training for employees, spill reporting requirements, spill containment, and cleanup. Keep spill cleanup equipment available when handling pesticides or their containers. If a spill occurs for a pesticide covered by certain state and federal laws, you may need to report any accidental- 1611 .,B 21 release if the spill quantity exceeds the "reportable quantity" of active ingredient specified in the law. See Appendix A for important telephone numbers for report- ing pesticide spills. Very few of the pesticides routinely used in turf management are covered under these require- ments. A complete list of pesticides and reportable quan- tities is available at http • / /wwwfloridadisaster.orgLps/ SERC/htcl.htm. Table 10 provides reportable quantities for some common pesticides, but it is your responsibility to determine if a pesticide you use has a reportable quantity. The list in the table should not be used as a substitute for a review of the official Section 304 list provided at the website above. Table 10: Reportable quantities for certain pesticides Chemical Name Brand Name CAS Number EH5 RO CERCLA RO Atrazine AAtrex 1912249 N/A N/A Fenoxycarb Logic 74490 -01 -8 N/A N/A Hydramethylnon Maxforce 67485 -29 -4 N/A N/A Malathion Cythion 121 -75 -5 N/A 100 Methiocarb Mesurol 2032 -65 -7 10 10 Simazine Prince 122 -34 -9 N/A N/A Trifluralin Treflan 1582098 N/A 10 (For a complete list call (850) At 3 -9970, or go to htti2://www.floridadisaster.orci/cos/SERC/"`htcl.htm). Reportable quantities are given in pounds of active ingredient. Public Law 96-510 and Public Law 92 -5000 (CERCLA) require immediate notification of the appropria- s U.S. governmental agency when oil or hazardous substances are discharged. The law states, "Any such person who fails to notify mmediately such agency of such discharge shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more tha i one year, or both." Under Chapters 376 and 403, Florida Statutes: Any owner or operator of a facility who has knowledge of any release of a hazardous substance fron a facility in a quantity equal to or exceeding the reportable quantity (see the MSDS sheet) in a 24 -hour period shall immediately rn �tify the State Warning Point. The owner or operator having a discharge of petroleum products exceeding 25 gallons on a perviot s surface (or any amount in a waterbody) must report such discharge to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection or tf e State Warning Point. The penalty is not in reporting a spill; it is in failing to report a spill. REPORT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION u Name, address, and telephone number of person reporting. Name, address, and telephone number of person responsible for the discharge or release, if known. Date and time of the discharge or release. Type or name of the substance discharged or released. Estimated amount of the discharge or release. Location or address of the discharge or release. Source and cause of the discharge or release. Size and characteristics of the area affected by the discharge or release. Containment and cleanup actions taken to date. Other persons or agencies contacted. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries MANAGEMENT OF PESTS IN THE LANDSCAPE WEED MANAGEMENT Florida law defines a weed as a plant growing where it is not wanted. Plants often earn their reputations as weeds if they grow without care or cultivation and despite efforts to get rid of them. Weeds compete with desired plants for space, water, light, and nutrients and can harbor insect pests and diseases. The predominant weed species change from season to season in Florida. Because weed populations can explode if not kept in check, the amount of pressure from these pest plants remains consistently high. Weeds reproduce from seed, root pieces, and special vegetative reproductive organs such as tubers, corms, rhizomes, stolons, or bulbs. People, animals, birds, wind, and water can distribute seeds. Many of the weeds that show up in landscape beds come from seeds. Weeds also arrive in landscape beds when their reproductive tissues and organs are in the soil of transplants. Weed rhizomes or stolons can also creep into a landscape bed from an adjacent infested area. Plastic or metal edging that penetrates several inches into the ground around the perimeter of the bed reduces the likelihood of weed infestations from rhizomes or stolons. Preventative weed control is important. Removing estab- lished weeds from landscape beds can be time consum- ing and/or expensive. Weed infestations will probably have to be removed by hand, as there are a limited num- ber of herbicides available that can be safely applied over the top of and around most landscape plants. For Green Industry service personnel, the application of most herbicides must be done by licensed pest - control professionals. For more information, see the IFAS web - site: http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/TOPIC Ornamental Pests. INSECTS AND OTHER ORGANISMS Fewer than i percent of all insects are harmful to plants and many are actually beneficial, acting as predators or parasites of harmful insects and assisting in the cross - pollination of certain plants. Remember that disease, nutritional deficiencies, cultural treatments, and environ- mental conditions can cause a plant to appear unhealthy or discolored, so it is important to diagnose a problem correctly before remedial measures are taken. Some plants in the urban landscape are oversprayed, resulting in unnecessary environmental contamination and often upsetting the natural predator /parasite —pest balance. Think about all of the control options available under IPM. Before using a chemical control method for an active pest infestation, look around the landscape to see if predatory or parasitic insects are present to control your pest problem. If you must spray, use the least -toxic remedy possible and exercise great care to avoid contam- inating yourself and other living creatures. 161Q 821 In general, IPM calls for pesticides to be applied as need- ed when plants have an active infestation and significant damage is likely. However, some pest problems may be best handled with preventative measures, such as the use of residual Imidacloprid to target chinch bug nymphs as they emerge from their eggs. Preventative application measures should not be routine but should be based on your professional knowledge of the control agent or method, the pest's life cycle, environmental conditions, and historical data. Use preventative chemical applica- tions only when your professional judgment indicates that properly timed, preventative applications are likely to control the target pest effectively while minimizing eco- nomic and environmental costs. In addition to Florida's abundance of native pests, land - scape workers need to be aware of imported plant pests, their identification and control. In the last several years, these pests have caused substantial economic damage and an increase in the use of pesticides. The effects caused by citrus canker and greening are just two examples of dis- eases that have devastated a sector of Florida's economy. Insect examples in the landscape include the Asian cycad scale, pink hibiscus mealybug, Chilli Thrips, Lobate Lac Scale, Ficus whitefly, and many others. Florida's tropical climate and international status predis- poses us to imported plant pests. We have a history of the rapid spread of these imported pests to landscape plants. The normal problems of pest control are made worse by: • No populations of beneficial predators, • Poor or slow problem identifications, • No basis for control product selection • It requires the constant awareness that new pest prob- lems are likely. Employers and employees must be vigilant and seek additional training from IFAS, which is the key source of diagnostic and control information for these exotic pests. For more information on IPM and insect pests, see the following: • IFAS Publication ENY -337, Commercial Applications of Insecticides and Miticides in the Green Industry, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/IG 145. • IFAS Publication ENY -338, Insect Management on Landscape Plants, at ht1p: / /edis.ifas.ufl.eduAG013. • IFAS Publication ENH -300, Insect Pest Management on Turfgrass, at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/IG001. • Featured Creatures at http: / /creatures.ifas.ufl.edu. Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 PLANT NEMATODES Nematodes are small, unsegmented roundworms, gen- erally transparent and colorless; most are slender, with bodies from 1 /100 to 1/8 inch long. Only about 10 per- cent of nematodes are estimated to be plant parasites. Nematodes affect plants by damaging the roots, reduc- ing their ability to function. For more information, see: • Nematode Management in Residential Lawns, IFAS Publication ENY -006, httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/NG039. Nematode Management for Perennial Landscape Plants, IFAS Publication ENY -051, http: //edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ IN469. • The IFAS website: httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/TOPIC- Ornamental Pests. PLANT DISEASES Plant pathology is the study of plant diseases. Diseases are caused by microorganisms such as fungi, bacteria, and viruses. Some disease symptoms, such as leaf spots and wilting, are easily seen or measured. Others are difficult to observe (for example, root decay) or are very subtle (for example, shorter growth flushes). Detecting the less - obvious symptoms is more difficult when the diseased plant is the only specimen of its kind in the landscape and cannot be compared with a healthy one. Normally, nonparasitic plant disorders are not included in the study of diseases, but it is still important to rec- ognize them. These disorders include improper planting depth, nutrient imbalances, temperature extremes, toxic chemicals, mechanical injury, water imbalances, and air pollution. Most environmentally induced problems tend to be uniform, whereas disease may show up in spots throughout a field. 1611 B21 For more information on plant disease, see the following: • IFAS Publication LH064, Key for Identification of Landscape Turfgrass Diseases, at http://edis.ifas.ufl. edu/LH064. • IFAS Publication LH040, Turfgrass Disease Management, at httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH040. DIAGNOSTIC ASSISTANCE The primary role of the Florida Extension Plant Diagnostic Clinics (FEPDC) is to determine whether symptoms in submitted plant samples involve an infectious causal agent, e.g. fungus, bacterium or virus, or other cultural or environmental factor that causes similar symptoms. The goal of the FEPDC system is to educate clientele by providing plant disease and dis- order diagnoses and recommendations for preventative and therapeutic measures. The FEPDC is a fee -based service provided to any Florida resident by the Plant Pathology Department of the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), University of Florida, in conjunction with the Cooperative Extension Service. For more information, the nearest laboratory, and fees, see Sample Submission Guide for Plant Diagnostic Clinics of the Florida Plant Diagnostic Network. Available at: httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu /SR007. The OF -IFAS Rapid Turfgrass Diagnostic Service was designed and implemented for managers of high quality turfgrass in Florida. The biggest distinction between this and the standard services provided by the Plant Disease Clinic is the turn - around time for sample results, the direct involvement of the OF Extension Turfgrass Pathologist, and the price charged for the service. The price is $75 (in 2008) and reflects the added costs associated with a full time student dedicat- ed to turfgrass diagnostics with rapid turn - around time. httl2://turfpath.ifas.ufl.edu/turfgrass/rapiddiag.shtml. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries Unless otherwise mentioned, references are available from the Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, or your county Cooperative Extension Service agent. Florida Lawn Handbook. Trenholm and Unruh, SP45 Third Edition, 2005. http: / /ifasbooks.ufl.edu /. Best Management Practices for Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses, 2007 Florida Department of Environmental Protection. httl2://www.del2.state.fl.us/water/nonj2oint/docs/ nonp oint/glf bmp07. pdf. Sample Submission Guide for Plant Diagnostic Clinics of the Florida Plant Diagnostic Network. Palmateer Et al., 2008. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /SR007. OF -IFAS Rapid Turfgrass Diagnostic Service. httl2:Hturfpath. ifas. ufl .edu /turfgrass /ral2iddiag.shtml. Aquatic Plant Removal Permits: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Invasive Plant Management Section. http:// my fwc. coin/nonnatives/InvasivePlants/ index.htm. FDEP NPS Publications Page. httl2://-,-.-ww.del2.state.fl.us/water/nonl2oint/12ubs.htin. Regulation of Landscape Architecture: httl2://ww-w.mvfloridalicense.com/dbl2L/12ro/larc h/. Regulation of Professional Engineering: http: / /www.fbl2e.ore/. DESIGN & INSTALLATION REFERENCES PREPARAI l; )N Basic Principles of Landscape Design, D.L. Ingram, IFAS Circular 536. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/MG086. Preparing To Plant a Florida Lawn, L.E. Trenholm, IFAS Publication ENH -02. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LHO12. Establishing Your Florida Lawn, L.E. Trenholm, IFAS Publication ENH -03. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LHO13. Planting Specifications for Landscape Plants, E.F. Gilman, 2003, IFAS Publication ENH 856. httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EPI 12. Atlas of Florida Vascular Plants. R.P. Wunderlin and B.F. Hansen. 2000. (S.M. Landry and K.N. Campbell 1611 621 [application development], Florida Center for Community Design and Research). Tampa, Florida: Institute for Systematic Botany, University of South Florida. httl2://v;,",w.121antatlas.usf.edu/default.asl2. IFAS landscape tree and shrub site http: / /hort.ifas.ufl.edu /woody/. Guide to the Vascular Plants of Florida. R.P. Wunderlin. 1998. Gainesville, Florida: University Press of Florida. Selecting a Turfgrass for Florida Lawns, L.E. Trenholm, J.B. Unruh, and J.L. Cisar, IFAS Publication ENH -04. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH005. St. Augustinegrass for Florida Lawns, L.E. Trenholm, J.L. Cisar, and J. B. Unruh, IFAS Publication ENH -5. httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LHO10. Landscape Plant Selector, IFAS software publication at http: / /ifasbooks.ufl.edu. ENVIRONMENTAL STRESSES Environmental Stresses and Your Florida Lawn, L.E. Trenholm, IFAS Publication ENH -153. httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP070. Growing Turfgrass in the Shade, L.E. Trenholm, IFAS Publication ENH -151. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP072. Minimizing Traffic Damage to Your Florida Lawn, L.E. Trenholm, IFAS Publication ENH -152. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP071. Low Temperature Damage to Turf, L.E. Trenholm, IFAS Publication ENH -80. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH067. Managing Your Florida Lawn under Drought Conditions, H.C. Jones, C.S. Lippi, and L.E. Trenholm, IFAS Publication ENH -157. httl2: #edis.ifas.ufl.edu /EP078. Tips for Maintaining Landscapes During Drought, R.J. Black, IFAS Publication ENH 158. httl2://edis.ifas.un.edu/EP091. IRRIGATION REFERENCES STANDARDS Landscape Irrigation and Florida- Friendly Design Standards, December 2006, Florida Department of Environmental Protection. http: / /www.del2.state.fl.us/ water/ waterpolicy/ docs/LandscapelrrigationFlorida Friendl,Design.pdf. Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 Florida Building Code — Plumbing, Appendix F. International Code Council 900 Montclair Rd. Birmingham AL, 35213 -1206 (205) 599 -9871 httl2:ffwww,floridabuilding.orgMCISOld/bc/default.asp or http: / /www.iccsafe.org. Standards and Specifications for Turf and Landscape Irrigation Systems, Fifth Edition. December 2005. Florida Irrigation Society, (800) 441 -5341, Address: 9340 56th Street N. Suite 105, Temple Terrace, FL 33617. http:44ww fisstate .org/standardsrevision3.pdf. ASABE Standards —2007. Standards, engineering practices, and data developed and adopted by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. 2007. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 2950 Niles Rd., St. Joseph, MO 49085. Telephone (269) 429 -0300. http: //www.asabe.org /standards/searchpur.html. National Engineering Handbook Series 210 -VI. November 1997. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington D.C., 20013. htW: / /www.ftw.nres.usda.gov /tech ref.html or http: / /directives.sc.egov.usda.ggv /. Turf and Landscape Irrigation Best Management Practices, April 2005. The Irrigation Association. (703) 536 -7080, 6540 Arlington Blvd., Falls Church, VA 22042 -6638. http: / /www.irrigation.org. Florida Automated Weather Network htW://fawn.ifas.ufl.edu. Irrigation of Lawns and Gardens, D.Z. Haman, G.A. Clark, and A.G. Smajstrla, IFAS Circular 825, May 1989. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/WI003. Microirrigation in the Landscape, G.A. Clark, IFAS Fact Sheet AE -254. htip: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu /AE076. Field Evaluation of Microirrigation Water Application Uniformity, A.G. Smajstrla, BJ. Boman, D.Z. Haman, D.J. Pitts, and F.S. Zazueta, IFAS Publication AE094, 1997. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AE094. Efficiencies of Florida Agricultural Irrigation Systems, A.G. Smajstrla, B J. Boman, G.A. Clark, D.Z. Haman, D.S. Harrison, F.T. Izuno, D.J. Pitts, and F.S. Zazueta, 1991. http: / /edis,ifas.ufl.edu/AEIIO. Flushing Procedures for Microirrigation Systems, A.G. Smajstrla and B.J. Boman, WAS Bulletin 333. htjp:/Jedis.ifas,ufl.edu/Wl013. 1611 B21'1 Field Guide to Soil Moisture Sensor Use in Florida, 2008, St. Johns River Water Management District http• //www sjrwmd .com/floridawaterstar /pdfs/ SMS field guide.1df. Irrigating Landscape Plants During Establishment, E.E Gilman, IFAS Publication ENH 857. httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/EPl 13. Lawn Sprinkler Selection and Layout for Uniform Water Application, A.G. Smajstrla, G.A. Clark, and F.S. Zazueta, IFAS Bulletin 230, 1997. htip://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AE084. Basic Irrigation Scheduling in Florida, A.G. Smajstrla, B J. Boman, G.A. Clark, D.Z. Haman, F.T. Izuno, and F.S. Zazueta, IFAS Bulletin 249, 1988. htip://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AEI 11. Potential Impacts of Improper Irrigation System Design, A.G. Smajstrla, F.S. Zazueta, and D.Z. Haman, IFAS Publication SS- AGE -807, November 1988. htLI2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AE027. How To Calibrate Your Sprinkler System, L.E. Trenholm, J.B. Unruh, and J.L. Cisar, IFAS Publication ENH 61, January 2001. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH026. Watering Your Florida Lawn, L.E. Trenholm, J.B. Unruh, and J.L. Cisar, IFAS Publication ENH 9, February 2001. httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH025. Florida Irrigation Guide. Gainesville, Florida: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Conservation Service, 2006. http://www.fl.nrcs.usda.go Turf Irrigation for the Home, F.S. Zazueta, A. Brockway, L. Landrum, and B. McCarty, IFAS Circular 829, April 1995. httl2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/AE144. Irrigation System Controllers, F.S. Zazueta, A.G. Smajstrla, and G.A. Clark, IFAS Publication AGE -32, Bulletin 294, July 1994. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AE077. MULCHING, MOWING, AND PRUNING REFERENCES Mulches for the Landscape, R.J. Black, E.F. Gilman, G.W. Knox, and K.C. Ruppert, WAS Publication ENH 103. httl2://cdis.ifas.ufl.edu/MG251. Mowing Your Florida Lawn, L.E. Trenholm, J.B. Unruh, and J.L. Cisar, IFAS Fact Sheet ENH 10, January 2001. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH028. Pruning Landscape Trees and Shrubs, E.F. Gilman and R.J. Black, IFAS Circular 853. htip://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/MG087. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries Pruning Shade Trees in the Landscape at http://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/woody,/prunin Mangrove Trimming Guidelines for Homeowners. Tallahassee, Florida: Florida Department of Environmental Protection. httl2://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wettands/mangrove FERTILIZATION REFERENCES Fertilization and Irrigation Needs for Florida Lawns and Landscapes, L.E. Trenholm, E.F. Gilman, G.W. Knox, and R J. Black, IFAS Publication ENH 860 2002. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EPI 10. Fertilization Recommendations for Landscape Plants, G.W Knox, T.. Broschat, and R). Black, IFAS Publication ENH 858 2002. http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP114. General Recommendations for Fertilization of Turfgrasses on Florida Soils, J.B. Sartain, IFAS Publication SL -21, 2007. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LHO14. The Florida Fertilizer Label, J.B. Sartain and W.R. Cox, 2002. httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS170. Seashore Paspalum for Florida Lawns, IFAS Publication CIR 1244, Trenholm and Unruh, 2002. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP059. Fertilization of Field -grown and Landscape Palms in Florida, 2005, IFAS Publication ENH 1009. httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP26 1. Nutrient Deficiencies of Landscape and Field -grown Palms in Florida, 2005, IFAS Publication ENH 1018. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/EP273. How to Calibrate Your Fertilizer Spreader, McCarty and Sartain, 2003, IFAS Publication ENH 62, htip://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH024. Selected Fertilizers Used in Turfgrass Fertilization, J. Sartain, IFAS Circular CIR -1262, 2001. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS318. Soil Testing and Interpretation for Florida Turfgrasses, J.B. Sartain, IFAS Publication SL -181, 2001. htLp:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS317. Standardized Fertilization Recommendations for Environmental Horticulture Crops, G. Kidder, E.A. Hanlon, T.H. Yeager, and G.L. Miller, IFAS Publication SL141, 1998. htW: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/CNO11. Technical Memorandum- Estimation of Nitrogen Loading from Residential Irrigation, April 2008, Tampa Bay Estuary program. htLp://www.tbel2tech.orgZEertilize eg html. 1611 821 Evaluation of Current Stormwater Design Criteria within the State of Florida (Harper and Baker, 2007, FDEP Contract 50108). http:/Iwww.dep.state.fl.us/Water/nonpoint/doc nonpoint/SW TreatmentReportFinal 71907.pdf. Weather Terminology: http: //severe.worldweather.org/rain/ and http:/Lwww.wrh.noaa.gov/sew/MediaGuide/Terms Outlooks Watches Warnings.pdf. PESTICIDE REFERENCES Many documents are available on the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Nonpoint Source Management Publications web page at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/nonl2oint/2ubs.htm. FDACS Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control at (850) 921 -4177 or at http://www.flaes.orgLaes-en Bureau of Compliance Monitoring at (850) 488 -3314 or at http://www.flatL.org/ complimonitoring/index. html. Pesticide and Chemical Reportable Quantities: htip://www.floridadisaster.oracl2s/SERC/htcl.htm. Operation Cleansweep http://www.del2.state.fl.us/waste/categorie cleansweep= pesticides /. Best Management Practices for Agrichemical Handling and Farm Equipment Maintenance, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 1998. httn://www.floridaapwateri)olicv.com/PDF/BMDS/ BmI2 AgrichemicalEquipment1998.12df. Agrichemical Handling Facility, Code 309. 2008. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, P. O. Box 141510, Gainesville, FL 32605. Telephone (352) 338 -9555. httD: / /efotiz.nres.usda. izov /referencesbublic/FU 11309 March 2008.pdf. Broadcast Boom Sprayer Calibration, T.W. Dean, IFAS Pesticide Information Sheet PI -24. httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/Pl016. Broadcast Boom Sprayer Nozzle Uniformity Check, T.W. Dean, IFAS Pesticide Information Sheet PI -23. httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/PlOI5. Designing Facilities for Pesticide and Fertilizer Containment. MWPS -37. Revised 1995. Midwest Plan Service, 122 Davidson Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011 -3080. Telephone (515) 294 -4337. http://www.mm:ps.or . Department of Environmental Protection — Revised DECEMBER 2008 0 Diseases of Landscape Woody Ornamentals, G. W. Simone, PP/PPP 57, http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/PP108. Key for Identification of Landscape Turfgrass Diseases, M.L. Elliott and G.W. Simone. httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/LH064. 1611 B21 Commercial Applications of Insecticides and Miticides in the Green Industry, E.A. Buss, 2006, IFAS Publication ENY -337, http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/IG145. Insect Pest Management on Turfgrass, Buss and Turner 2004, httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/IGOOI. In -depth profiles of insects, nematodes, arachnids and Nematode Management in Residential Lawns, other organisms that are of interest. Featured Creatures W.T. Crow, 2007, IFAS Publication ENY -006, at http: / /creatures.ifas.ufl.edu. htip: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/NG039. Information on ornamental pests: httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/TOPIC Ornamental Pests. Integrated Pest Management in the Commercial Ornamental Nursery, Mizell and Short, 2006, IFAS Publication ENY -336, http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu/IG144. Insect Management on Landscape Plants, E.A. Buss and D.E. Short, IFAS Publication ENY -338. http:/ /edis ifas ufl edu//pdffiles/IG/IG01300 pdf. Nematode Management for Perennial Landscape Plants, W.T. Crow, 2007, IFAS Publication ENY -051, http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/IN469. Pesticide Container Rinsing, T.W. Dean and O.N. Nesheim. httl2://edis.ifa.5.ufl.edu/Pl003. Turfgrass Disease Management, M.L. Elliott and G.W. Simone. htti2:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu/LHO40. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries 161 1 B21 APPENDIX A: IMPORTANT TELEPHONE NUMBERS • Name, address, and telephone number of person reporting. • Name, address, and telephone number of person responsible for the discharge or release, if known. • Date and time of the discharge or release. • Type or name of the substance discharged or released. • Estimated amount of the discharge or release. • Location or address of the discharge or release. • Source and cause of the discharge or release. • Size and characteristics of the area affected by the discharge or release. • Containment and cleanup actions taken to date. • Other persons or agencies contacted. For Ambulance, Fire, or Police Dial 911 State Warning Point 24 hours Toll -Free • 1 (800) 320 -0519 Department of Community Affairs, or Division of Emergency Management (850) 413 -9911 National Response Center 24 hours Toll -Free • 1 (800) 424 -8802 (Federal law requires that anyone who releases into the environment a reportable quantity of a hazardous substance [includ- ing oil when water is or may be affected], or a material identified as a marine pollutant, must immediately notify the NRC). FDEP Emergency Response Jacksonville (904) 807 -3246 Orlando (407) 893 -3337 Ft. Lauderdale (954) 958 -5575 Ft. Myers (239) 332 -6975 Tampa (813) 744 -6462 Panama City (850) 872 -7650 Pensacola (850) 595 -8300 Tallahassee (850) 245 -2010 (For chemical hazard information) CHEMTREC HOTLINE (Emergency only) 24 hours Toll -Free • 1 (800) 424 -9300 Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 0 1611 g21 TELEPHONE State Emergency Response Commission Florida Department of (NOT a 24 -hour number) 1 (800) 635 -7179 Environmental Protection District Offices (This telephone number is for follow -up reporting under state Northwest (Pensacola) (850) 595 -8300 spill reporting requirements. In an emergency, call the State Warning Point [see Emergency Reporting Telephone Numbers Northeast (Jacksonville) (904) 807 -3300 on the preceding page]. If federal reporting is requited, also call the National Response Center [see Emergency Reporting Central (Orlando) (407) 894 -7555 Telephone Numbers on the preceding page.) Southeast (West Palm Beach) (561) 681 -6600 Florida Friendly Landscapes Program University of Florida (352) 392 -1831 x330 Southwest (Tampa) (813) 632 -7600 Florida Department of Agriculture South (Ft. Myers) (239) 332 -6975 and Consumer Services Bureau of Entomology Water Management Districts and Pest Control (850) 921 -4177 Local Toll -free Northwest Florida Bureau of Pesticides (850) 487 -0532 (Tallahassee) (850) 539 -5999 Bureau of Compliance Monitoring (850) 488 -8731 Suwannee River (Live Oak) (386) 362 -1001 1- 800 - 226 -1066 Florida Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater /Nonpoint Source St. Johns River Management Section (Tallahassee) (850) 245 -7508 (Palatka) (386) 3-29 -4500 1 -800- 451 -7106 Hazardous Waste Southwest Florida Management Section (850) 245 -8707 (Brooksville) (352) 796 -7211 1- 800 - 423 -1476 Mangrove Trimming Section (850) 245 -8482 South Florida (West Palm Beach) (561) 686 -8800 1- 800 - 432 -2045 Sunshine State One Call (locator service) 811 or 800 - 432 -4770 ww�v,callsunshine.c.xn FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries 161 1 821 �� APPENDIX B: FLORIDA COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE TELEPHONE NUMBERS .. lelephong� Alachua Gainesville (352) 955 -2402 Baker Macclenny (904) 259 -3520 Bay Panama City (850) 784 -6105 Bradford Starke (904) 966 -6224 Brevard Cocoa (321) 633 -1702 Broward Davie (954) 370 -3725 Calhoun Blountstown (850) 674 -8323 Charlotte Punta Gorda (941) 764 -4340 Citrus Inverness (352) 527 -5700 Clay Green Cove Springs (904) 284 -6355 Collier Naples (239) 353 -4244 Columbia Lake City (386) 752 -5384 Dade Homestead (305) 248 -3311 Desoto Arcadia (863) 993 -4846 Dixie Cross City (352) 498 -1237 Duval Jacksonville (904) 387 -8850 Escambia Pensacola (850) 475 -5230 Flagler Bunnell (386) 437 -7464 Franklin Apalachicola (850) 653 -9447 Gadsden Quincy (850) 875 -7255 Gilchrist Trenton (352) 463 -3174 Glades Moore Haven (863) 946 -0244 Gulf Wewahitchka (850) 639 -3200 Hamilton Jasper (386) 792 -1276 Hardee Wauchula (863) 773 -2164 Hendry LaBelle (863) 674 -4092 Hernando Brooksville (352) 754 -4433 Highlands Sebring (863) 386 -6540 Hillsborough Seffner (813) 744 -5519 Holmes Bonifay (850) 547 -1108 Indian River Vero Beach (772) 770 -5030 Jackson Marianna (850) 482 -9620 Jefferson Monticello (850) 342 -0187 Lafayette Mayo (386) 294 -1279 Lake Tavares (352) 343 -4101 Lee Ft. Myers (239) 533 -4327 Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 1611 � g21 Leon Tallahassee (850) 606 -5200 Levy Bronson (352) 486 -5131 Liberty Bristol (850) 643 -2229 Madison Madison (850) 973 -4138 Manatee Palmetto (941) 722 -4524 Marion Ocala (352) 671 -8400 Martin Stuart (772) 288 -5654 Monroe Key West (305) 292 -4501 Nassau Callahan (904) 879 -1019 « Yulee (904) 548 -1116 Okaloosa Crestview (850) 689 -5850 « (alt- phone) (850) 729 -1400 x5850 Okeechobee Okeechobee (863) 763 -6469 Orange Orlando (407) 254 -9200 Osceola Kissimmee (321) 697 -3000 Palm Beach West Palm Beach (561) 233 -1700 Pasco Dade City (352) 521 -4288 New Port Richey (727) 847 -8177 Pinellas Largo (727) 582 -2100 Polk Bartow (863) 519 -8677 Putnam East Palatka (386) 329 -0318 St. Johns St. Augustine (904) 209 -0430 St. Lucie Fort Pierce (772) 462 -1660 '° Port St. Lucie (772) 337 -5684 Santa Rosa Milton (850) 623 -3868 Sarasota Sarasota (941) 861 -5000 Seminole Sanford (407) 665 -0311 Sumter Bushnell (352) 793 -2728 Suwannee Live Oak (386) 362 -2771 Taylor Perry (850) 838 -3508 Union Lake Butler (386) 496 -2321 Volusia DeLand (386) 822 -5778 ° Daytona Beach (386) 257 -6012 New Smyrna Beach (386) 423 -3368 Wakulla Crawfordville (850) 926 -3931 Walton DeFuniak Springs (850) 892 -8172 Washington Chipley (850) 638 -6180 FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries 1611 APPENDIX C: RULE 5E- 1.003(2) LABELING REQUIREMENTS FOR URBAN TURF FERTILIZERS Effective Dec. 31, 2007 (2) FERTILIZER LABEL REQUIREMENTS FOR URBAN TURF, SPORTS TURF OR LAWNS. (a) Definitions 1. "Urban Turf ' or "Lawns" means non agricul- tural land planted in closely mowed, managed grasses except golf courses, parks and athletic fields. 2. "Sports Turf' means non agricultural land planted exclusively for golf courses, parks and athletic fields. 3. "No Phosphate Fertilizer" means fertilizer products with phosphate levels below 0.5 % intended for established urban turf or lawns. 4. "Low Phosphate Fertilizer" means fertilizer products intended for new or established urban turf or lawns, with phosphate levels equal to or above 0.5 % or as provided in paragraph (2)(b). 5. "Starter Fertilizer" means a fertilizer formulat- ed for a one -time application at planting or near that time to encourage root growth and enhance the initial establishment. 6. "Established Urban Turf' means urban turf older than 12 months. 7. "New Urban Turf' means urban turf estab- lished less than 12 months. (b) Fertilizer products labeled for use on sports turf, urban turf or lawns shall be no phosphate or low phosphate and have labeling that meets the restrictions set forth in this rule for the applica- tion of nitrogen. 1. No phosphate fertilizers shall not contain more than 0.5 % of available phosphate expressed as P205. The "grade" shall indicate a zero guarantee. 2. Fertilizers labeled as Low phosphate shall have use directions that do not exceed an appli- cation rate of 0.25 lbs P205/1000ft2 per applica- tion and not to exceed 0.50 lbs P205/1000ft2 per year. Label use directions may be included that allow higher rates if an annual soil sample repre- sentative for the site shows the need for a higher application rate. 3. Fertilizers labeled as, or formulated for use as, starter fertilizer shall have use directions that do B2 not exceed an application rate of 1.0 lb of P205/1,000 ft2 and that subsequent applications shall be made with products meeting the defini- tion of Low or No Phosphate fertilizers. The term "Starter Fertilizer" shall be part of the brand name. 4. Fertilizers labeled as urban turf, sports turf, or lawn fertilizer shall have directions for use for nitrogen that: a. Are consistent with the recommenda- tions in the following table: Fertilization Guidelines for Established Turfgrass lawns in Three Regions of Florida North Florida is north of Ocala. Central Florida is defined as south of Ocala to a line extending from Vero Beach to Tampa. South Florida includes the remaining southern portion of the state. b. Nitrogen shall not be applied at an application rate greater than 0.7 lbs of readily available nitrogen per 1000 ft2 at any one time based on the soluble fraction of formulated fertilizer, with no more that 1 lb total N per 1000 ft2 to be applied at any one time and not to exceed the annual nitrogen recommendations in the Fertilization Guidelines for Established Turfgrass Lawns in Three Regions of Florida, set forth herein. Use directions for nitrogen may be included that allow higher rates if an annual tissue sample representative of the site shows the need for a higher application rate. 5. The following language shall appear conspic- uously on bags of fertilizer sold at retail: "Do not apply near water, storm drains or drainage ditches. Do not apply if heavy rain is expected. Apply this product only to your lawn/ garden, and sweep any product that lands on the Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 Nitrogen recommendations (Ibs N / 1000 ft2 /year)* Species North Central South Bahia grass 2 -3 2 -4 2 -4 Bermuda grass 3 -5 4 -6 5 -7 Centipede grass 1 -2 2 -3 2 -3 St. Augustine grass 2 -4 2 -5 4 -6 Zoysiagrass 3 -5 3 -6 4 -6 North Florida is north of Ocala. Central Florida is defined as south of Ocala to a line extending from Vero Beach to Tampa. South Florida includes the remaining southern portion of the state. b. Nitrogen shall not be applied at an application rate greater than 0.7 lbs of readily available nitrogen per 1000 ft2 at any one time based on the soluble fraction of formulated fertilizer, with no more that 1 lb total N per 1000 ft2 to be applied at any one time and not to exceed the annual nitrogen recommendations in the Fertilization Guidelines for Established Turfgrass Lawns in Three Regions of Florida, set forth herein. Use directions for nitrogen may be included that allow higher rates if an annual tissue sample representative of the site shows the need for a higher application rate. 5. The following language shall appear conspic- uously on bags of fertilizer sold at retail: "Do not apply near water, storm drains or drainage ditches. Do not apply if heavy rain is expected. Apply this product only to your lawn/ garden, and sweep any product that lands on the Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 driveway, sidewalk, or street, back onto your lawn/garden." (c) Specialty fertilizers labeled for urban turf or lawns shall have directions for use that include: 1. Application rates for phosphorous shall not exceed 0.25 lbs. P205/1000 ft2 per application and not exceed 0.50 lbs. P205/1000 ft2 per year. Label use directions may be included that allow higher rates if an annual soil sample representa- tive for the site shows the need for a higher application rate. 2. Application rates for nitrogen shall not exceed 0.7 lbs of readily available nitrogen per 1000 ft2 at any one time based on the soluble fraction of formulated fertilizer, with no more that 1 lb total N per 1000 ft2 to be applied at any one time and not to exceed the annual nitrogen recommendations in the Fertilization Guidelines for Established Turfgrass Lawns in Three Regions of Florida. Use directions for nitrogen may be included that allow higher rates if an annual tis- sue sample representative of the site shows the need for a higher application rate. 3. Rates shall be expressed in units of weight or volume per unit of area coverage (where applica- tion rates are given in volume, the label shall provide sufficient information to calculate the application rates by weight). 4. Rates shall be expressed per 1000 square feet. 5. Maximum coverage area per container or bag shall be displayed prominently on the front of the container or bag. (i.e. This product covers 5000 square feet; This bag feeds 4000 square feet). 16I 1 B21 (d) Fertilizers labeled for sports turf at golf courses, parks and athletic fields shall: 1. Have directions for use not to exceed rates recommended in the document titled SL191 "Recommendations for N, P, K and Mg for Golf Course and Athletic Field Fertilization Based on Mehlich I Extractant ", dated March 2007, which is hereby adopted and incorporated by reference into this rule. Copies may be obtained from the Soil and Water Science Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611 or the following website: httl2://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS404. 2. Have directions for use in accordance with the recommendations in "BMP's for the Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses ", published by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, dated January 2007. Copies may be downloaded from http: / /www.dep. state .fl.us /water /nonpoint/pubs. ht m. (e) Fertilizers other than specialty fertilizers labeled for urban turf shall: 1. Have directions for use not to exceed rates recommended in the document titled Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources in Florida, June 2002, Florida Green Industries., which is hereby adopted and incor- porated by reference into this rule. Copies may be obtained from http://wwwdel2.state.fl.us /water/ nonpoint/docs/nonpointBMP Book final.pdf. (f) Existing Stock — Licensees are permitted to sell or distribute products that do not meet the label requirements of the rule for one and one -half years after the effective date of the rule. Products at the retail level on or after the effective date of the rule are permitted to be offered for sale. FLORIDA FRIENDLY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries 161 � B21 For Ambulance, Fire, or Police Dial 911 State Warning Point 24 hours Toll -Free 1- 800 - 320 -0519 Department of Community Affairs, or (850) 413 -9911 Division of Emergency Management National Response Center 24 hours Toll -Free 1- 800 - 424 -8802 (Federal law requires that anyone who releases into the environment a reportable quantity of a hazardous substance [including oil when water is or may be affected], or a material identified as a marine pollutant, must immediately notify the NRC). FDEP Emergency Response Jacksonville (904) 807 -3246 Orlando (407) 893 -3337 Ft. Lauderdale (954) 958 -5575 Ft. Myers (239) 332 -6975 Tampa (813) 744 -6462 Panama City (850) 872 -7650 Pensacola (850) 595 -8300 Tallahassee (850) 245 -2010 CHEMTREC HOTLINE (Emergency only) 24 hours Toll -Free 1- 800 - 424 -9300 Department of Environmental Protection - Revised DECEMBER 2008 1611 B21 MIECTION A e�W P_l PROTECT OUR RESOURCES... FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Florida attracts visitors and residents alike. We all enjoy the recreational opportunities afforded by springs, beaches, rivers, forests, and prairies. And the state is a gardener's paradise, offer- ing nearly twelve months of horticultural. productivity. But Florida's rapid population growth presents challenges. Loss of wildlife habitat, water pollution, and the increasing demand placed on a limited water supply threaten the natural resources that brought us here. Now, more than ever, it is time to make choices that protect the health and beauty of Florida. Those choices start right in your home landscape. Florida's springs (pictured above) offer wildlife habitat and recreational opportunity, but they are increasingly threatened by pollution. Florida - Friendly LandscapingTM practices help protect Florida's water resources from contamination. Swales (dips) and berms (rises) help slow the runoff of stormwater from a landscape. The water perco- lates through the soil and is fil- tered by turfgrass before it . reaches the underground reser „ s a voir called the aquifer. Porous ►' pavers (pictured right), like'" mulch and crushed shell, also allow runoff to seep into the earth instead of carrying debris into nearbv water bodies. Aud" 4C3aT To learn more about creating and maintain- ing attractive landscapes that protect Florida's water resources and environment, contact your county Extension office. Or contact the FFL State office at: (352) 273 -4518 httn://fyn.ifas.ufl.edu E -mail: fyn @ifas.ufl.edu The Cooperative Extension Service is a partnership between the University of Florida and your local county government. a FIND OUT HOW TO CONVERT YOUR YARD TO A FLORIDA - FRIENDLY LANDSCAPE TODAY! Visit Publications at: hM: / /fyn.ifas.ufl.edu o����pa,PROtECTION w� FLORY Florida- Frienldly Landscaping"',.,...,,,. Solutions for Your Yard OUR YARDS AND ".. rr COMMUNITY LANDSCAPES -t-Al The first line of defense. MEvery year, thousands of Floridians turn to their countys UFAFAS ,, _IExtension office for advice from trained -- +horticultural staff and ,,.0 master gardener �'"�volunteers. UFAFAS 4.-xtension can teach you to design and maintain an attractive home landscape that uses minimal. water, fertilizer, and pesticides. Florida Yards & Neighborhoods (FYN) is a public education and outreach program for homeowners. As part of the Florida - Friendly LandscapingT" (FFL) Program, it is offered statewide through most UFAFAS Extension offices. Help is just a phone call away and your county Extension office is a wealth of information. Signage at the Citrus County Extension office (pictured below) teaches visitors about the nine Florida - Friendly LandscapingTM principles. Contact your county Extension office at http:/ /solutionsforyourlife.ifas.ufl. edu/map/ to find a schedule of FFL workshops. Learn how to build a com- post bin, build and install a rain barrel (pictured above), plant a veg- etable garden, calibrate your sprinkler system, and much more! Phone: (352) 273-4518 or visit the web site: http: / /fyn.ifas.ufl.edu. Please visit our web site to find your county Extension office. � i♦!A i The nine Florida - Friendly Landscaping' principles emphasize sustainable landscaping choices. c" #1 ` RIGHT PLANT, t RIGHT PLACE r Select plants suited for a specific location. Plants in the right place will thrive on minimal amounts of water, fertilizer, and pes- ticides. Irrigate only when your lawn and landscape show wilt signs. Water during cooler times of day, and check your irrigation system regularly for leaks and clogs. Apply fertilizers with at least 30% slow - release nitrogen (N) at the right times and in the right amounts to prevent leaching and runoff into ground- and surface waters. Never fertilize before a heavy rain. AM W g Maintain a 2 -3" layer of mulch on landscape beds to retain soil xv" �y moisture, prevent erosion, and suppress weed germination. e #5 ATTRACT WILDLIFE Choose plants with fruits or berries to attract birds and other pollinators. Leave snags and increase vertical. layering to provide wildlife habitat. #6 " MANAGE YARD PESTS 1t RESPONSIBLY Practice Integrated Pest Management (IPM) for a healthy, sustain- able approach to keeping your landscape safe from pest insects. Return valuable nutrients to the soil and reduce waste disposal by com- posting grass clippings, raked leaves, and primed tree and plant parts. REDUCE STORMWATER RUNOFF e� Use features like earth shaping and rain gardens to keep rainwater on your landscape, rather than letting it run off into storm drains, carrying fertilizers, pesticides, soil, and other debris. PROTECT THE WATERFRONT Protect the water body you live on from chemicals and debris. Designate a 10' maintenance -free zone between the shoreline and your landscape and do not fertilize, mow, or apply pesticides in that area. 2611 821 Florida Department of Environmental Protection MODEL ORDINANCE FOR FLORIDA - FRIENDLY FERTILIZER USE ON URBAN LANDSCAPES [alternate title: MODEL ORDINANCE FOR FLORIDA - FRIENDLY USE OF FERTILIZER ON URBAN LANDSCAPES] 2010 Note. Title recision for clarity. There is no defined Florida - Friendly fertiliierproduct, as timing, chemistry, grade, amount, site - specific conditions and application practices all affect `Florida friendliness'°] INTRODUCTION This attached Model Fertilizer Use Ordinance is another tool to reduce sources of nutrients coming from urban landscapes to reduce the impact of nutrients on Florida's surface and ground waters. Limiting the amount of fertilizer applied to the landscape will reduce the risk of nutrient enrichment of surface and ground waters, but effective nutrient management requires more comprehensive control measures. Such a comprehensive approach is needed that may include, but is not limited to, land planning and low- impact development, site plan design, landscape design, irrigation system design and maintenance, fertilizer application, landscape maintenance, and waste disposal. To assist local governments in improving their existing land development regulations, several "model" ordinances have been developed. These include: "Low Impact Design" ordinances which seek to reduce the impact of urbanization on our natural resources by stressing "source controls" that either minimize the generation of stormwater or minimize the pollutants that can get into stormwater. For example, promoting development designs that minimizes clearing of natural vegetation and the compaction of urban soils. A Model Springs Protection Code was developed by DCA, DEP, and other stakeholders that includes specific Land Development Regulation recommendations that promote Low Impact Design. This Model Code is available as Chapter 5 in Protecting Florida's Springs. An Implementation Guidebook. It is available at httl2://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcl2/DCP/sl2rings/index.cfm. "Landscape Ordinances" because design, construction, and maintenance are major determinants in the amount of fertilizer and irrigation that is needed to maintain healthy urban landscapes and minimize adverse impacts on water resources. A model Landscape Ordinance entitled "Guidelines for Model Ordinance Language for Protection of Water Quality and Quantity Using Florida- friendly Lawns and Landscapes" was developed by a group of agencies, industries, and interest groups over a two year period and published in 2003. It was fundamentally an adaptation of earlier water conservation ordinances revised to include water quality protections for compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) or stormwater NPDES permit requirements. The language focused on continuing education of lawn care and landscape professionals, proper planning and supervision during development and construction, and the use of best management practices, including the Florida - Friendly Landscape Program. This model ordinance has been renamed "Florida- 1611821 Friendly Landscapinem Model Guidelines for Ordinance Language for Protection of Water Quality and Quantity," updated in 2008 and 2010 and may be downloaded from: httl2://www.del2.state.fl.us/water/­nonl2oint/12ubs.htm. Finally, the 2004 Florida Legislature directed Florida's water management districts to work with interested parties to develop landscape irrigation and Florida - Friendly design standards for new construction (section 373.228, F.S.). Local governments are to use the standards and guidelines when developing landscape irrigation and Florida - Friendly ordinances. The Committee on Landscape Irrigation and Florida - Friendly Design Standards convened and developed the standards. They are published in a booklet called Landscape Irrigation and Florida friendly Design Standards (December 2006). The 2009 Legislature has directed that it be revised in 2011. The current version of this document can be downloaded from: htti2://www.de!i2.state.fl.us/water/wateri2ohcy/land irr.htm 2 1611 821 MODEL ORDINANCE FOR FLORIDA - FRIENDLY USE OF FERTILIZER ON URBAN LANDSCAPES (AUGUST 2010) 1. FINDINGS As a result of impairment to (MUNICIPAL / COUNTY)'S surface waters caused by excessive nutrients, or, as a result of increasing levels of nitrogen in the surface and /or ground water within the aquifers or springs within the boundaries of (municipality/ county), the governing body of (municipality / county) has determined that the use of fertilizers on lands within (municipality / county) creates a risk to contributing to adverse effects on surface and /or ground water. Accordingly, the governing board of (municipality/ county) finds that management measures [Guidancc: optional "additional management measures than are othenxise'J contained in the most recent edition of the "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries, 2008, " may be required by this ordinance. 2. PURPOSE AND INTENT This Ordinance regulates the proper use of fertilizers by any applicator; requires proper training of Commercial and Institutional Fertilizer Applicators; establishes training and licensing requirements; establishes a Prohibited Application Period; specifies allowable fertilizer application rates and methods, fertilizer -free zones, low maintenance zones, and exemptions. The Ordinance requires the use of Best Management Practices which provide specific management guidelines to minimize negative secondary and cumulative environmental effects associated with the misuse of fertilizers. These secondary and cumulative effects have been observed in and on (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY)'s natural and constructed stormwater conveyances, rivers, creeks, canals, springs, lakes, estuaries and other water bodies. (Guidance: as appropriate] Collectively, these water bodies are an asset critical to the environmental, recreational, cultural and economic well-being of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) residents and the health of the public. Overgrowth of algae and vegetation hinder the effectiveness of flood attenuation provided by natural and constructed stormwater conveyances. Regulation of nutrients, including both phosphorus and nitrogen contained in fertilizer, will help improve and maintain water and habitat quality. 3. DEFINITIONS For this Article, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth in this section unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. "Administrator" means the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Administrator, or an administrative official of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) government designated by the City /County Administrator to administer and enforce the provisions of this Article. "Application" or "Apply" means the actual physical deposit of fertilizer to turf or landscape plants. 3 16 I i B21 "Applicator" means any Person who applies fertilizer on turf and /or landscape plants in (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY). "Board or Governing Board" means the Board of City /County Commissioners of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), Florida. "Best Management Practices" means turf and landscape practices or combination of practices based on research, field - testing, and expert review, determined to be the most effective and practicable on- location means, including economic and technological considerations, for improving water quality, conserving water supplies and protecting natural resources. "Code Enforcement Officer, Official, or Inspector" means any designated employee or agent of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) whose duty it is to enforce codes and ordinances enacted by (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY). "Commercial Fertilizer Applicator ", except as provided in 482.1562(9) F.S., means any person who applies fertilizer for payment or other consideration to property not owned by the person or firm applying the fertilizer or the employer of the applicator. "Fertilize," "Fertilizing," or "Fertilization" means the act of applying fertilizer to turf, specialized turf, or landscape plants. "Fertilizer" means any substance or mixture of substances that contains one or more recognized plant nutrients and promotes plant growth, or controls soil acidity or alkalinity, or provides other soil enrichment, or provides other corrective measures to the soil. "Guaranteed Analysis" means the percentage of plant nutrients or measures of neutralizing capability claimed to be present in a fertilizer. "Institutional Applicator" means any person, other than a private, non - commercial or a Commercial Applicator (unless such definitions also apply under the circumstances), that applies fertilizer for the purpose of maintaining turf and /or landscape plants. Institutional Applicators shall include, but shall not be limited to, owners, managers or employees of public lands, schools, parks, religious institutions, utilities, industrial or business sites and any residential properties maintained in condominium and /or common ownership. "Landscape Plant" means any native or exotic tree, shrub, or groundcover (excluding turf). "Low Maintenance Zone" means an area a minimum of ten (10) feet wide adjacent to water courses which is planted and managed in order to minimize the need for fertilization, watering, mowing, etc. "Person" means any natural person, business, corporation, limited liability company, partnership, limited partnership, association, club, organization, and /or any group of people acting as an organized entity. 4 "Prohibited Application Period" means the time period during which a Flood Watch or Warning, or a Tropical Storm Watch or Warning, or a Hurricane Watch or Warning is in effect for any portion of (CITY /COUNTY), issued by the National Weather Service, or if heavy rain' is likely. "(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Approved Best Management Practices Training Program" means a training program approved per 403.9338 F.S., or any more stringent requirements set forth in this Article that includes the most current version of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Vater Resources by the Green Industries, 2008, "as revised, and approved by the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Administrator. "Saturated soil" means a soil in which the voids are filled with water. Saturation does not require flow. For the purposes of this ordinance, soils shall be considered saturated if standing water is present or the pressure of a person standing on the soil causes the release of free water. Guidance. Some have questioned the enforceability ofpractical field definitions which should be considered before adoption.] "Slow Release," "Controlled Release," "Timed Release," "Slowly Available," or "Water Insoluble Nitrogen" means nitrogen in a form which delays its availability for plant uptake and use after application, or which extends its availability to the plant longer than a reference rapid or quick release product. "Turf," "Sod," or "Lawn" means a piece of grass- covered soil held together by the roots of the grass. "Urban landscape" means pervious areas on residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, highway rights -of -way, or other nonagricultural lands that are planted with turf or horticultural plants. For the purposes of this section, agriculture has the same meaning as in s.570.02. 4. APPLICABILITY This Ordinance shall be applicable to and shall regulate any and all applicators of fertilizer and areas of application of fertilizer within the area of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) unless such applicator is specifically exempted by the terms of this Ordinance from the regulatory provisions of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be prospective only, and shall not impair any existing contracts. Guidance: In 403.9336, the Legislature further finds that local conditions, including variations in the types and quality of water bodies, site - pecific soils andgeology, and urban or rural densities and World Meteorological Organization definition of heavy rain: Rainfall greater than or equal to 50 mm (2 inches) in a 24 hour period. httn:Hsevere.worldweather orWrain /, and forecast keyword "likely ", 1611 g21 characteristics, may necessitate the implementation of additional or more stringent fertiliser management practices at the localgovernment level. Localgovernment may adopt additional or more stringent provisions to the model ordinance as provided in 403.9337(2). However, the localgovernment should consider the disadvantages of confusing jurisdictional differences and should clearly demonstrate they meet the required criteria. (2) Each county and municipalgovernment located within the watershed of a water body or water segment that is listed as impaired by nutrients pursuant to s. 403.067, shall, at a minimum, adopt the department's Model Ordinance for Florida - Friendly Fertiliser Use on Urban Landscapes. A localgovernment may adopt additional or more stringent standards than the model ordinance if the following criteria are met: • (a) The localgovernment has demonstrated, as part of a comprehensive program to address nonpoint sources of nutrient pollution which is science based, and economically and technically feasible, that additional or more stringent standards than the model ordinance are necessary in order to adequately address urban fertilizer contributions to nonpoint source nutrient loading to a water body. o (b) The localgovernment documents that it has considered all relevant scientific information, including input from the department, the institute, the Department ofAgriculture and Consumer Services, and the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, if provided, on the need for additional or more stringent provisions to address fertilitier use as a contributor to water quality degradation. All documentation must become part of the public record before adoption of the additional or more stringent criteria.] [Guidance: Florida Statues 125.568(3), 166.048(3), 373.185(3), 720.3075(4), and others provide that a local ordinance, deed restriction or covenant may not prohibit or be enforced so as to prohibit any property owner from implementing Florida friendly landscaping on his or her land or create any requirement or limitation in conflict with any provision of part IT of this chapter {3 73 } or a water shortage order, other order, consumptive use permit, or rule adopted or issued pursuant to Chapter 373 part IL] [Guidance: Florida Statues 482.156 and 482.1562. Neither the Limited Commercial Landscape Maintenance Certification Program nor the Limited Certification for Urban Landscape Commercial Fertiliser Application allows landscape maintenance workers to make any kind of pesticide applications (including weed control and /or weed and feed products) to any turf areas.] [Guidance: Florida Statues 482.242, and 487.051 (2), P.S. Regulation of pest control businesses and applicators, and of pesticide use, is preempted to the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS and suspected pesticide misuse should be reported to FDACS. 5. TIMING OF FERTILIZER APPLICATION No applicator shall apply fertilizers containing nitrogen and /or phosphorus to turf and /or landscape plants during the Prohibited Application Period, or to saturated soils. [Guidance: One of the most controversial issues associated with recent fertilitier ordinances enacted by local governments is the definition of the Prohibited Application Period. Some ordinances have prohibited the application of fertiliser, even slow release formulations, during the summer rainy season, opicaly June 1 to September 30. The reasoning is that rain occurs frequently, saturating the soil, leading to more runoff. Saturated soils are prone to runoff or leaching with little or no additional water, and pose a higher than normal risk until soil moisture capacity is restored. Fertilitier management is largely about keeping the 0 1611 82il nitrogen and /or phosphorus in the root Zone where it can be used by plants. Periods of heavy rainfall contribute to leaching, which is washing nutrients out of the root Zone, and to runoff, especially in areas with compacted or bare soils and significant slope. Vegetative ground cover is important to minimitiing erosion, filtering particulates, and incorporating or promoting the biological transformation of potential pollutants. Many variables influence the relationship between fertiliser rates, vegetation health and nutrient enrichment of surface and ground waters. According, sound science and carefully reasoned judgment are recommended in determining how to define the Prohibited Application Period. j 6. FERTILIZER FREE ZONES Fertilizer shall not be applied within ten (10) feet of any pond, stream, watercourse, lake, canal, or wetland as defined by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Chapter 62 -340, Florida Administrative Code) or from the top of a seawall, unless a deflector shield, drop spreader, or liquid applicator with a visible and sharply defined edge, is used, in which case a minimum of 3 feet shall be maintained. If more stringent (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Code regulations apply, this provision does not relieve the requirement to adhere to the more stringent regulations. Newly planted turf and /or landscape plants may be fertilized in this Zone only for a sixty (60) day period beginning 30 days after planting if need to allow the plants to become well established. Caution shall be used to prevent direct deposition of nutrients into the water. [Guidance: This Zone is a setback to prevent the applicator from inadvertently depositing fertiliser in the water while performing the application. It is not designed as a treatment buffer, and is to be adhered to as a fundamental environmental safety as of the applicator's job, regardless of the owner's desires. Some communities have existing residential setbacks of as little as 10 feet from water or seawall. Low maintenance Zones, vegetated falter strips, and riparian buffers are strong encouraged, but such activities are rightly apart of land use planning. Local governments are encouraged to implement these low - impact developmentpractices where feasible.] 7. LOW MAINTENANCE ZONES A voluntary ten (10) foot low maintenance zone is strongly recommended, but not mandated, from any pond, stream, water course, lake, wetland or from the top of 'a seawall. A swale /berm system is recommended for installation at the landward edge of this low maintenance zone to capture and filter runoff. If more stringent (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Code regulations apply, this provision does not relieve the requirement to adhere to the more stringent regulations. No mowed or cut vegetative material may be deposited or left remaining in this zone or deposited in the water. Care should be taken to prevent the over -spray of aquatic weed products in this zone. [Gizidance: Care must be taken to ensure erosion of the surface soil does not occur. Excessive erosion may be a greater pollution ha wrd than occasional proper applications of fertihZer.] 8. FERTILIZER CONTENT AND APPLICATION RATES Guidance: RULE 5E- 1.003(2)(d), F.A.0 contains the followin gprovisionsforg!tILcourses, parks and athletic fields. As such, no additional specific requirements are included for these types of urban turf The appropriate Best Management Practices listed below must be followed on such sites for nutrient management activities.• (d) Fertilisers labeled for sports turf atgolf courses, parks and athletic fields shall- 7 1611 B21 1. Have directions for use not to exceed rates recommended in the document titled SL191 "recommendations for N, P, K and Mg for Golf Course and Athletic Field Fertili .Zation Based on Mehlich I Extractant" dated March 2007, which is hereby adopted and incorporated by reference into this rule. Copies may be obtained from the Soil and Water Science Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611 or the following website: ho: / edis. fa s. ufl. edu/ SS404. 2. Have directions for use in accordance with the recommendations in `BMP's far the Enhancement of EnvironmentalQuality on Florida Golf Courses'; published by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, dated January 2007. Copies may be downloaded from ha://www.det).state.t7.uslwaterinonpointlt)ubs.h tm. Note that this does not exempt applicators at these sites from the required basic Green Industry BMP training. Information on this is located at htt � &n fas u .edu/brofessionals /BMP over v ie w . htm. If other provisions of the ordinance are not appropriate for these sites, such exceptions should be noted.] (a) Fertilizers applied to turf within (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) shall be formulated and applied in accordance with requirements and directions provided by Rule 5E- 1.003(2), Florida Administrative Code, Labeling Requirements For Urban Turf Fertilisers. (b) Fertilizer containing nitrogen or phosphorus shall not be applied before seeding or sodding a site, and shall not be applied for the first 30 days after seeding or sodding, except when hydro - seeding for temporary or permanent erosion control in an emergency situation (wildfire, etc.), or in accordance with the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for that site. (c) Nitrogen or phosphorus fertilizer shall not be applied to turf or landscape plants except as provided in (a) above for turf, or in OF /IFAS recommendations for landscape plants, vegetable gardens, and fruit trees and shrubs, unless a soil or tissue deficiency has been verified by an approved test. [Guidance: Soil and tissue tests forphosphorus are normally done by UFIIFAS or another accredited laboratory. IFAS recommendations are available from the County Extension service or hgp:llsolutions%ryourlife.ufl edu /lawn and garden/] 9. APPLICATION PRACTICES a. Spreader deflector shields are required when fertilizing via rotary (broadcast) spreaders. Deflectors must be positioned such that fertilizer granules are deflected away from all impervious surfaces, fertilizer -free zones and water bodies, including wetlands. b. Fertilizer shall not be applied, spilled, or otherwise deposited on any impervious surfaces. c. Any fertilizer applied, spilled, or deposited, either intentionally or accidentally, on any impervious surface shall be immediately and completely removed to the greatest extent practicable. d. Fertilizer released on an impervious surface must be immediately contained and either legally applied to turf or any other legal site, or returned to the original or other appropriate container. e. In no case shall fertilizer be washed, swept, or blown off impervious surfaces into stormwater drains, ditches, conveyances, or water bodies. 10. MANAGEMENT OF GRASS CLIPPINGS AND VEGETATIVE MATTER In no case shall grass clippings, vegetative material, and /or vegetative debris be washed, • T swept, or blown off into stormwater drains, ditches, conveyances, water bodies, wetlands, or sidewalks or roadways. Any material that is accidentally so deposited shall be immediately removed to the maximum extent practicable. 11. EXEMPTIONS The provisions set forth above in this Ordinance shall not apply to: (a) bona fide farm operations as defined in the Florida Right to Farm Act, Section 823.14 Florida Statutes; (b) other properties not subject to or covered under the Florida Right to Farm Act that have pastures used for grazing livestock; (c) any lands used for bona fide scientific research, including, but not limited to, research on the effects of fertilizer use on urban stormwater, water quality, agronomics, or horticulture. [Gvldance. Limited waivers for special cases such as botanicalgardens, etc. should not be considered as less stringent for the purposes of the model as a minimum requirement.) 12. TRAINING (a) All commercial and institutional applicators of fertilizer within the (un)incorporated area of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), shall abide by and successfully complete the six -hour training program in the "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries" offered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection through the University of Florida Extension "Florida- Friendly Landscapes" program, or an approved equivalent. (b) Private, non - commercial applicators are encouraged to follow the recommendations of the University of Florida IFAS Florida Yards and Neighborhoods program when applying fertilizers. [Guldance. A localgovernment may establish a certification /education program for the institutional or private application of fertilitiers indicating the completion of an education program for special local requirements not covered in the above programs. It is up to the localgovernment to set a continuing education or renewal provision for these applicators. Persons n)ith statewide FDACS commercial fertiliser certification cannot be required to submit to additional local testing after obtaining the FDA CS certificate. J 13. LICENSING OF COMMERCIAL APPLICATORS (a) Prior to 1 January 2014, all commercial applicators of fertilizer within the (un)incorporated area of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), shall abide by and successfully complete training and continuing education requirements in the "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Dater Resources by the Green Industries'; offered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection through the University of Florida IFAS "Florida - friendly Landscapes" program, or an approved equivalent program, prior to obtaining a 0 li I 16I 1 1 621 (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Local Business Tax Certificate for any category of occupation which may apply any fertilizer to turf and /or landscape plants. Commercial Fertilizer Applicators shall provide proof of completion of the program to the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Tax Collector's office within 180 days of the effective date of this ordinance. [Guidance: The ordinance is prospective only. Occasions may exist for a finite time where pre- existing contract terms mandate practices not in accordance with the BMPs. Such terms should be voided at contract expiration.] (b) After 31 December, 2013, all commercial applicators of fertilizer within the (un)incorporated area of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), shall have and carry in their possession at all times when applying fertilizer, evidence of certification by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services as a Commercial Fertilizer Applicator per 5E- 14.117(18) F.A.C. (c) All businesses applying fertilizer to turf and /or landscape plants (including but not limited to residential lawns, golf courses, commercial properties, and multi - family and condominium properties) must ensure that at least one employee has a "Florida- friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries" training certificate prior to the business owner obtaining a Local Business Tax Certificate. Owners for any category of occupation which may apply any fertilizer to Turf and /or Landscape Plants shall provide proof of completion of the program to the (Municipality/ County) Tax Collector's Office.[Guidance. This is an example of an administrative enforcement mechanism. It may be modified to use other local mechanisms as appropriate]. 14. ENFORCEMENT [Guidance: Local governments should consider making penalties consistent with their other fines and penalties.] Funds generated by penalties imposed under this section shall be used by (Municipality/ County) for the administration and enforcement of section 403.9337, Florida Statutes, and the corresponding sections of this ordinance, and to further water conservation and nonpoint pollution prevention activities. 10 16ii B21 UFUNIVERSITY of BUL867 FLORIDA IFAS Extension Grass Carp: A Fish for Biological Management of Hydrilla and Other Aquatic Weeds in Florida David L. Sutton and Vernon V. Vandiver, Jr.2 Abundant growth of aquatic plants causes serious problems in ponds, lakes, rivers, and irrigation and drainage throughout Florida. In some situations, native aquatic plants become weeds, but most often exotic plants introduced from areas outside the state flourish under the favorable growing conditions found in Florida. Long -term economical solutions to Florida's aquatic weed problems have been elusive and there is a need for control techniques to alleviate aquatic weed problems. This bulletin provides information on a biological method, the grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella Val.), for management of some of Florida's aquatic weed problems. Emphasis is placed on use of this fish to control hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata [L.f.] Royle) and other submersed aquatic plants. Since the grass carp is a living organism - in contrast to either herbicides or mechanical devices used for aquatic weed management a somewhat different approach is required. A knowledge of the life cycles of plants that become weeds and feeding behavior of the fish are important considerations in understanding the various ways in which grass carp can be used to manage plant problems. The grass carp will not be useful for all aquatic plant problems; rather it offers the potential to effectively and economically manage certain of them. Man has probably been the single most important factor in the spread of hydrilla (Figure 1) and other aquatic plants. The demand for aquatic plants used in aquariums and elsewhere has resulted in their sale and distribution throughout the country. Figure 1 . Also, once established in natural waters, the plants may be spread by boaters traveling from one body of water to another. It is to be hoped that public recognition of problems some of these plants may cause will lead to regulations and public cooperation to cease their introduction and transportation, purposeful or inadvertent. 1. This document is Bulletin 867, Department of Fisheries and Aquacultural Sciences, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. First published December 1986. Reviewed March 2000. Please visit the EDIS Web site at http: / /edis.ifas.ufl.edu. 2. David L. Sutton, Professor (Aquatic Weeds), and Vernon V. Vandiver Jr., Associate Professor (Aquatic Weeds Specialist); Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, 32611. The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences is an equal opportunity /affirmative action employer authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function without regard to race, color, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. For information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension Service office. Florida Cooperative Extension Service /Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences /University of Florida /Christine Taylor Waddill, Dean. 1611 s Grass Carp: A Fish for Biological Management of Hydrilla and Other Aquatic Weeds in.... 2 Herbicides are frequently used for hydrilla control, but biological organisms offer unique advantages for management of hydrilla and other aquatic weeds. Advantages of using effective, safe organisms to manage aquatic weeds biologically include (1) longevity of the method once it has become established; (2)constant feeding activity against the growing weed; (3) low long -term costs; (4) high effectiveness on some plants; and (5) in the case of fish, the potential for conversion of the weed to a useful protein product (fish flesh). The most promising biological agent for many submersed plant problems and some other aquatic weeds is the grass carp (Figure 2), also commonly called the white amur. Figure 2 . Description of Grass Carp This fish is indigenous to those rivers in the eastern part of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and China that flow into the Pacific Ocean between latitudes 50° North and 23° North. The grass carp has been introduced into more than 50 countries throughout the world for aquatic weed control and aquaculture. In some countries, the grass carp is an integral part of fish culture and forms an important source of protein for human consumption. The grass carp was considered for introduction into the U.S. primarily because of its plant eating diet, which was thought to have great potential for the control of aquatic weeds. In 1963 the U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Fish Farming Experiment Station, Stuttgart, Arkansas, in cooperation with Auburn University, imported grass carp for experimental purposes; in 1970, this fish was introduced into Florida primarily for researchers to study its ability to control hydrilla. Wide -scale use of the grass carp in Florida and many other states during 1970 to 1984 was limited and closely regulated due to fears about its reproduction and negative impact on sport fish. Since the grass carp 5 potential for causing such problems was evident, early research focused on developing a fish that would be non - reproductive but would retain the grass carp's herbivorous diet. The natural grass carp is diploid with a chromosome number (2N) of 48. During the past few years, research with the grass carp has resulted in the production of a sterile triploid grass carp (3N), which has an extra set of chromosomes. The aquatic weed control capabilities of the triploid fish are essentially the same as the diploid. The triploid grass carp is produced in the same way as the diploid, except that fertilized eggs subjected to heat, cold, or pressure shock result in the formation of fish with an extra set of chromosomes for a total of 72. The extra chromosomes make these fish sterile. The nuclei of cells of the triploid grass carp are larger than those of diploid fish. An instrument such as the Coulter Counter can be used to measure the diameter of the nuclei of fish blood cells. Therefore, it is possible to screen fish considered for introduction into aquatic weed problem areas to assure that each fish stocked is a triploid. The grass carp tolerates cold water and also flourishes and grows at rapid rates in warm waters such as those found in Florida. These herbivorous fish may grow at a rate of 2 pounds (0.91 kg) or more per month when sufficient vegetation is available. The young fish grow at a much faster rate than older, mature fish, and females grow faster than males. In Florida, some fish have grown to 40 pounds (18 kg) with an apparent life span of approximately 10 years. The grass carp is primarily a "grazer "; it tends to feed on the surface and in shallow water. At times it can be seen feeding with its back and tail extending above the surface. The grass carp prefers submersed plants and the soft tips of young tender plants (Table 1). Small grass carp prefer musk -grass over hydrilla when both plants 1611 621 Grass Carp: A Fish for Biological Management of HVdrilla and Other Aquatic Weeds in.... 3 are present, but large fish will consume hydrilla before musk grass. Even though young fish will feed on various species of Cladophora and Spirogyra and other filamentous algae, the grass carp is not normally considered an effective method to control many types of algae. Feeding rates of large, mature fish on algae are not well known. When the preferred food of the grass carp is not available, this fish feeds on terrestrial vegetation hanging over the surface of the water. In fact, the name "grass carp" comes from its unique ability to consume terrestrial grasses. Other terrestrial plants eaten by the grass carp range from banana leaves (Musa spp.) to various dried grasses, including clippings from golf courses or similar turf areas. Caution should be exercised when feeding grass clippings to grass carp. Some pesticides commonly used on turf areas are quite toxic to fish. The ability of grass carp to consume and utilize aquatic plants depends on the size of both plants and fish. Additional factors which influence the feeding behavior of grass carp include their size, age, gender, and population density, and the species, abundance, and location of plants within a body of water. Management Techniques Birds, snakes, and other fish prey on small grass carp. Based on measurements of mouth width and total length for largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides Lacepede), it has been calculated that grass carp must be greater than 18 inches (450 mm) in length to eliminate predation. Therefore, when predators are present, fish to be stocked should be at least 12 inches (0.3 m) in length or 1 pound (0.45 kg) in weight for good survival. Mortality rates increase sharply with smaller fish. Small grass carp have a better chance of survival if they are stocked when the weeds are dense enough to provide protective cover. When the weed biomass is low, such as after a herbicide treatment, use of mechanical methods, or in a new body of water, fish in good condition and weighing 5 pounds (2.3 kg) or more will survive better than smaller fish. To remove hydrilla and other aquatic weeds with grass carp alone, fish must be stocked in sufficient numbers so that their consumption rate exceeds the growth rate of the plants. With so many factors influencing the feeding rate of the grass carp and the growth rate of the plants, it is impossible to give one specific stocking rate that will apply for every situation. Rates of 20 to 255 grass carp per acre (50 to 638 fish per hectare) have been found to provide effective control of hydrilla. Removal of hydrilla with 40 fish per acre (100 per ha) is shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. A dense growth of any weed will obviously require more fish than a sparse amount of the plant. One approach is to stock 20 to 30 fish per acre (50 to 75 grass carp per hectare). Then in a year to a year and a half, add more fish if the desired level of control has not been achieved. Figure 3 . Figure 4. In a body of water, the area infested with weeds in relation to the total area may be taken into consideration when determining the number of fish to stock. Transect lines, a recording fathometer, biomass sampler, or aerial surveys can be used to help estimate the amount of weeds present. In this way, the fish can be stocked according to the amount of vegetation, rather than the total area of the body of water under consideration. 1611 1­4 Grass Carp: A Fish for Biological Management of Hydrilla and Other Aquatic Weeds in... 4 Very low oxygen levels can be encountered during the early morning or on cloudy days in bodies of water containing dense weed growth. In this case, it is better to use herbicides or to mechanically remove the hydrilla before stocking the fish, or better yet, wait for cooler water temperatures before stocking. A few measurements of dissolved oxygen made just prior to sunrise, particularly during the summer, will give a good indication of whether sufficient dissolved oxygen is present for good fish survival. Dissolved oxygen readings of at least 3 ppm will help ensure good survival of the fish. It should also be noted that dissolved oxygen levels tend to decrease with increasing water temperature. Use of herbicides to remove a majority of the biomass of hydrilla before stocking with grass carp will reduce the number offish required, since the fish need to consume only the newly emerging hydrilla growth. This integrated approach appears to be an efficient and cost - effective way to manage hydrilla. When herbicides are used, sufficient time must be allowed for the indirect effects of the herbicide to diminish prior to stocking grass carp. Although most aquatic herbicides are not toxic to fish, the decaying vegetation may reduce dissolved oxygen to levels unsuitable for good survival of fish. Oxygen measurements should be taken to indicate whether the water is suitable for stocking grass carp. In small bodies of water, 5 fish per acre (13 grass carp per hectare) have controlled hydrilla regrowth following use of herbicides. Rates lower than this may be possible since 5 fish per acre in some situations will eliminate all submersed plant growth. Therefore, to prevent regrowth of hydrilla but at the same time allow for growth of other desirable plants, rates of 1 to 3 fish per acre (3 to 8 fish per hectare) may be suitable, with an occasional spot treatment of herbicide to control any new growth of hydrilla which becomes more abundant than the fish can consume. One area of interest is the use of grass carp to manage hydrilla concomitant with establishment of desirable, native aquatic plants. In order to accomplish this, low numbers of fish or the use of plants low on the list of foods preferred by the fish are important considerations. With grass carp it may be possible to eliminate hydrilla in many bodies of water and promote growth of desirable aquatic plants to enhance water quality. The grass carp has also provided control of hydrilla in some flowing water situations. Figure 5 and Figure 6 show an agricultural canal before and after use of herbicides and stocking of grass carp. Figure 5 . Figure 6 . Limited work has been done on the use of grass carp in conjunction with mechanical control methods prior to fish stocking. However, it is likely that the number of fish required following mechanical removal of hydrilla would be higher than the number required after application of herbicides, but considerably lower than the number required if fish alone were used. Stocking of grass carp must take place after any negative effects of mechanical harvesting have diminished. For example, a temporary reduction in dissolved oxygen may occur during harvesting, due to sediment disturbance and suspension of decaying material in the water. Mechanical methods can be especially useful for removing portions of dense mats of weeds. This creates weed -free refuge areas where the fish would not be subjected to the low oxygen levels that can occur in the thick mat of plants. A Fish for Bioloaical 161 1 82 of Hydrilla and Other Aquatic Weeds in.... The time of year to stock grass carp depends primarily on availability of fish and on water quality. When the fish are used in conjunction with herbicides or mechanical methods, stocking needs to be done prior to regrowth of hydrilla but after the effects of these treatments have dissipated. The fish can be transported and handled much easier during cooler months than during the hot summer months. Injured fish are less susceptible to diseases when stocked in cool water rather than warm water. Also, as discussed earlier, cool water contains more dissolved oxygen than warm water. In bodies of water with culverts or canals leading to other areas, screens or gates must be installed to prevent escape of the grass carp. Barriers need to be constructed so the fish cannot jump over them. Screens (Figure 7) have proven effective in preventing movement of grass carp while allowing unrestricted movement of water. This type of barrier must have spaces between the bars narrower than the stocked grass carp's body width. Figure 7. Grass carp are extremely difficult to remove from a body of water. Draining the water or using a fish toxicant such as Rotenone are two ways to remove them. Permit Requirements for Grass Carp In Florida, a permit is required by law for use or possession of grass carp. Only grass carp certified as triploid can be used in an aquatic weed management program. Individuals interested in using grass carp for aquatic weed management may contact the University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service or the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission for assistance in stocking rates, suppliers of certified triploid grass carp, and procedures for obtaining a permit. Application for a permit may be obtained by writing the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, Bureau of Fisheries Management, 620 S. Meridan St., Tallahassee, FL 32301. Summary Management of hydrilla and other aquatic weeds in many bodies of water is possible with grass carp. An integrated management program consisting of low stocking rates of fish combined with applications of herbicides or mechanical control methods may be the best way to reduce nuisance growth of weeds. This approach may also encourage growth of desirable native aquatic plants. Converting unwanted weeds to valuable fish protein is an additional benefit of using grass carp. Additional Readings Cross, D. G. 1969. Aquatic weed control using grass carp. J. Fish Biol. 1:27 -30. Shireman, J. V. and C. R. Smith. 1983. Synopsis of Biological Data on the Grass Carp Ctenopharyngodon idella (Cuvier and Valenciennes, 1844). FAO Fisheries Synopsis No. 135. 86 pp. Sutton, D. L. 1974. Utilization of hydrilla by the white amur. Hyacinth Contr. J. 12:66 -70. Sutton, D. L. 1977. Grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella Val. in North America. Aquatic Botany 3:157 -164. Swingle, H. S. 1957. Control of pondweeds by use of herbivorous fishes. Proc. South. Weed Conf. 10:11 -17. Van Dyke, J. M. and D. L. Sutton. 1977. Digestion of duckweed (Lemna spp.) by the grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella. J. Fish Biol. 11:273 -278. Van Dyke, J. M., A. J. Leslie, Jr., and L. E. Nall. 1984. The effects of the grass carp on the aquatic macrophytes of four Florida lakes. J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 22:87 -95. 161 1 .821 ', Grass Carp: A Fish for Biological Management of Hydrilla and Other Aquatic Weeds in.... 6 Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank W. B. Ennis, Jr., J. C. Joyce, C. L. Phillippy, J.V. Shireman, J. G. Stanley, J. A Van Dyke, and F. J. Ware for their critical review of this article. 1611 B I Grass Carp: A Fish for Biological Management of Hydrilla and Other Aquatic Weeds in 7 Table 1. Table 1. A few common Florida aquatic plants eaten by grass carp in the approximate order of preference. Order ofpreference Commonname Scientificname 1 Hydrilla Hydrilla verticillata [L.f] Royle 2 Musk -grass Chara spp. 3 Southern maiad Najas quadalupensis (Spreng,) Magnus 4 Brazilian clodea Egeria densa Planch. 5 Water -meal Wolffia spp. 6 Duckweeds Lemna spp. and Spirodela spp. 7 Azolla or water -fern Azolla caroliniana Willd. 8 Pondweeds Potamogetan spp. 9 Coontail Ceratophyllum demersum L. 10 Torpedograss Panicum repens L. 11 Cat -tail Typha spp. 12 Water -aloe Stratiotes aloides L. 13 Watercress Nasturtium officinale R. Br. 14 Eurasian watermilfoil Myriophyllum spicatum L. 15 Tapegrass or eel -grass Vallisneria americana Michx. 16 Parrott - feather Myriophyllum aquaticum (Veil.) Verdc. 17 Water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms 18 Water - lettuce Pistia stratiotes L. 19 Water - lillies Nymphaea spp. 20 Spatterdock Nupharluteum (L.) Sibth. & Sm. Untitled Page CONTACT INFORMATION Name: First: DOB (mm /dd /yyyy): Street: Street 2: City: Email: Cell Phone: Home Phone Work Phone: Fax: Lake Management Company Homeowners Association: 16 11 821ge I °" APPLICATION FOR TRIPLOID GRASS CARP PERMIT WATER BODY INFORMATION Last: Middle: Zi State: FLORIDA Ext: How many Triploid Grass Carp are you requesting: How many ponds at this site: Lake Name: r "— Lake County: ICOLLIER Acreage: �— What is the physical address of the body of water where the carp will be released? Copy Address from Above Street: Street 2: �— City: State: Are there any water inlets or outlets to the water body? zip: FLORIDA r Yes r no Has any state, county, city, or other agency r Yes r no designated this site as a permitted mitigation or water quality treatment https: // public. myfwc. com /crossdoi/ triploidgrasscarp /PrShowQuestionaire.aspx 12/3/2010 Untitled Page 1ge 2 o B21 site wherein specific aquatic vegetation must be maintained? RIPARIAN OWNERSHIP Please check the appropriate box to designate r Single Owner ownership of the waterbody and /or adjacent r Multiple Private Owners property: Do all riparian owners consent to the stocking of r yes r no triploid grass carp in this water body? Comments: By selecting the Apply for Permit button below, you certify that the information provided by you above is correct and true to the best of your knowledge. Apply for Permit I Return https:// public. myfwc. com /crossdoi/ triploidgrasscarp /PrShowQuestionaire.aspx 12/3/2010 11/23/10 Pelican Bay Nutrient Management Plan Propos(� Associate8 2 1 TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC. MARINE & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B • Naples, Florida 34104 -3732 • (239) 643 -0166 • Fax 643 -6632• lauren @turrell - associates.com November 23, 2010 James Hoppensteadt Pelican Bay Foundation, Inc. 6251 Pelican Bay Blvd. Naples, FL 34108 Re: Proposal for Professional Environmental Services Dear Mr. Hoppensteadt: Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. is pleased to provide you with this amended proposal for environmental services. We appreciate that the Foundation is still interested in creating a nutrient management plan as a means of implementing a proactive approach to managing and improving upland water quality contributor standards. Pelican Bay is a unique planned community, well known for its gulf -front preserve and its overall environmental sensitivity. The approximately 3 square mile location spans between the beach and Tamiami Trail, from Vanderbilt Beach Drive south to Seagate Boulevard. The community consists of single- and multi- family residences, passive and recreational areas, natural preserve areas, and a limited amount of upscale commercial development. Even though the environment was in the forefront of the development of Pelican Bay, concerns have arisen in the last decade throughout the State of Florida that indicate a proactive stance should be taken with respect to improving the management of stormwater and reducing nutrient and other contaminant inputs into the water management system. As discussed briefly in our previous proposal, the nutrient management plan we proposed will be designed to focus on three main aspects: Nutrient Inputs — mapping the flow of water and nutrients throughout the development. Since water is the major mode of transport for nutrients and other contaminants to reach the open waters of Clam Bay, the water flow through these basins will be mapped. While much of this information is likely available in site development plans and permit exhibits, we have not to date been made aware of any available supply of this information. Research into accumulating the plans and compiling the information into a single document /exhibit is included in this work component. Major water collection areas such as swales and pipes, lakes, and connections between the lakes will be mapped. This will allow us to decide on the most advantageous locations for sampling sites, which we will coordinate with the known PBSD collection sites to avoid any duplicate sampling. This task includes several additional components such as: - Differentiating and mapping all of the pervious and impervious surfaces within the community. This is useful in terms of knowing how much of each area (community, neighborhood, condominium, etc.) is able to percolate water through the ground and how much runs directly into the storm water system. - Further breaking down the pervious surfaces between lawn, landscape areas, golf course, and others can also be used to estimate nutrient requirements and applications Page 1 of 4 12/02/2010 1611 8L1' 11/23/10 Pelican Bay Nutrient Management Plan Proposal Jurrell, Hall & Associates) within the system. Identifying points where nutrients enter the system is done as part of the mapping. Figuring out which neighborhood or areas of neighborhoods flow into each detention area and lake can help to track down problems if high nutrient levels are detected during the water quality testing component of the program. 2. Landscape Management — coordinating with associations, landscape companies, golf course, PBSD staff and others with respect to landscaping management and maintenance activities. We feel that coordination with each subdivision or association property manager and landscaping staff will prove to be a vital component of the plan to document fertilizer, herbicide, and pesticide application. Creating a "Before and After" comparison will, in our opinion, go a long way to showing outside agencies and other interested parties that tangible, documented, and quantifiable changes are being made. There are around 90 different associations within the Pelican Bay Community. Documenting the landscape areas of each association (done under Task 1 above), coordinating with each association's landscape company, and tracking each landscaping company's fertilizer and pesticide applications over the course of a year will be time consuming but we believe necessary to fully document the baseline conditions within the communities. Knowing this before we begin will also allow us and the Foundation to quantitatively track improvements and make comparisons between pre and post Program conditions. Additional tasks include: - When fertilization is done. Knowing the timing of fertilization efforts can be used in conjunction with water quality results to determine if nutrient levels are ambient, based on continual trickling inputs, or the result of initial flushes immediately following fertilizer applications. - The type and quantities of fertilizer and pesticides used between the different associations and communities. Identifying types of inputs including fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, silt or other materials that can be suspended in the water column. We feel this is an important component in terms of being able to make recommendations for changes. Identifying the types and brands of applications that work better (more taken up rather than run -off) within the community would be very helpful in arguing changes that can be made to reduce inputs into the water bodies throughout the development. Having practical real -life examples (both good and bad) to show other residents should help to get people to consider alternatives. This would also include whether or not best management practices are used (and if so, which ones). - Coordination and information gathering from all of the landscape companies working within Pelican Bay. Educating them on the reasons for the increased scrutiny, as well as the goals and intents of the Program. Following up to make sure workers are properly trained in the appropriate BMPs and verifying that they are utilizing or applying them correctly. This would be done through face -to -face meeting with the landscapers as well as through site visits and inspections. - Outreach meetings and presentations to all of the associations with respect to the Program. We would propose to present status reports to association boards at their annual meetings as well as a series of presentations to the residents at large. The presentations would be designed to increase resident awareness of nutrient related issues and stress the importance of buying into the Program to improve water quality even further within the development. Page 2 of 4 12/02/2010 1611 621 11/23/10 Pelican Bay Nutrient Management Plan Proposal (Turrell, Hall & Associates) Water Quality — sampling of the water at focal points throughout the system. This would be used to: - Identify beneficial and negative components relative to helping improve water quality - Identify potential changes that could be made to improve the cleansing capabilities of the water management system. Collecting water samples at nodal points and having the samples analyzed by certified lab(s) will be part of this task. In addition, we will also sample the irrigation waters being used throughout the community. The goals of this proposed plan are to identify areas where improvements can be made, make recommendations to minimize impacts to the adjacent preserve and water body, and to collect data to evidence improvements or revise annual recommendations accordingly. Our nutrient management plan will include recommendations for water conservation and improved soil and water quality. It will also include training sessions with landscape personnel and interested residents with suggestions for improving fertilizer and pesticide application methods. The overall goal of the Program is to reduce nutrients, suspended solids, and heavy metals from accumulating in the water bodies on -site. The program also includes follow up, inspections, and compliance verification with respect to contractor training and implementation of any recommendations made and adopted by the Foundation. COSTS It was previously estimated that the initial plan preparation, mapping, coordination, and data collection will cost around $250,000.00 for the first year. These costs were based on our anticipated effort to get the mapping, coordination with all of the individual associations and landscape companies, resident educational efforts, creation of a tracking system for application rates and amounts, and water quality testing set up and under way in the initial phases of this plan. The cost breakdown that went into this estimate includes the following: Component 1 — Nutrient Inputs ($40,000 - $50,000) - Aerial mapping, survey, and ground truthing efforts associated with creating GIS shapefiles of pervious and impervious areas in each Basin and community. ($20,000 - $25,000 depending on amount of ground verification needed from aerial work) - Research and compilation of stormwater permits and exhibits to create GIS shapefile of water flows through the development. ($5,000 - $10,000 depending on what is readily available and what would have to be researched more in depth through old permit file reviews and ground truthing) - Data sorting, compilation and manipulation necessary to create maps and exhibits for reporting and presentations ($15,000) Component 2 — Landscape Management ($155,000) - Meetings and coordination with landscape companies, going over BMP requirements, goals, and objectives of the Program. Familiarization with tracking and data logging sheets. Collection of information on what is currently being applied. ($55,000) - Internet portal for information to be collected and disseminated. It will allow companies to enter information via an internet connection and also allow Pelican Bay residents a view of ongoing program results and milestones. ($15,000) Page 3 of 4 12/02/2010 1611 B21" 11/23/10 Pelican Bay Nutrient Management Plan Proposal Jurrell, Hall & Associates) Produce short video for the Community television station highlighting the program and explaining how all homeowners can participate. ($40,000) Information and educational meetings with associations. Since we want the entire community to buy into the Program, we feel that individualized presentations specific to each different association will be better able to generate active involvement. We would also provide presentations to larger community meetings such as the PBSD, Foundation, Men's Coffee, and other meeting venues. ($45,000) Component 3 — Water Quality ($45,000) - Collection of water samples (4x /year). ($6,400 /year) - Lab costs for analyzing samples. Initial year's testing will include metals (copper, lead, zinc, arsenic, and cadmium). Subsequent years will not include metals if no problems are seen during the first year. ($27,200/1" year, $19,500 /subsequent years) - Compilation and reporting on all components of the Program. ($11,400) Water quality and application data will then be collected for an additional four years and used to track changes within the identified basins to document improvements or identify areas where further suggestions can be implemented for improvements. An annual report will be generated broken down by basin to document the data collected, identify any changes observed, list any recommendations felt necessary, and update the Foundation on the status of the project. Annual data collection and report generation is estimated to cost $37,500 per year (roughly $7,500 per basin). Based on our conversations, I understand that the Foundation may feel that the contractor coordination is not necessary and that the Program can be implemented without the "before and after" comparison proposed. While I still believe that this information will be an important component in any later discussions that might arise with State and County personnel, the Program can be implemented without it. Likewise, the internet and video components can also be eliminated or postponed should the Foundation feel that the individual association meetings are adequate to disseminate the necessary information. I would still be happy to meet with you or the Foundation Board to further discuss this program and answer any questions you or they may have. Please feel free to call me to discuss this further. Sincerely, Tim Hall Page 4 of 4 12/02/2010 1611 821 Suggested Landscape Maintenance Service Agreement Modification Scheduled Fertilizer Applications Contractor will install custom mixed, non staining granular and low phosphorus fertilizers to turf, plants, palms and trees four times per year in February, March, October and December using Best Management Practice (BMP) rates and recommendations published by the University Of Florida Institute Of Food And Agricultural Sciences for healthy growth and protection of surface water resources. During the course of any fertilizer application the contractor shall have appropriate on -site supervision by a senior principal or management employee to establish "fertilizer free" zones within 10 feet of any lake, pond, preserve or wetland area. 1611 + B221 RECEIVED DEC 0 6 201 Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U-,� Advisory Committee 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples FL 34104 Fiala September 21, 2010 AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order 11. Attendance 111. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: August 17, 2010 V. Transportation Services Report A. Budget Report- Gloria Herrera B. Project Manager Report — Darryl Richard VI. Landscape Maintenance Report - Hannula Henning -7-� Ccyl+� VII. Landscape Architect's Report A. McGee & Associates — Phase II -B and I -A Completion B. Windham Studio — Phase III Project and Maintenance VIII. Old Business IX. New Business X. Committee Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment The next meeting is October 19, 2010 3:30 p.m. Growth Management Division - Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 Misc. Torres: Date: 1a '+� Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee z885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples FL 34104 August 17, 2010 Minutes I. The meeting was called to order by Dale Lewis at 3:31 PM. II. ATTENDANCE Members: Dale Lewis, Betty Schudel (Excused), Bill Jaeger (Absent), Helen Carella, John Weber County: Darryl Richard- Project Manager, Pam Lulich- Manager Landscape Operations, Michelle Arnold- Director ATM, Gloria Herrera - Budget Analyst Others: Mike McGee —McGee & Associates, Scott Windham - Windham Studio, Dale Hannula- Hannula Landscaping, Marlene Sherman- Public, Dom Festa- Treasurer Countryside Master Association, Wayne Sherman- Public, Darlene Lafferty - Juristaff III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA John Weber moved to approve the agenda as submitted Second by Helen Carella. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 18, 2010 John Weber moved to approve the May 18, 2010 minutes as submitted Second by Helen Carella. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. V. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES REPORT: A. Budget Report —Gloria Herrera reviewed the following information: o Collected Ad Valorem Tax Darryl Richard perceived Line Item 2 Delinquent Ad Valorem Tax $215.54 are assessed late payment penalties. • True Carry Forward will be reported in February 2011 • Committed Total Expenses $492,570.74 • Work Orders will roll into the next Fiscal Year Dale Lewis noted $250,914.76 is remaining (in the Budget) for current Project activity. 1611 B22 B. Project Manager Report - Darryl Richard gave the following information: (See attached) (R -18) Radio Road Phase III Project • Bonness Curbing Project will be completed August 24th - Inspection is scheduled August 24h • Landscaping Project is scheduled for completion September 30th - Final grade on Soil fill material is underway - Installation of Irrigation System is complete - Flushing and operational tests on the Irrigation System is required prior to installing Plant Materials - Effective August 24h Maintenance Traffic (Lane Closures) becomes sole responsibility of Hannula Inc. - Lane Closure Fees will be paid by the MSTU (after August 241h - A weekly count for Lane Closures will be emailed to the Committee (by Staff) Discussion took place on Lane Closure Fee schedule and number of Lane Closures needed during the Project. Dale Hannula noted Landscaping and Curbing was performed concurrently by Bonness and Hannula which minimized Lane Closures. Darryl Richard confirmed Lane Closure Fees are $300.00 per day from September through November. (R -1 S) Radio Road Phase II -B & Phase I -A o Landscaping replacements are scheduled next week (due to Traffic Signal installation at Circle K) Dale Hannula reported removal of debris was required - Status complete. Darryl Richard stated 100% of the Landscape Refurbishment costs were paid by TECM. (R -11) On Going Maintenance Contract • Hannula Change Order was reviewed due to necessary additional Landscaping and Irrigation ($16,082.50) • Change Order is from Santa Barbara to Airport Pulling • Change Order is paid by Fund 111 Dale Lewis perceived weed problems will occur in Mulched areas as some are very shallow. Darryl Richard was confident that Hannula is aware of the contractual obligation to maintain the weeds. VI. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REPORT- Hannula Dale Hannula announced Jim Stephens is no longer with Hannula. He stated the initial main focus will be Training and infield Training with Mike Anderson. 161 1, B22 Scott Windham reviewed Radio Road Monthly Maintenance Report and noted the following: (See attached) • Median 28 Sod requires Fertilization (Devonshire) • Sod in ROW is patchy and requires replacement (Devonshire) • Median 5 Mulch is required (Santa Barbara) VII. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT REPORT A. McGee & Associates - Phase II -B and I -A Completion Dale Lewis questioned Mike McGee's outlook on initiation of Phase II (Trees and Hedges) as $34,000.00 was earmarked in the Budget for the Project. After discussion it was concluded McGee and Associates Maintenance Consulting Contract was expired and Windham Studio will move forward to Project completion. Dale Lewis moved to approve the $34,000.00 earmarked in the Budget plus a 20% contingency to allow Scott Windham (Windham Studio) to start work on the Project (Devonshire Hedge second phase) and present exact figures at the next meeting, not only for Landscaping, to include Irrigation and Plant Material for a Total Cost. Second by John Weber. Motion carried unanimously 3-0. B. Windham Studio - Phase III Project and Maintenance Scott Windham reviewed Status Report for Phase 3 Curbing. (See attached) • Installation of Large Material and Plantings will commence by September 17th • Final completion date - October 30th • French drains were not required - Cost adjustment will be made during the final pay application VIII. OLD BUSINESS -None IX. NEW BUSINESS -None X. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Marlene Sherman inquired on the completion date for Radio Road Landscaping. Dale Lewis responded September 3& is the scheduled date. Subsequently the Devonshire Project will commence and is the largest undertaking for Radio Road Beautification MSTU (requested by the BCC.) Discussion ensued on Radio Road Beautification MSTU Jurisdiction, Boundary expansions and the creation of a new MSTU. Dom Festa questioned if the County assumed responsibility for Maintenance at completion of Landscape Projects. 3 1611 iB22 4 Staff stated Maintenance is paid by the following Funding sources upon completion of MSTU Landscape Projects: Fund III • Radio Road (Santa Barbara to Airport Pulling) • Arterial Roadways • Specific (4) Lane Roadways County General Fund o After completion of Radio Road Phase III (Livingston Road to Airport Pulling) Radio Road Beautification MSTU is responsible for • Devonshire Projects • Devonshire Maintenance Dom Festa questioned if establishing a new MSTU was needed to Fund Landscaping on Davis Road. Dale Lewis replied affirmatively as Davis Road is not within the Radio Road Beautification MSTU Boundary. After much discussion the following was concluded: • Davis Road is a State Road • State Funding was pulled when he Road was widened • Grant Funds are available — Organizations with monies beforehand may apply XI. PUBLIC COMMENT Dale Lewis suggested duplicating (2) Radio Road Streetscape Beautification Signs (for Livingston Road and Airport.) Dale Lewis moved to purchase 2 additional signs, duplicates of the Radio Road Streeiscape Beautification Sign, cost not to exceed $2,500.00. Second by Helen Carella. Motion carried unanimously 3-0. There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 4:36 P.M. 4 . . .0 . 1611 822 Radio Road Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee A �- "- Dale Lewis, Chairman These minutes approved by the Committee on - (� f t✓ as presented or amended_. The next meeting is September 21, 2010 3:30 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 A 1611 8221 September 21, 2010 Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manger, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Radio Road MSTU Proiect Report (R-22) - ACTIVE: DEVONSHIRE shrub REFURBISHMENT 09- 21 -10: Based on previous success in refurbishment of Devonshire with a new hedge of `callusia' shrubs — new project activity continues per Committee direction with Windham Studio providing analysis and proposal for new project as a `continuation' of the refurbishment. (R-18) - ACTIVE: RADIO ROAD PHASE III PROJECT (Livingston Rd. to Airport Pulling; Windham Studios (PO 4500105824) 09- 21 -10: Proj ect Substantial Completion scheduled for Oct. 7, 2010. (R-15) - ACTIVE: RADIO ROAD PHASE H -B & Phase I A (II-B is from Kings Way/Briarwood Entry to Tina Lane); (I -A is from Devonshire to Santa Barbara.) 09- 21 -10: Project is Substantially Completed. Project Close -out documents being processed. (R -19) — ON GOING: MAINTENANCE CONSULTING CONTRACT 09- 21 -10: Windham Studios is under contract for maintenance consulting (R-14) — ON GOING: MAINTENCE CONTRACT — BID# 09 -5111R -- "Radio Road Beautification MSTD/MSTU Roadway Grounds Maintenance" 08- 17 -10: Hannula request price increase per Phase II-B, I -A, and (pending completion) Phase III 09- 21 -10: Staff & Windham Studio review of proposed for price increase. Fiala 12✓�_ Henning Coyle Al Coletta Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples FL 34104 October 19, 2010 AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance 111. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: September 21, 2010 V. Transportation Services Report A. Budget Report- Gloria Herrera B. Project Manager Report — Darryl Richard VI. Landscape Maintenance Report A. Hannula B. Windham Studio VII. Landscape Architect Report — Windham Studio A. Phase III Project B. Devonshire Refurbishment VIII. Old Business IX. New Business X. Committee Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment 161 1 B 22 RECEIVED DEC 0 6" 2010 The next meeting is November 16, 2010 3:30 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 Misc. Corres: Date: Item: 1611 g22 -4 aRadio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee '*'%k z88g Horseshoe Drive South Naples FL 34104 September 21, 2010 Minutes I. The meeting was called to order by Dale Lewis at 3:30 PM. II. ATTENDANCE Members: Dale Lewis, Betty Schudel (Excused), Bill Jaeger (Absent), Helen Carella, John Weber County: Darryl Richard- Project Manager, Gloria Herrera - Budget Analyst Others: Scott Windham - Windham Studio, Mike Anderson - Hannula Landscaping, Darlene Lafferty- Juristaff III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Add: DL A. Attendance IX B. New Signs VII. C. Windham Studio - Devonshire Refurbishment John Weber moved to approve the agenda as amended Second by Dale Lewis. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 17, 2010 Dale Lewis requested to suspend mail distribution (minutes and agenda) as the Committee receives them via email for review. He perceived it as a cost saving as a hard copy (minutes and agenda) is distributed to the Committee at the meetings. Change: Pg 3, Paragraph 1, first Bullet should read: "(Radio Rd.) " Pg 4, Paragraph 3, should read: Dale Lewis replied affirmatively as Davis "Blvd" is not within the Radio Road Beautification MSTU Boundary. John Weber moved to approve the August 17, 2010 minutes as amended Second by Helen Carella. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. V. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES REPORT: A. Budget Report —Gloria Herrera reviewed the following information: (See attached) • Collected Ad Valorem Tax $295,176.83 • Improvements General Open P.O.s $169,516.25 • Five P.O.s will roll into the new Fiscal Year (highlighted) 1611.822 o Modification on future Budget Reports will include - Removal of the Bid Number - Add detailed information for clarification on the P.O. Dale Lewis requested adding the remaining Balance due on Project Activity on the Budget Report. He questioned the payment status on the Curbing Project. Darryl Richard responded Bonness was paid $591,187.60 (Budget Report Line Item 33.) After discussion the following was determined by Staff and Committee: • Approximately $200,000.00 is due (remaining balance) on the Curbing Project • Sufficient monies are available ($280,750.90) for final payment on the Curbing Project • At the conclusion of FYI additional Funds will be available (closed P.O. monies will roll into FYI 1) B. Project Manager Report - Darryl Richard reported the following: (See attached) jR -18) Radio Road Phase HIP roject • Substantial Completion - First week of October • Tree planting - In progress • Irrigation System - Is Operational Scott Windham gave additional information on the Irrigation installation: • Installation is 85% complete • Irrigation System Flushing is in progress • Zones are turned on by Hand (as needed) • Installation of Bubblers is concurrent with Tree installation Darryl Richard reported to date there were minimal days of Lane Closures (6 days - Fees $1,800.00.) (R -1 S) Radio Road Phase H -B & Phase I -A o Completion of Paperwork - In progress to closeout the Project Signage Protect • Windham Studio is the Project Consultant • Signcraft P.O. will be opened after October 1, 2010 VI. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REPORT- Hannula Mike Anderson reported the following: Devonshire • Fertilization is complete • Mulch was installed K 161 1822 Radio Road o Fertilization was performed September 21, 2010 Darryl Richard stated Irrigation repairs were performed on Devonshire. Mike Anderson clarified the Irrigation repairs were due to storm generated power surges. Mike Anderson reported Irrigation issues with the (newly installed) second Hedge. Darryl Richard perceived the Irrigation problem was a timing issue and an assessment was needed (during progression of Refurbishment.) Scott Windham stated the Scope (of Services) was modified to include Irrigation reevaluation on the following: o The Hedge (existing) o Future Hedge o Tree Replacement Program o The area between the Future Hedge and Sidewalk Dale Lewis questioned if Irrigation repairs are presently needed during the new Hedge installation. Scott Windham responded affirmatively. Darryl Richard perceived Reuse is available to water the Hedge (via the Irrigation Drip System.) Staff will confirm with Roger Dick if Reuse can be used throughout the day. Windham Studio -Radio Road Monthly Maintenance Report (See attached) Scott Windham gave the following additional information: o Soft silhouette Bougainvillea will be installed and maintained in a tight configuration to preclude leggy growth (Phase III) VII. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT REPORT A. McGee & Associates — Phase II -B and I -A Completion -None B. Windham Studio — Phase III Project and Maintenance Scott Windham reviewed the following information: o Installation of Large Plant Material will be completed by this week o Substantial Completion date is anticipated September 29th Dale Lewis restated concerns of installing Mulch in lieu of Sod based on Median Maintenance (in front Circle K and past Windjammer Village): o Mulch layer is too thin o Weed Control Applications are non existent o Weeds are rampant in the Medians Mike Anderson verified one application (herbicide) was sprayed and the second application is scheduled. 3 161 16224 Darryl Richard requested Hannula use a Pre - emergent Herbicide to prevent Weed growth. C. Windham Studio — Devonshire Refurbishment Scott Windham distributed and reviewed Scope of Services ($4,900.00) for Refurbishment Design Services above the Base allotment per Annual Maintenance Consulting Services Agreement (North Residential side.) (See attached) • Mahogany Trees will be removed in a Phase Program • Scope is an increase of $2,900.00 to the original Base Contract Dale Lewis moved to accept the Proposal and grant Windham Studio Budget Monies ($4,900.00 total.) Second by John Weber. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. Motion was amended to include: The Budget Monies ($4,900.00) is in addition to the Base Contract. Second by Helen Carella. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. Scott Windham will present a Concept for Tree ideas and Cost Estimates at the October meeting. Discussion ensued on replacement costs (for Mahogany Trees.) It was concluded the estimate was $50,000.00 for half of the Project. VIII. OLD BUSINESS -None IX. NEW BUSINESS A. Attendance The Radio Road MSTU Committee Attendance record was reviewed. Discussion ensued and was determined Bill Jaeger had (4) consecutive unexcused absence. After discussion it was asserted by the Committee that Meeting Attendance is necessary (by Members) to ensure a quorum is established. Dale Lewis moved to remove Bill Jaeger from the Committee and (directed Stafj) to advertise the Vacancy (on the Radio Road MSTU Committee.) Second by John Weber. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. B. New Signs - Previously discussed under V. R X. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS -None XI. PUBLIC COMMENT -None M 1611 B22 There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 4:36 P.M. Radio Road Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee o t2 Dale Lewis, Chairman These minutes approved by the Committee on as presented_ -�S_or amended The next meeting is October 19, 2010 3:30 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 1611 g22 RichardDarryl From: RichardDarryl Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 8:23 AM To: Mitchelllan Cc: sillery t; arnold_m; lulich_P; dcherry- lafferty @comcast.net; dalewis168 @embargmail.com; 'John Weber; Radio road Committee Betty Schudel (bettyschudel @comcast.net); Wilfred Jaeger Subject: FW: MSTU resignation Importance: High Ian, Please see attached email /letter of resignation from Mr. Bill Jaeger of the Radio Road Beautification MSTU Committee. Please advertise this vacancy on the Radio Road Beautification MSTU Committee as soon as possible. Thank you, Darryl Richard, RLA MSTU Project Manager Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Growth Management Division - Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, Florida 34104 telephone: 239 - 252 -5775 Fax: 239 - 252 -6627 Cell: 239 - 253 -9083 From: Judy [mailto:judyjaeger @comcast.net] Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 11:35 PM To: RichardDarryl Subject: MSTU resignation Dear Darryl, I hereby submit my resignation from the Radio Road MSTU Advisory committee due to failing health and personal commitments. Please keep me on your email list so I can keep abreast of actives and answer questions from residents of our park, Windjammer Village. Bill Jaeger Tracking: 1 1611 B224 STATUS REPORT To: Radio Road MSTU Advisory Committee Company: Darryl Richard, Collier County ATM From: Scott Windham Date: October 19, 2010 RE: Radio Road Phase 3 Curbing, Irrigation and Planting Construction Progress Committee and team: The following is a brief progress report for the Radio Road Phase 3 Irrigation and Planting construction: Construction Proaress: • Hannula completed tree and palm installation last week, 10/15. • Irrigation is fully operational and zones are being brought on line as shrub and ground cover beds are completed from east to west. • Hannula started container plants last Tues, 10/12 and will continue over the next two weeks mulching the week of 10/25. • The Substantial Completion date has shifted to 10/29 and the final completion date has shifted to mid November to be formalized through change order this week. • Plant material quality looks excellent and Hannula has maintained a high level of professionalism and team effort throughout the project including committing man resources for the final push of the project. Please email or call me if you have any questions. Thank you, Scott Windham, ASLA Landscape Architect, LA 000 -1516 Windham Studio, Inc., Landscape Architecture, LC 26000365 8891 Brighton Lane, Bonita Springs, Florida 34135 Phone: (239) 390 -1936 Fax: (239) 390 -1937 Email: Scott @windhamstudio.com www.windhamstudio.com 1611 g221 October 19, 2010 Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manger, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Radio Road MSTU Proiect Report (R -22) - ACTIVE: DEVONSHIRE shrub REFURBISHMENT 09- 21 -10: Based on previous success in refurbishment of Devonshire with a new hedge of `callusia' shrubs — new project activity continues per Committee direction with Windham Studio providing analysis and proposal for new project as a `continuation' of the refurbishment. 10- 19 -10: Windham Studio to present cost estimate for `Phase II Devonshire Refurbishment Project' (R -18) - ACTIVE: 90% COMPLETED - RADIO ROAD PHASE III PROJECT (Livingston Rd. to Airport Pulling; Windham Studios (PO 4500105824) 10- 19 -10: Project Substantial Completion re- scheduled for Oct. 26, 2010 (R -15) - COMPLETED: RADIO ROAD PHASE II -B & Phase I -A (II -B is from Kings Way/Briarwood Entry to Tina Lane); (I -A is from Devonshire to Santa Barbara) 10- 19 -10: Project is Substantially Completed. Project Close -out documents being processed. (R -19) — ON GOING: MAINTENANCE CONSULTING CONTRACT 10- 19 -10: Windham Studios is under contract for maintenance consulting (R -14) — ON GOING: MAINTENCE CONTRACT — BID# 09 -5111R -- "Radio Road Beautification MSTD/MSTU Roadway Grounds Maintenance" 08- 17 -10: Hannula request price increase per Phase II-B, I -A, and (pending completion) Phase III 10- 19 -10: Staff & Windham Studio review of proposed for price increase. Preparation of Change Order document in progress. Ba �§ t| \20 §§ �k »§ / \ \ ) � - - -! k j | / 2 = / | § E coE 2 A t ! � � } t % ƒ ) k / / { E \ 2 /� \ \\ X }�\ cr CL US 1611 B22r \\ \\ / \ ; o` f co co ) / k \ / # k .2 _ } ( \ \ / k k ! ( —) _ Z. - � ( ) ) ) /{!! z ]Z.# IL f § ! ! ! ■ §� , § {$§ kkk�� \ ®} § 2�$ko�lE§}k /§| § §f)�df \ § §k�$ §kku o;« o k 6 km ) k§ i ! !k ! �k »§ / \ \ ) � - - -! k j | / 2 = / | § E coE 2 A t ! � � } t % ƒ ) k / / { E \ 2 /� \ \\ X }�\ cr CL US 1611 B22r G C C S 0 a m O N N O. O 0 0 OQ f� co 3 o C a o ,y a d o a o m C (9 f9 �9 19 f9 f9 M fA fA f9 E9 !9 � q = L d o d n E - _O t U W G E d c � a c Z 0 0 o S o Q A a d d N ro o o O 0 0 0 0 0+ U o U E ¢ f O u N O m. a N f7 7 pp°o O C y 12 p0 F 2 0 U w a E 01 � � a J J W W y 7 W J :s m W N � E m a a O a O a y � o ,c sm m 5 5a 4 O W Q Z � a vz y 8 2 W a ¢ ; U € d o O j U a a v O 0 s O W a O O o O N Z Z 0 o N m O O S O ° f9 (9 d} (9 (9 y m m E o z v > N o a o F 7 W W W N a v u m_ LL a m m U) d m F d O N O. O lU co 3 o C a o ,y a d o a o m � LL v a b O. c °1 'v _ a `m� R a $ E m am «`o w m c - v � U c a m a - 3 m B = L d o d 9 m0 N d _O t U W G W `o � a a o m y� Q r Q A a d d N ro C Q C 6 W E ¢ f d o o c v o Q o J N m m 12 p0 F 2 0 U w a E 01 i a m¢ 3 o r a a O O S O ° f9 (9 d} (9 (9 y m m E o z v > N o a o F 7 W W W N a v W fW1 2 W N � F E _ 1611 B22 a m m t m m a � •o d «`o w m � E 3 d m a W `o � a m m m Q m O Q A d N N CD d a 3 w a E 01 ami m m m c a� o � E m a a O a a y o ,c sm m 5 5a � Z Z m mro m E E m F m E U S E a m a. N °' LD p p� m etl m 3 3 b ° c co ° N m m r c N o y d N 2 m y m A A 6 N® 9 m J J E S m N N N m N c a Q E -:2 N m p Q E - N8 o rc c . O Q J 1611 B22 §TI : $o ... ..G§ \ /\[} 2 \}� /; 3 } \�� � \k m m / /�9 V 73 �3 a ) k co) 4 ! ! ■ ; � D 2 g 2 D � D 2 161 a B22 PHASE 2 HEDGE PLANTING PLAN s r_# \ /!! }¥ - ! |. |2! 2 DEVONSHIRE BOULEVARD NAPLES, FLORIpr DA PREPARED FO COLLIER COUNTY ATM _ _. ok .... .{ ok H • .... Fiala C� Henning Coyle • Coletta Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples FL 34104 November 16, 2010 AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: October 19, 2010 V. Transportation Services Report A. Budget Report- Gloria Herrera B. Project Manager Report — Darryl Richard VI. Landscape Maintenance Report A. Hannula B. Windham Studio VII. Landscape Architect Report — Windham Studio A. Phase III Project B. Devonshire Refurbishment VIII. Old Business A. Devonshire Water Usage IX. New Business A. December Meeting X. Committee Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment i61 FJ. Ira DEC 0 6 2010 6:}Cc"t +✓ f�.`� >.t! !cE i�- ��tq,rngGS�C!!2 c. The next meeting is December 21, 2010 3:30 p.m. Growth Management Division - Construction & Main te)dim ewres: 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 Date: Item #: ^. a: a, Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee �► 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples FL 34104 October 19, 2010 Minutes I. The meeting was called to order by Dale Lewis at 3:30 PM. 1611 II. ATTENDANCE Members: Dale Lewis, Betty Schudel, Helen Carella, John Weber County: Darryl Richard- Project Manager, Gloria Herrera - Budget Analyst, Pam Lulich- Landscape Operations Manager Others: Scott Windham - Windham Studio, Mike Anderson - Hannula Landscaping, Darlene Lafferty - Juristaff Darryl Richard announced the County received a Resignation Letter from Bill Jaeger. He noted the vacancy to serve on the Radio Road MSTU Committee was Advertized. (See attached) III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Add: VIII A. Signs Betty Schudel moved to approve the agenda as amended Second by Helen Carellm Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 21, 2010 John Weber moved to approve the September 21, 2010 minutes as submitted Second by Dale Lewis. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. V. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES REPORT: A. Budget Report —Gloria Herrera reviewed the following information: (See attached) • Projected Ad Valorem Tax $307,700.00 • Estimated Investment Interest $3,500.00 Dale Lewis questioned the following: • The Funding Source used to calculate the Estimated $3,500.00 Investment Interest • The applicable Interest Rate Staff stated the Radio Road MSTU Funds are in placed in Investments (County) and collecting Interest. I 161d B2[ After discussion it was concluded Gloria Herrera will confer with the Budget Office to verify the originating source, calculation method, and Interest Rate used on the Estimated Investment Interest Line Item. She will report the information to the Committee. Gloria Herrera continued the Budget Report o Available Capital Improvements $446,500.00 o Carry Forward is not a true figure as it will be audited February 2011 o (5) P.O.s from FYI were rolled into the FYI I Budget ($102,977.27) B. Project Manager Report - Darryl Richard reported the following: (See attached) (R -18) Radio Road Phase III Project • Substantial Completion is scheduled October 26th • Weeds will be removed prior to shrub installation • Irrigation System adjustments were made - Testing of the Irrigation System is currently being performed (R -15) Radio Road Phase H -B & Phase I -A • Phase II -B Project is Complete • Hannula Landscaping is under Contract (Fund 111) to maintain the entire Roadway (R -14) Maintenance Contract - Bid # 09 -5111 R Darryl Richard noted a Change Order ( Hannula) is under review (by Staff) due to the addition of Landscaping (Materials.) Scott Windham perceived the increase of 15.35% (based on the original Base Contract) was appropriate due to the following criteria: o Phase III (Livingston Rd. To Airport Pulling) - Last mile of Radio Rd. consists of solid line of Shrubs - 80% increase in Bed Area • Annual Cost increase - $16,082.50 (from Santa Barbara to Airport Pulling Rd.) • Devonshire will be maintained by Fund 111 (when the completed Project is turned over to the County) VI. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REPORT A. Hannula -Mike Anderson reported the following: o Suggested an application of Supplemental Fertilization to correct Palm Tree deficiencies - Supplemental Fertilization is included in the Maintenance Contract B. Windham Studio - Scott Windham gave the following Report: o A second application of Fertilizer will be applied to address Turf issues (across from Publix) 2 1611 922 Darryl Richard noted treatments were applied to eliminate chinch bugs in the I" median (between Devonshire and Santa Barbara.) Betty Schudel relayed Resident concern of installing Black Olive Trees due to the untidy nature of the Tree. Discussion ensued and it was clarified the Shady Lady Black Olive will be installed and is dissimilar to a regular Black Olive Tree. After discussion it was perceived the concerned Resident will be satisfied with the Shady Lady variety. VII. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT REPORT- Windham Studio A. Phase III Project - Reviewed under V. R B. Devonshire Refurbishment Scott Windham reviewed the Hedge Installation Opinion of Probable Cost: • Total Estimate $26,977.50 • Included continuation of the Clusia Hedge from Belville Blvd. to Radio Rd. • Suggested to retain the existing Ficus Hedge (behind the sign) • Proposed Hedge consists of - 10 gallon, 48 inch Plants - 274 Shrubs • Proposed Long Term Goal - Install Hedge and allow growth - Phase out Mahogany Trees and install Sod concurrently in the 9 ft area (from the back of sidewalk to Clusia Hedge) Darryl Richard stated Quotes are required for the Hedge Project. Discussion ensued concerning Bid Solicitation for the Hedge Project and it was determined Hannula Landscaping performed the first phase of the Hedge Installation. Dale Lewis requested Hannula Landscaping be awarded the Project based on familiarity with area and the Project Scope. After discussion it was concluded Staff will • Present the Project to Purchasing utilizing the Maintenance Contract • If Bid Solicitation is required the Committee will be notified Pam Lulich questioned if the metered water for Devonshire was separated out as Fund 111 is presently paying for water usage on Devonshire Blvd. Darryl Richard reported the (Radio Rd MSTU) Water Tap has (1) meter and is paid by Fund 111. He stated a separate Tap is needed (by the MSTU Pam Lulich stated the following will be submitted at the November 16 meeting (Radio Rd. MSTU.) • Total water usage for Devonshire (metered by the Central Control) • Fund 111 Annual Water Bill and a transfer of payment for Devonshire water usage 3 1611 B22 Discussion ensued concerning the MSTU's future financial responsibility for Water usage on Devonshire. Staff noted the Committee is currently paying for Electricity on Devonshire. After discussion it was concluded careful review is required by Staff to establish the water source and quantity used for Devonshire. Dale Lewis moved to approve the Bid from Windham Studio ($26,977.50) with preference to the current Maintenance Contractor Hannula because of their knowledge of the past job. Second by Betty Schudel, Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. Devonshire Blvd. Tree Replacement Scott Windham distributed information on the Devonshire Tree Replacement Project: • Bid Tabulation (See attached) • Planting Plan (See attached) Discussion took place concerning Planting Plan Options. After discussion the Committee perceived sufficient Funds will be available to complete the Tree Replacement Project in (1) Phase. Darryl Richard requested Windham Studio prepare Bid Documents to complete the Shrub and Tree Replacements as (1) Project. Dale Lewis moved to approve for the Program go forward on Devonshire and for Windham Studio to provide written documents to the Committee. The Committee approves the cost presented thus far (by Windham Studio) plus 20% Contingency with the total cost as $120,000.00 for Refurbishment plus Consultant's Fee for the Project. Additionally, the Project is to be completed in one Phase. Second by Betty Schudel, Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. Darryl Richard anticipated the following timeline for the Shrub and Tree Replacement Project: • Bid Solicitation - January 2011 • Construction - March 2011 • Project Completion -mid July 2011 VIII. OLD BUSINESS A. Signs • Signs are approved • Order will be placed for (2) Signs IX. NEW BUSINESS -None X. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS -None XI. PUBLIC COMMENT -None rd ib i i e0224 There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 4:52 P.M. Radio Road Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee Dale Lewis, Chairman These minutes approved by the Committee on as presented or amended_. The next meeting is November 16, 2010 3:30 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 J 1611 A A W W W W W W W W W W N N N N N N N N N N W W W (D W W V T (n A W N � O fD O V O N A W N -+ O (O O V 01 Cn A W N� O (O W V T N A W N --� O x room --I --j OROOTOr-EFKK nz *Mo O zmm - i- Izc�C)�� W22- 00 Omm cc D VEpm�m0 c>m -1-P zz 0 m DD m Tmc DMM ZDD ZZ 10�m lmrzooz -co o- coo-->ZO„ XXZZ mX n=Da r D N r=te 0 Z X 0m ry -< _< 00 z xmm m mO rm z� m- 0cmi>D zmzcnn�'ny�mm rnmm Timm mom= << ZNO C)�� �� �Z CnD =nmZm n�m� ��zmozz my� xx T -n�D��p00 z x 0 z z r�x m��p� m -<m� �7 zcnOO�om DD�� �x-OXA m n zcncn c D0� �D cnz �D(7�TT nm > >00 cn�Zmm cn 0 -ID Z �Om 03 �mm 0 XMMm0<XXKK0Om -DKDK 0-° 0 Z N O m O X A 0 K cmm00 Z O O X c r m X X GZ) m m mO 0Dr F- co Wm mZ0 m0 1� m mm _� -0a mr�m 0 O ccn 0 0 x O m z m x m X c r r m -< O� K G) Z n K W n� p z cn O wlludEAlfA Iffl fA lfAlfA lfH l69lfA lfA fA fA fA fn 69 69 C91.4 ffl fA fA ffl fA ffl fA fA fA 4*k9169 4A w 69 fA ltfl lEfl fA ffl 69 fA N N O J N O O) T W tr A A N V Gr M M O O A O O 0 0 0 0 0 9 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T O) V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m Cn O co IfA Iio Ifo fA IfA 169 I fA 169 I fA O N � W W V O to 3 CWO (n W -V+ 00 W W N, (A fA fo 69 fA ffl fA fo to 69 69 69 0% fA fA fA 69 fA d! fA O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A O A O (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O Vt O O O N O o 0 0 A A 0 A O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o 0 0 =+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c* h O v 0 A a 0 0 7 2 2 2 T T T T < G� (O 0 ° 3 3 3 0 0 0 M W Q_ U (D '' C QQ_ 7' 3 N Ci (D w (p 7 7 w w CD V V T fA 69 fA 69 fo 69 69 69 69 fA fA Go _O_ C! n CD y y y C �' O O CD C) C) O m 3 v o CD Z m in m Al 4 W W A W N (n —8 N N 00 O O N O O) CD W A fl 69 69 69 (fl EA V3 69 ffl 6// J N t0 V 9),P 01 O) W P 4, Cn m w m O N Cn m 7 0 W OD O O O O V 7 0 V A 00 O O W DO oov-• 00 000 D O co A A 0 0 0 0 0 mcn_ w co d0 n O CO Cn W CT Cn 0 0 0 O O O V O CT — N O W O O A O (T CT O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 V 0 0 CT O A O A O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O o 0 Cn O Cl N O A o A 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VI Cn O Cn O CA Co fA to 69 69 69 69 ffl 69 69 fA fA 69 fA 69 cA 1"169169 69 fo 69 69 (n W O A A co 00 O N O W O) O O O O O CO 4 O A O O O O O CT V O CO O 00 O O OD OD O O O O O o O O O O O W fA fA 69 (A 69 69 fo 69 ffl 69 fA fA fA 69 b9 fA I"I fA Iffl fA ffl fA fA N N N � V O Cn O O C O A A A A A A A A A A A A A to 3 CWO (n W -V+ 00 O A O O O COf A (A fA fo 69 fA ffl fA fo to 69 69 69 0% fA fA fA 69 fA d! fA fA fA fA 69 X (e D � � C O A A A A A A A A A A A A A (A A A O — O) O O) N N (n (Wn 3 CWO (n W -V+ 00 Cn Cn CT O Cn O O W CT Cn W — M V N O W A O (n CT Oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N O W O CO O Cn O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A O A O (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O Vt O O O N O o 0 0 A A 0 A O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o 0 0 =+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 h O v 0 A a 0 0 7 2 2 2 T T T T < G� (O 0 ° 3 3 3 0 0 0 o A O W O W N N N W W O 070 W Q_ U (D '' C QQ_ 7' 3 N Ci (D w (p 7 7 w w CD A A O N CO O A N N N V O 3 3 y 9 C a = -< C.) r r r > >," rr0D 0mr-rm gym= Cn 0 0 0 G) ° m v v CD co a C C (D 7 7 7 y C� y CD 3 3 =! C 3 0 C _O_ C! n CD y y y C �' O O CD C) C) O m 3 v o CD Z m (� Si C .7. 3 7 O fD CD O d Q .n.. C) d � � m _= y y y (D X (e D co C O A A A A A A A A A A A A A N O (CO:, 3 W o !C Cn CT CT Cn Cn (n O CT m Cn CT 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O V CD (D Cn O w A o O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 69 fA fi) fA fA -°�° N � OD W A A N C� 0 V N za N N N W O g4 Oi W ik 3 m S o A O W O W N N N W W O 070 W CD A A O N CO O A N N N V O << > >," rr0D 0mr-rm gym= m mm7 3 3 =! C 3 0 C o T << (� Si C .7. 3 7 O fD CD O d Q .n.. C) d _= y y y (D C) r N N— 7 C) TS T C 'Ci < 8 m y m I CD CD y CD '�—' tU Q (D (3 W (D Do d =r y 70 T Z, d m m — CD 7 0 N ID fD (D 0 O go_ 3 x C fl.1 7 7 O + N UOi CD � m (3 (j 0 7 CD. 0 C) rn 0 D a .. 41 ffl fA b9 fA 69 fA EA Efl to EA EA 69 EA fA fA o _ _ W 3 W V W O Cn — a O (O OD O O N CT A O N O V O A O O O O O A W O N CT O 0 O (n O O O j co Cn O O O co O W O W O O O W W 0 0 0 0 0 O O) O o 0 3 .. n fA 69 fA 69 b9 fA fA fA EA ffl 69 ffl fA fA fA f9 a d It W N N O) Cn Dl N 00 al (D (Vn O W 00 V A ' ' ' ' a _ N 0 0 O O OD 0 69 69 69 69 (e D co C O N O (CO:, 3 W o !C V CD (D Cn O V CL V O O O O O O 69 fA fi) fA fA n O 3 3 CD 69 69 69 69 Ili A (o i9 ffl fA fA fA (e D a � N O (CO:, U) N Ili A (o i9 ffl fA fA fA /X 0 0 cD 'n O a Z `'v0 00 ic � j 0 0 0 C 0 W 0) (D W CD V O W v A /X 0 0 cD 'n O a Z `'v0 00 ic � j 0 0 0 C 16114g221 November 16, 2010 Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manger, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Radio Road MSTU Project Report (R -22) - ACTIVE: DEVONSHIRE shrub REFURBISHMENT 11- 16 -10: Committee to review Windham Studios Proposal for Professional Services for Devonshire Refurbishment Project. (R -18) - COMPLETED: 100% COMPLETED - RADIO ROAD PHASE III PROJECT (Livingston Rd. to Airport Pulling; Windham Studios (PO 4500105824) 11- 05 -10: Project substantially completed. (R -15) - COMPLETED: RADIO ROAD PHASE H -B & Phase I -A (II -B is from Kings Way /Briarwood Entry to Tina Lane); (I -A is from Devonshire to Santa Barbara) 10- 19 -10: Project is Substantially Completed. (R -19) — ON GOING: MAINTENANCE CONSULTING CONTRACT 11- 16 -10: Windham Studios is under contract for maintenance consulting (R -14) — ON GOING: MAINTENCE CONTRACT — BID# 09 -5111R -- "Radio Road Beautification MSTD/MSTU Roadway Grounds Maintenance" 08- 17 -10: Hannula request price increase per Phase II -B, I -A, and (pending completion) Phase III 11- 16 -10: Staff & Windham Studio review of proposed for price increase. Anticipated increase will be effective after December 5, 2010. (j) 1611 B22 STATUS REPORT To: Radio Road MSTU Advisory Committee Company: Darryl Richard, Collier County ATM From: Scott Windham Date: November 16, 2010 RE: Radio Road Phase 3 Curbing, Irrigation and Planting Construction Progress Committee and team: The following is a brief progress report for the Radio Road Phase 3 Irrigation and Planting construction: Construction Progress: • We completed an irrigation substantial completion walk through on 10/29 generating a minimal punch list. • We completed the landscape substantial completion walk through on 11/5 with minimal punch items including primarily 3 Tabebuia Trees and balance of the mulch. • WSI and Hannula are currently finalizing the As Built Landscape and Irrigation Plans and will complete all close out documents by the final completion date of 12/5/10. • As stated previously, the plant material quality looks excellent and Hannula has maintained a high level of professionalism and team effort throughout the project. We appreciate the opportunity to be a part of the project and feel that we as well as the Radio Road MSTU Committee have a project that we all can be proud of as premier in our community. Please email or call me if you have any questions. Thank you, Scott Windham, ASLA Landscape Architect, LA 000 -1516 \Vindham Studio, Inc., Landscape Architecture, LC: 26000365 8891 Brighton Lane, Bonita Springs, Florida 34133 Phone: (239) 390 -1936 Fax: ( 239) 390 - 1.937 Email: scott(awi.ndhamstudio.com www. witicth ai-ri S tudi o. cotil 0 1611 B22 Radio Road M.S.T.U. Maintenance Consulting Services per Contract # 08 -5060 Co ier Covcvcty November 16, 2010 Mr. Darryl Richard, Project Manager Collier County Alternative Transportation Modes Department 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, Florida 34104 RE: RADIO ROAD M.S.T.U. Maintenance Consulting Services per the Fixed Term Professional Landscape Architectural Services Contract #08 -5060: Task VI Change Order 1: Refurbishment Design Services — Devonshire Blvd Hedges, Street Trees and Medians Dear Darryl: As requested, we have prepared the following scope of services for your review and approval. This proposal includes refurbishment design services above and beyond the base allotment as per the annual maintenance consulting services agreement for the Devonshire Boulevard north hedge. OPTIONAL SERVICES: TASK VI- Change Order 1. Upon Request Limited Refurbishment Design Services Project Scope Windham Studio will complete the following requested refurbishment design services under Optional Services, Task VI Limited Refurbishment Design Services: VIA Devonshire Blvd, Berkshire Lakes Perimeter Hedge and Street Tree Replacement: • Site analysis and base map preparation (for irrigation and plantings) for Radio Road to Belville Blvd (Hedge) and Radio Road to Santa Barbara Blvd (Trees) • Prepare conceptual plan for committee and staff review and consideration • Prepare Mahogany Tree and Viburnum Hedge Removal Plan • Prepare Hedge and Street Tree Replacement Planting Plans • Prepare Irrigation Refurbishment Plans • Prepare Opinions of Probable Cost and Bid Tabular • Services During Construction including attend Pre -Bid meeting, weekly site construction meetings, tree and container plant layout review and substantial completion walk through V1.2 Devonshire Blvd Median Landscape and Irrigation Refurbishment: • Site analysis and base map preparation (for irrigation and plantings) for medians from Radio Road to Santa Barbara Blvd • Prepare conceptual plan for committee and staff review and consideration • Prepare Median Refurbishment Planting Plans IX "indhatn Studio, Inc., Landscape Architecture, LC 26000365 8891 Brighton Lane, Bonita Springs, Florida 34135 Phone: (239) 390 -1936 Fax: (239) 390 -1937 Email: Scott @windhamstudio.com ,vw \v.windh ams tudio x om 1 0 1611 B22 • Prepare Irrigation Refurbishment Plans • Prepare Opinions of Probable Cost and Bid Tabular • Services During Construction including attend Pre -Bid meeting, weekly site construction meetings, tree /palm and container plant layout review and substantial completion walk through V1.3 Devonshire Blvd, Publix Shopping Center Hedge and Street Tree Replacement: • Site analysis and base map preparation (for irrigation and plantings) for Radio Road to Santa Barbara Blvd (Hedge and StreetTrees) • Prepare conceptual plan for committee and staff review and consideration • Prepare Mahogany Tree and Viburnum Hedge Removal Plan • Prepare Hedge and Street Tree Replacement Planting Plans • Prepare Irrigation Refurbishment Plans • Prepare Opinions of Probable Cost and Bid Tabular • Services During Construction including attend Pre -Bid meeting, weekly site construction meetings, tree and container plant layout review and substantial completion walk through V1.4 Reimbursable Expenses: • Prints, couriers, etc. FEES: Please see attached Fee Schedule Thank you for the opportunity to submit this scope of services in order to assist the county and the Radio Road M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee in maintaining and improving the district. Sincerely, Scott Windham, ASLA Landscape Architect, LA 000 -1516 Windharn Studio, Inc., .Landscape Architecture, LC 26000365 8891 Brighton Lane, Bonita Springs, Florida 34135 Phone: (239) 390 -1936 Fax: (239) 390 -193, Email: Scott @windhamstudio.com w-w- cv.,viidhams tudio. com 2 0 m o o m 3 3 3 m? O r N G m m N 1 -1F F m N CJ w w v o o ^ 5�l° •` ° 0 0 o my rnm m m w v v do_ a i m N a n ° N y (7 n » F at a a a s 3: m a o N a N m 'p9 'p0 m m og w m m w ° ° m a io m 'm m 0 _ F A c (n r.o Q° m m 0 °o _ x o c E o. 0 o. x$ )°o n 3 _ T w^ T yy n G N v — U. W g ° m m 1e w OS w ° o v O(» o w, m mm 'm S a o 0 N (D 3 Uo) m Om N g N S a on O m m ° a w c n - _ g m m m `v x m 3c F p m d y o a c' y m ° m ? m 3 � ma C o N Q F m o o a mH m° m � a c - � N P S A m m O A W I O ° N N N N d T T T "rfl "rfl d d N Q W W EA 69 fA o fA � H to En W O O g a° 0 O o s w m p W N IJ ° V OVi A A p O, O O O N OD N N O W O O O O O O O N 3 O S r cnr, G W m N O . m C 9 C, N n m i D 8 c 00 o z m m Fa D m m I U) d 3 � a f cn w O r c a m O N m a = ^ m v � Am, o L7 n m N J N N T N d C _v ° f9 E9 fA m N N O O O G O O O m� 7] N G w r n � A T, 1 w - m o m _ � m E; . D m C G c � v = - � o w m = a S 3 a n 3 � m ° � w � S n - c T a p m T m m p O N w W V � O 1611 B22 nr r i m 0 to m i 1 m 9 N > W N » 0 n m K w 3 n io � O o n = o °- r y 3 N D D D Q J t° 00 O �o IO O to 0 0 0 0 3 N V O A O O O O O O O O O O O N -• i m � i. m m m 'w O o w'n r Z a O y a z _ o m n m m T m 0 O z O O v r m m (n C Q � d W f O O 3 O O O G O O 0 O 3 � v ' Z 0 z o O 9 7 m m O z D t m m m r m 9 0O 77 rn O i m v 1 9 m r m � N z S 7 O O r 7 � i O 1 p C 1 Z > <y a O m Cl 1611 O 41 N G«< G«< G G G< o.n ca nn vsi' p.p vw NO3m Ul NO Z�fn (0 m Q n$ D K a 2 N O 0 i D p 0 2 0 I D � �� v� m kq A c � U:2 V O N � m N Y v Oo O OOA p ... fINNN ..... NN(A .... NNNN O y z m �� Oo A OW1 N A N m p O N P p 0 0 gFyNN O O O e 0 0 A A O O NNy1NN O M O O N 0 0 0 0 Npp {qNN y � O S C D o ' So Q P o W m m nN N`» NfnNNU. m N n o W m NNe1N A N a � 70 O1 S n m ° N g$SOO $000 c � CD g o o nNNN C d y o 0 o c NNMfA bi N o 0 0 NNNN moo 0 0 o N o 0 o N o 0 0 .... ... H ... pW p m A QWp m A p� b C m W W O� A N o A W N O A I O O O O O O S O O S O O< 822,4 O y z m 7 O N 00 0. 3 C D O a Q N m O � a � 70 O1 S n m ° N C. T w O c � CD y C d � o a N � w = (:p N C X O j �. o o w. o '6 O i o ' � I 0 0 m w O_ °— m wo < m w a � m w m m (D ° m o o < N w m - c m CD o C 30 3 m O y O w i 0 � m m 00 CD CL (D o m w O• v 0- A F _ m FD' 7 CL o � N V m � o N ° m 0 N CD w o � O N 0 m _0 m m CD 3 3 � � w CD o o m m o' o. m 0 w a m v m a N to w 0 O p w 0 c tr m 0 N CD N' CD W W V W M A W o vi D Dc N A N w y O ° G ra n s d(o P? N O G) G) w w y w w O N N n N ° p a p p N m m O N:3 N �G a 0 0 0 cn o w m N m 0 0 0 3 N O O. Q J w N n o O -0 •O ° O N v -o w w •D w o otT > ° ° a� w > <y w w 0 0 m o m 6 O IO N (D N w 3, O M a- 0 O O i m o o (p m w Cl) 0 :E R. 2 2 w 0 0 ao m m O O o 0K: CD o c c M M 3 o 0 a w w w w w 0 0 < a Q N N o N v° o 0 w o o (p m n o. 0. ° ° c :E g m m m m m w O n a p' o n. o. = o o w w w w W 3 °' (� O 0 N D O V 0 — �-� m ° x �_ 0 O N _ poi w T O 0 cz ^ m 62 N N N N..Oi. v ma w 0 w C m a s m m 3 w 0 n 0 d O 0 (D On o w v O w w 5 0 G O (D 7 O O 3 0 ... (O m m N f0 o o• w o• m n o m ° o m m m o 3 3 N R D w, o m m C 0 N O O ° (Q fD O. w n cn m m m v a O p _ S = ° w F pT n (Q o C: m L w m 7� w n CD. 0 0 ?C. CD O (O 7 < - N 0 ° m' 0 ID o m (n N .D w _ o � m � : J a 3 7i w Cr m 0 a o. w < D < N CD D m O ol j 0 �• y 0 (p O m a c N m o s m (D is A `G a � m m 0' C 0 w m � m o f6� O N N 3 m m 0 N v O n N w w w O 3 w m 0 c -o O n O O O 77 z -n-I O Z n m m 9 N 9 '•1 V1 m 0 m m m r N r w mz N 1 O ' N n m 00 C m T c .Ti w Pi 3 o. n m c ° d w � Q c c (o m � C co 0, a w 0 co w wa �? r O• w m 0 O CD (n 00 (o w o x N cn v� v a m T go 7 � m° O O O m a w G y3 G O ' � wm Iv m 0 0 9' o 0 C T O 0 a � � o m m v w to °. V y n o c O, w N 0 o N O X 00 _O o a- c m a a) 0 m CD d ° w. m 0 0. m w T C CD 0 CD T : m W T M co it Z rn' r m N m m D m m 9 r ti 161,1 B22 A W N — R m T F 3 a CD (<D A 7 CD x, n 0 N < 0 0 cr vc N T 7 m � O o w m � a o v CD 0 O O � 0 m 0 S . 3 z 0 Ifl O N W O r m rr O m -01 O O V A 0 V1 T o• 0 N O M W o 0 G m N w v3 fA A -+ V N O O O O ww 69 v9 O O 0 0 0 0 61 69 V W O O O O O O O O m of Ot IU W J O N D D D Q p b9 fA fA 69 EM; V W W � NO O 0 0 'oo 0 0 3 N A (A (A (A vi vi N V O A O O o flt 0 0 0 o O O O O O O O m N m C fA v! w (D Is N o °0 0 3 N 11 6s 'A 69 D W N C O o O o O O O O O O O m Z m r v O m -0 m y m z is O C) Z o O T m 13 O m m m O v m m z m 0 r r m m 0 O C T O `m 9 m r My m Z c m (` m 5 m m x m ' 0 m Z v m m -a w m m m m m I m m r. m A W s I O O O y w w w w m m T T -n w w w c 0 Er^ vi (A fA 1-9 69 69 v) (A 69 64 (A Im y W W co W O o N W m V -� O N O N O O O O N O O O O O V O O O O O O O 'O ° ID 00 ° o o 0 0 rD O < N (my 7 N to y N G .N (A (A 69 (A (A fn fA fA (A v b A 160 '0 0 IN IN I0O ro lfO rb--.o. I`--o I`-Ol r8_0 r--o- Ii\, IEA O JI O 0 O O O O O O O O O 77 z -n-I O Z n m m 9 N 9 '•1 V1 m 0 m m m r N r w mz N 1 O ' N n m 00 C m T c .Ti w Pi 3 o. n m c ° d w � Q c c (o m � C co 0, a w 0 co w wa �? r O• w m 0 O CD (n 00 (o w o x N cn v� v a m T go 7 � m° O O O m a w G y3 G O ' � wm Iv m 0 0 9' o 0 C T O 0 a � � o m m v w to °. V y n o c O, w N 0 o N O X 00 _O o a- c m a a) 0 m CD d ° w. m 0 0. m w T C CD 0 CD T : m W T M co it Z rn' r m N m m D m m 9 r ti 161,1 B22 A W N — R m T F 3 a CD (<D A 7 CD x, n 0 N < 0 0 cr vc N T 7 m � O o w m � a o v CD 0 O O � 0 m 0 S . 3 z 0 Ifl O N W O r m rr O m -01 O O V A 0 V1 T o• 0 N O M W o 0 G m N w v3 fA A -+ V N O O O O ww 69 v9 O O 0 0 0 0 61 69 V W O O O O O O O O m of Ot IU W J O N D D D Q p b9 fA fA 69 EM; V W W � NO O 0 0 'oo 0 0 3 N A (A (A (A vi vi N V O A O O o flt 0 0 0 o O O O O O O O m N m C fA v! w (D Is N o °0 0 3 N 11 6s 'A 69 D W N C O o O o O O O O O O O m Z m r v O m -0 m y m z is O C) Z o O T m 13 O m m m O v m m z m 0 r r m m 0 O C T O `m 9 m r My m Z c m (` m 5 m m x m ' 0 m Z v m m -a w m m m m m I m m r. m 161,1 § § § § m o '� n 9 m \ ) :P2 M92 «o3mo «o£ @T \! $2 $2 \/§ \ / aE / {} S� ° ®= BE =ai //( §2,,- 0. \ §j\ ƒ} /xƒƒ� \ / -` }/ -n . w � $ ¥sm;2� \ ¥sm|27 � .ny22# } �efER E -nf2; § ) f % 2 ol0 2 cu -Vol 0 o (n «0 w (n0 \° �\ \/ \ \ } \ \ E 2 \ 0— } 0 \ 822 \ / c N m o '� n 9 m \ ) f o§ ƒ § m / 2 a % 0. \ 0 q \ / ■ -n . w � $ § \ / � 0 E § ) � ' Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples O xo4_ _ 'Aid 2 4 2011 January 18, 2011 BY ........................ AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: November 16, 2010 V. Transportation Services Report A. Budget Report- Gloria Herrera B. Project Manager Report - Darryl Richard VI. Landscape Maintenance Report A. Hannula B. Windham Studio Fiala Hiller Henning -r H— Coyle f °oleft � B22 VII. Landscape Architect Report - Windham Studio A. Phase III Project B. Devonshire Refurbishment VIII. Old Business A. Devonshire Water Usage IX. New Business X. Committee Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment The next meeting is February 15, 20113:30 p.m. Growth Management Division - Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Misc. Cares: Naples, FL 34104 Date: Item it: Cc pies �o: 161 1 9`22 � Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples FL 34104 November 16, 2010 Minutes I. The meeting was called to order by Dale Lewis at 3:30 PM. II. ATTENDANCE Members: Dale Lewis, Betty Schudel, Helen Carella, John Weber County: Darryl Richard- Project Manager, Gloria Herrera - Budget Analyst, Pam Lulich- Landscape Operations Manager, Michelle Arnold -ATM Director Others: Scott Windham - Windham Studio, Manny Gonzalez- Hannula Landscaping, Darlene Lafferty- Juristaff III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Add. XI. A. December Meeting Betty Schudel moved to approve the agenda as amended Second by Helen Carella. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 19, 2010 Change: V. A. pg 2, last sentence should read: Staff stated the Radio Road MSTU Funds are placed in Investments (County) and collecting Interest. VII. B. under Devonshire Blvd. Tree Replacement, first sentence of the motion was amended to read: Dale Lewis "moved the " Program go forward on Devonshire and Windham Studio "will " provide written documents to the Committee. Helen Carella moved to approve the October 21, 2010 minutes as amended Second by Betty Schudeb Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. V. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES REPORT: A. Budget Report — Gloria Herrera reviewed the following information: (See attached) • Collected Ad Valorem Tax $2,096.79 • Investment Interest Collected $182.23 John Weber inquired on the response to the Committees questions concerning the Funding source for the Investment Interest Line Item. Gloria Herrera responded a clarification will be provided at the next MSTU meeting. 1611 g22 B. Project Manager Report - Darryl Richard gave additional information as follows: (See attached) (R -18) Radio Road Phase III Project o Project is complete Dale Lewis stated the Radio Road Streetscape Beautification Signs are not installed and questioned if BCC approval is needed to install signs. Staff responded a ROW Permit is the only requirement to install the Signs. (R -15) Radio Road Phase II -B & Phase I -A o Phase II -B Project is Complete Darryl Richard reported FPL requested the relocation of (3) Royal Palms as they are too close to power lines: - (1) at Commercial Blvd. - (2) at Tina Lane Scott Windham noted FPL Right Tree Right Place guidelines were followed however FPL requires additional clearance. Darryl Richard stated Hannula will provide a Quote to relocate the Royal Palms as required by FPL. (R -14) Maintenance Contract - Bid # 09 -5111 R Darryl Richard announced Mike Anderson is no longer employed with Hannula Landscaping. He introduced Manny Gonzalez as the representative for Hannula. Darryl Richard reviewed the Hannula increase to the Annual Contract to include the following: o Phase III (Livingston Rd. To Airport Pulling) o Phase IIB (from Santa Barbara to Airport Pulling Rd.) 0 15.35% Annual Cost increase - $16,082.50 Dale Lewis moved that anytime a Budget Report is received by Staff it indicates the appropriate Funding Source for each Project (Fund 111 or MSTUFund) Second by Betty SchudeL Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. Staff confirmed the Roadway Maintenance Cost from Airport Pulling to Santa Barbara is paid by Fund 111. VI. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REPORT A. Hannula -Mike Anderson -None B. Windham Studio - Scott Windham reviewed Status Reports: (See attached) Dale Lewis commended Scott Windham on a job well done. He noted the work performed by Windham Studio far exceeded his expectations. 2 VII. 1611 Dale Lewis requested installation of additional Plants in the section from Phase IIB to Santa Barbara. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT REPORT- Windham Studio Scott Windham reviewed the following: A. Phase III Project o December 5t' is Final Completion date for the As Built Landscape and Irrigation Plans o (2) Locations for Radio Road Streetscape Beautification Signs were recommended - West end Median (section that meets Airport Pulling) - Commercial Blvd. (in the Crown of Thorn) Dale Lewis moved to accept Scott Windham's recommendation for the Sign Locations. Second by Betty Schudel. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. B. Devonshire Refurbishment Scott Windham reviewed Task VI. Change Order 1 and Fee Schedule (Devonshire Hedges, Street Trees and Medians.) He noted the Scope was revised to combine Projects on Devonshire Blvd. as requested by Staff. (See attached) Berkshire Lakes Perimeter Hedke and Street Tree Replacement o Cost Estimate $8,302.00 0 20 Hours of Field Time was calculated based on 120 day Project Median Landscape and Irrigation Refurbishment o Cost Estimate $9,100.00 Darryl Richard requested the Committee give consideration on removing Sod in the Devonshire Medians and install Shrubs to reduce water usage. Betty Schudel stated 100% refurbishment would be required if the Sod is removed. Publix Shopping Center Hedge and Street Tree Replacement o Cost Estimate $7,802.00 Dale Lewis expressed disapproval on spending Tax Payer monies on the Shopping Center Property. Discussion ensued on the Shopping Center and contribution to the MSTU. After discussion it was concluded MSTU Tax payment is based on: • The Folio number, not the number of units on the Property • The Taxable Value of the Property Dale Lewis requested Staff provide information on the Shopping Center Property Taxable Value. B22 161 1 ji Darryl Richard suggested deferring the Publix Shopping Center and Street Tree Replacement $7,802.00 Project on Windham Studio Change Order 1. John Weber recommended removing the $7,802.00 (from Windham Studio Change Order ])for the time being. Second by Dale Lewis. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. Based on the motion Darryl Richard noted the revised total for Change Order 1 is $17,852.00. Dale Lewis moved to accept Windham Studio Proposal for $18,000.00. Second by John Weber. Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. Devonshire Blvd. Landscape and Irrigation Renovation: Berkshire Lakes Hedge and Street Tree Replacement (See attached) • Budget reflects a significant increase in Irrigation Cost - Current Estimate $37,253.00 • A Controller is required for the expanded area • Irrigation System requires renovation for future Sod installation Darryl Richard suggested installing low ground cover (between the sidewalk and new hedge) to reduce Maintenance and water usage. Pam Lulich recommended installing a separate Meter to connect to the existing Irrigation (backup System) as the Devonshire water is supplied from Radio Road. Darryl Richard requested Windham Studio add the Water Meter installation to the Project. He expressed the need to differentiate between Reuse Water versus Well Water usage. Devonshire Water Usaze Pam Lulich stated research is underway on the MSTU Reclaim usage. She noted Electrical cost will be assessed in addition to the Reclaim usage. Discussion took place on the location for the Meter installation. After much discussion the following was determined: • The Effluent usage will be counted prior to reaching the Mixing Chamber • Devonshire Water flow can be measured by Bermad Valves and reported to the Central Controller Darryl Richard responded Windham Studio will review and provide a solution to track Reclaim Water usage. Dale Lewis requested Windham Studio present the remedy at the January meeting. 4 622 11 1611 Betty Schudel reported the Irrigation heads are staining Berkshire Lakes Monument walls. Manny Gonzalez responded the Irrigation heads will be adjusted. Darryl Richard reported A &L Labs will take Tissue and Soil samples to address nutrient deficiencies in Palm Trees. VIII. OLD BUSINESS A. Devonshire Water Usage- Previously discussed under VII. B. IX. NEW BUSINESS A. December Meeting The Committee agreed to cancel the December meeting. Dale Lewis moved to conduct the next meeting January 18, 2011. Second by Betty SchudeL Motion carried unanimously 4 -0. X. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS -None XI. PUBLIC COMMENT Sue Chapin gave the following update on the Radio Road East MSTU: 0 7 meetings and 1 workshop have been conducted since April o Landscape Architect Firm Urban Green Studios was selected There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 4:53 P.M. Radio Road Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee Dale Lewis, Chairman These minutes approved by the Committee on - A - l 1 , as presented�_or amended The next meeting is January 18, 2011 3:30 p.m. Growth Management Division — Construction & Maintenance 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 5 1611 B22 -P, .01 w w w w w w w w w w to to " N hi to r-j N I,.% - — — — O W W V O (n A W N O W 0 V T 0 A W N� O W 0 V O 0 A W N — 0 0 0 V Omm �cc -� D� ��m =9O'm- D ;MID O -OpZZ --0-41 ;>u 1 m��m -ncmc 1fA(n ��� DD vm m(�' n2nmzr U MM- =z OG� �aGi ;>a 3>1 < -Ir Dmm zpp zz ���m �mDZmn�zcm --Immomzzaz� ��zzmm�=DD rmmmx Tmm T6DO< ;m rxmr(nn=m;. zx@ �nnmm rTo ����Zm -��oo m« �-i r N D m zrz� (o C> mm �m „Tm m N�=< �Mm m-i�'O pm zZ m <,� DmC)m nrt ODpn�� < OOH m�m0D D m O c� m = no m z m n C, M N� c� m O z z m�� A m m� D�D Z o mOzz r mAp� m -:O� vA zcn00 zfp� x x �X O� m n zcncn c a� r,mD �Z �Dn0 7111 mnm cn�Zm m N D z{ m m Zcn m m n o m m p< oo nOm- �D cn O �o-u Czi Z(n nmO�A m�� cmmwmw 22z 00 00 Crm��D z O O m m m 0 � D r D D W O m m z m n X X O �� �1 nm cnu) DD mrc= co zmn� -I�m m mm 0 r = oz m mm c) ���, O to A m n cn O X 6AI(A If,9 I19169 f91691fA lV 169 I6Alf9 fA 69 EA 69 69 (A (n fA 69 fA 69 EA to to fA fn EAII -1-1(9 (A to (n to l<n Jf9 f9 f9 69 69 co O N N O J N O) d1 O O N J A m W O CO N O) A CO O) A A N J (n O O O O A Cn U) Ui O (n O O O J W C IV O W O O A O O 00 O O O N O 00 O O O O O O O O O J O O (n O A O O O O O O O O O V O O O O O O O O O O O O (r O O N O O O O O O O O O N N 0 O O O 00 O O O O O O O w O O O O 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 (r O O 00 O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O (A fA 69 69 69 69 (,9 (,9 60 U) EA 6fl (A fA (n 69 69 6fl 6A to to (9 fA 6A 69 69 69 fA 0 Oo _ W 00 N N Q) (n � O -.Cl A � J (n W w 0 (D O N W O O W t0 (D O t0 O O O O O OO N O A (n 0 t0 (D N O O O I . O. O N O. O N N A A V O O N O O J OD O O O 0) t0 O V O O (n O O N O O 00 VHfA 169169169 69 I6nl(n I6,k1(n169169 69 Efl 6A to (A (A w 69 69 to (n (A (A (9 f9 119 6111 169 169 I fn 1(A to 1(n 169 169169 169169 60 f,9 (A to to fn 69 69 69 En (n <11 (n fn fn 69 6fl N N W N W D] A A W O O O W O) O O O 4h- CO O O W Ot CO O O N O O O O) N O O W W O W 0 O O 0 0 0 X 3 J l0 a m W v OV A m OJ J O O Q J O O w N O N J O O O O O O OO W W (D O) W O O O O N OO ) O O W A W W O O (P W (n O O W 0 0 a a O (D W J J N A (A (,9 fn (fl 6fl A Q) A OD O W J O O N 0 0 0 0 (P O O co O O O O 6111 169 169 I fn 1(A to 1(n 169 169169 169169 60 f,9 (A to to fn 69 69 69 En (n <11 (n fn fn 69 6fl N N W N W D] A A W O O O W O) O O O 4h- CO O O W Ot CO O O N O O O O) N O O W W O W 0 O O 0 0 0 X 3 J l0 9 O n 0 0 0 w OD w ao O (P W A O) (n an .40 A O A O A O O O O C) (T O (n O 69169 69 (D (A (,9 691(,9 (n (n 60 fA la a(n owe 00 09 A A O) W O O) N N N (n J A (D (n W (P (P (P N (n O O w (n W W J — N O A m (n (P O O O O O O O O N O (D O O (n O A 0 A O .40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (r O O O N O 0 0 Qo N A O A O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (n (Jl O Cn O C CC CC i/i w N C N n N (D N � O gn -n < G G CL Q Q O S S S N n (Op N (U N n C C C N D) (1) 3 3 3 m x Q° m_ =-t: c'i r n) m X< D n r r r U �. o (D 3 O v y 0) (D (D 3 fn (n (n y 0 () G) .N (D C1 C C C 0 � N D_ O_ O_ p �� N (D 0 0 0' v 3aaa N :v 6 7 3 3 (Q (O D n n O O N N (D (D (Ai A A A A A A A cn A (Ai, , A A A O (n (n (n (n (n (n O) O (P O (n (n cn U1 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 z N— N N O N N o 0 J N N N N N E O A A OO W A A A N (n N N N N W A j A� O J (D (P N A W 0 N N OD n (n A O N (WD j O 0 N n ('') N 1 (D r p r p y r N w n wm r r m � r c<3 � Gi n c c a) CD c: Q O Q n 3 d OI 3 Q Q .n.. () _ �) (D y N N N (� N m N N S I N (D 'CO 7 (OOD N' N j (D(D `G. N O r i2° (n SM D N n N a (D CL (D - N S C N -OO FD' (TD r (e m U3 — — 7 91 (D (D fD Z to (n 0) (D 0 sp to 3 N (n O yO N + y go N W (D (D (D j z O v 7 (D 7 y Q n F5' 7 y 69 69 69 fA 69 (A (A (A 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 (A (A 6A f�D 000 N J O) O (n CA 0A O 0J OCD (n (D (D (n co OO O O O N (D N O O N (n O. . . (n — O O O j N A 0 0 0 0 O N O J 0 0 0 m (D 00 O O O (r O N O CC 614,69 6A (n f,9 to (A to (A fn fA 69 f9 69 69 (A (n (A a n co i a) A J N N W (n N O O N O — J 00 W A O N O J (n D A W N O N A O O O J O O N O N O t0 J O O (n O O (D O O m O a m W v OV A m OJ J O O Q J O O J O O o A fA (n fA 6fl 69 T O m fD Q Q (D a a A (A (,9 fn (fl 6fl Q m d N A O m 0 n 0 wo o T o � N j A � O 9 O n 0 0 0 w OD w ao O (P W A O) (n an .40 A O A O A O O O O C) (T O (n O 69169 69 (D (A (,9 691(,9 (n (n 60 fA la a(n owe 00 09 A A O) W O O) N N N (n J A (D (n W (P (P (P N (n O O w (n W W J — N O A m (n (P O O O O O O O O N O (D O O (n O A 0 A O .40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (r O O O N O 0 0 Qo N A O A O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (n (Jl O Cn O C CC CC i/i w N C N n N (D N � O gn -n < G G CL Q Q O S S S N n (Op N (U N n C C C N D) (1) 3 3 3 m x Q° m_ =-t: c'i r n) m X< D n r r r U �. o (D 3 O v y 0) (D (D 3 fn (n (n y 0 () G) .N (D C1 C C C 0 � N D_ O_ O_ p �� N (D 0 0 0' v 3aaa N :v 6 7 3 3 (Q (O D n n O O N N (D (D (Ai A A A A A A A cn A (Ai, , A A A O (n (n (n (n (n (n O) O (P O (n (n cn U1 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 z N— N N O N N o 0 J N N N N N E O A A OO W A A A N (n N N N N W A j A� O J (D (P N A W 0 N N OD n (n A O N (WD j O 0 N n ('') N 1 (D r p r p y r N w n wm r r m � r c<3 � Gi n c c a) CD c: Q O Q n 3 d OI 3 Q Q .n.. () _ �) (D y N N N (� N m N N S I N (D 'CO 7 (OOD N' N j (D(D `G. N O r i2° (n SM D N n N a (D CL (D - N S C N -OO FD' (TD r (e m U3 — — 7 91 (D (D fD Z to (n 0) (D 0 sp to 3 N (n O yO N + y go N W (D (D (D j z O v 7 (D 7 y Q n F5' 7 y 69 69 69 fA 69 (A (A (A 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 (A (A 6A f�D 000 N J O) O (n CA 0A O 0J OCD (n (D (D (n co OO O O O N (D N O O N (n O. . . (n — O O O j N A 0 0 0 0 O N O J 0 0 0 m (D 00 O O O (r O N O CC 614,69 6A (n f,9 to (A to (A fn fA 69 f9 69 69 (A (n (A a n co i a) A J N N W (n N O O N O — J 00 W A O N O J (n D A W N O N A O O O J O O N O N O t0 J O O (n O O (D O O m O N A (n (n co O W d1 N N J v (NO A l(A E9 69 69 N oo O W W J N N W O m � D 7 C7 a � C � tD y < O — a (D M C- D v c Z O v CA °° .& D v Q 00 ic N C a m W v M (D J O O Q J O O J O O A fA (n fA 6fl 69 n O (D A (A (,9 fn (fl 6fl N A (n (n co O W d1 N N J v (NO A l(A E9 69 69 N oo O W W J N N W O m � D 7 C7 a � C � tD y < O — a (D M C- D v c Z O v CA °° .& D v Q 00 ic N C 1611 B22 January 18, 2011 Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manger, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Radio Road MSTU Protect Report (R -22) - ACTIVE: DEVONSHIRE shrub REFURBISHMENT; Funding Source Fund 158 01- 18 -11: Committee to review Windham Studios Plans for Devonshire Refurbishment Project. (R -18) - COMPL.ETED: 100% COMPLETED - RADIO ROAD PHASE III PROJECT (Livingston Rd. to Airport Pulling; Windham Studios (PO 4500105824) ; Funding Source Fund 158 01- 18 -11: Project substantially completed. (R -15) - COMPLETED: RADIO ROAD PHASE H -B & Phase I -A (II -B is from Kings Way /Briarwood Entry to Tina Lane); (I -A is from Devonshire to Santa Barbara) ; Funding Source Fund 158 01- 18 -11:: Project is Substantially Completed. (R -19) — ON GOING: MAINTENANCE CONSULTING CONTRACT; Funding Source Fund 158 01- 18 -11:: Windham Studios is under contract for maintenance consulting (R -14) — ON GOING: MAINTENCE CONTRACT — BID# 09 -5111R -- "Radio Road Beautification MSTD/MSTU Roadway Grounds Maintenance" ; Funding Source Fund 111 08- 17 -10: Hannula request price increase per Phase II -B, I -A, and (pending completion) Phase III 01 -18 -1 l: Staff & Windham Studio review of proposed for price increase. Anticipated increase will be effective after December 5, 2010. 1 0 161 1 B22 STATUS REPORT To: Radio Road MSTU Advisory Committee Company: Darryl Richard, Collier County ATM From: Scott Windham Date: January 17, 2011 RE: Radio Road MSTU Devonshire Landscape Refurbishment Status Report MSTU Committee and Staff: The following is a report on the status of the Devonshire Landscape Refurbishment Hedge and Tree replacement project: • Devonshire Landscape Refurbishment 100% Construction Drawings, Opinion of Cost and Bid Tabular have been submitted to staff for review and preparation for bid. • Per committee request, we added Asian Jasmine for the ROW area between the back of the sidewalk and the Clusia hedge instead of sod. • Base bid tabular includes 15 gallon Clusia shrubs for an initial installed height of 5- 6'.( +/- $100 ea) We have also provided an alternate for 10 gallon, 4' Clusia ( +/- $55 ea) in the event that the committee elects to save on the budget and allow the shrubs to grow. • Staff is researching a method of calculating a separate Devonshire percentage of use for the effluent supply based on a reading from the Devonshire Bermad and comparing it with the effluent Bermad which is upstream from the mixing chamber. Please email or call me if you have any questions. Thank you, Scott Windham, ASLA Landscape Architect, LA 000 -1516 Windham Studio, Inc., Landscape Architecture, LC 26000363 8891 Brighton Lane, Bonita Springs, Florida 34133 Phone: (239) 390 -1936 Fax: (239) 390 -1937 Email: scott@\Nlndhamstudio.com www.X1111ldharnstudio.com 6) 0 C W ro D� v c d 0 w 1p O A m D W m m d' m W c O c CD 0 CD c O S 44 40 J � O •001 W O O S N N O O W W W Q Q p O 3 c Z ' ' c cF m M Z V V C C O 4 4n4 > ' m ' ' a a =• z M r M m C U 0 D U d y Ul V d m 10 W V 0 171 A W �• N N a CI y d + N N O N1�7 (D W W N N rw 0 0 N V N q' ro Ic to m 00 W 3 � {�' '0' o + z- 8 ,W'c 0 O 0. O. N C R O W 0 a n(D m F y c c o 0 0 0 0 7 v+ d d m ?a Ln a a 0 F > >, Wm 0 W 'm a 1D N O O O O 7 3° y Er o m (D v 7 C C m m' go moo: W W d o0 a' (D a < _ a d o o t° fO m v 0. ID m W n y o 0 0 0 F (A m ' EF g 0 y 0= 3 0. (D a W W W y Oo c W '0 � W W y y O (��• y N V O G G 'O M. 7 0 n (D 0 01 61 61 a 5 -1 F. W c > 0 -`�. ('(pp ('e 'TJ Cam,' W y W 6 (D W W W W on CD Pr m (a 9 0 y t° ' n o cc m in y U 0 c^ 8 p =O W 0 N' W co �. A C7 O N 8 N m y (D O• lA o° = 3 y O O N °mYl d 0 m F °o 0 W _ rL T 0 (p' O 7 o W 8 S2 T IM m N W 0 CD N O O _7CC O O ' G 2 0 d g o y 6"1 N O' W 2 CD D1 oa Cl. x f ? m s (u m (D m 0 °y a m O 0 O' (D y N ¢ d lD 0 W '0 a A W .•. O i+. Cc> fT 0) p 00 (T1 O) O O M r r r r r W m T T T m N 1D 'W< (D 0 O C CD T O n d d N I to cn Q .-.W. . •I N r m W IV � � ' 0 C ' � r_ N � n • G W 'fO A O O 71 iO V •O O s O w O vN O O O tW O O » 6 m 0 O 9 tV O O H 69 C o tl 0 O O O O CD CD O O 0 0 O O D O O O m o � 0 W N n 4. fA FA Vi EA fA 69 iA 40 fA 41i EA Hi E9 44 vFN O O O O A .W W W + V A N 10 W W W V N + O N O 17 V A A A 0 O O N N V O AA O O O 0 17 O 71 O OO 0 CO O 0 Go o O O O O O O O l 10 O C 22 y ?Z a m y t" M O w n W C N m --1 y n c S W m 07 O t0 W 'ct N 3 @ 3 iq v 3 ° � n 3 y N W D) a W N 7 O N 571 N M W A O O m N S o En w A N O O Z 3 W W to 4A V N + 9) O O OD O O W W W C W O• c N 0 CL W r C s d CL W x 0 (D w x N v W W O m w V A A � N N 69 �Gq A O O O O iii V O O O O 44 O O O m m 3 w o "O J m c 2 to o 0 ' c (D W ( N3 1 o' 3 ( X N I N I ID v 0 I o 1 ! wi > > ..W, i O --I j 1 a 1 ;:� 1 N = 0 0 C ' � a O m m c g V V O n0 0 d O c W d 7 w T (ID v CD S: w m co 00 T W (O 1 C) W W N c EA c O W Ln )n eD 0 0 0 J 44 Vi W W N m ' D r c M m m M m m X r N 3 a o o .q , (<D .0 A d a < g i C � I O Cn Q Rulvlv>vl W V O O + y o 0 0 0 ,Q o O 0 O O I N V WO A O O O O1 0 0 0 0 00 O O 0 0 l�n II 1 N + 3 m 1° 7 W o. a 9 O m m o m 0 m O CL (n co N c a (0 '69 0 ca y V W CD O O rOi c <» 6) w + V W c coo 00 C O O O Z it r C m n 1 A N :t 0 N Z o Z O T Q r m O CO) O 0 c Q 3 N IV 1 / r rn ! Or it M M 1 0 I � I !O I 10 O C 22 y ?Z a m y t" M O w n W C N m --1 y n c S W m 07 O t0 W 'ct N 3 @ 3 iq v 3 ° � n 3 y N W D) a W N 7 O N 571 N M W A O O m N S o En w A N O O Z 3 W W to 4A V N + 9) O O OD O O W W W C W O• c N 0 CL W r C s d CL W x 0 (D w x N v W W O m w V A A � N N 69 �Gq A O O O O iii V O O O O 44 O O O m m 3 w o "O J m c 2 to o 0 ' c (D W ( N3 1 o' 3 ( X N I N I ID v 0 I o 1 ! wi > > ..W, i O --I j 1 a 1 ;:� 1 N = 0 0 C ' � a O m m c g V V O n0 0 d O c W d 7 w T (ID v CD S: w m co 00 T W (O 1 C) W W N c EA c O W Ln )n eD 0 0 0 J 44 Vi W W N m ' D r c M m m M m m X r N 3 a o o .q , (<D .0 A d a < g i C � I O Cn Q Rulvlv>vl W V O O + y o 0 0 0 ,Q o O 0 O O I N V WO A O O O O1 0 0 0 0 00 O O 0 0 l�n II 1 N + 3 m 1° 7 W o. a 9 O m m o m 0 m O CL (n co N c a (0 '69 0 ca y V W CD O O rOi c <» 6) w + V W c coo 00 C O O O Z it r C m n 1 A N :t 0 N Z o Z O T Q r m O CO) O 0 c Q 3 N IV 1 / r rn ! Or it M M 1 0 I � I !O I 16 1 Fiala , 4i�le.� 0102 0 330 Henning. Coyle V"IMit JWmA )K Advisory Coonomittee 2705 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 December 2, 2010 AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: November 4, 2010 V. Budget Report VI. Landscape Maintenance Report - CLM VII. Utilities Report - Charles Arthur VIII. Project Manager Report - Darryl Richard IX. Old Business X. Update Report A. Maintenance — Bruce Forman B. Tax Analysis — Bud Martin XI. New Business XII. Public Comment XIII. Adjournment The next meeting is January 6, 2011 at 2:00 P.M. ST. JOHNS PARISH LIFE CENTER 625 111 T" Ave. Naples, FL Misc. Corms- Date:-03) 0-2 111 Item *1�1( Copies to: 1611 VaNda6isE OmeA M.4.7.N. Advisory Ooomomlttea 2705 Horseshoe Drive Soudi Naples, FL 34104 November 4, 2010 MINUTES I. Call Meeting to Order The meeting was called to order by Charles Arthur at 2:00 p.m. A quorum was established. 11. Attendance Members: Dick Lydon, Bud Martin, Charles Arthur, Bruce Forman, Bill Gonnering (Excused) County: Darryl Richard —MSTU Project Manager, Pam Lulich— Landscape Operations Manager, Michelle Arnold -ATM Director, Gloria Herrera - Budget Analyst, Alison Bradford - Pathways Others: Chris Tilman — Malcolm Pirnie, Jim Fritchey —CLM, Darlene Lafferty— Juristaff III. Approval of Agenda Add. IX. A. Pathway Bud Martin moved to approve the agenda as amended. Second by Bruce Forman. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. IV. Approval of Minutes — October 14, 2010 Change: Xl. A., pg 4, first bullet should read. Monies $600, 000.00 is remaining from the Bridge Funds on Vanderbilt Dr. Pg 5, second paragraph, should read: South of Bluebill Ave. (on Vanderbilt Dr. to Vanderbilt Beach Rd.) Dick Lydon moved to approve the minutes of October 14, 2010 as amended. Second by Bruce Forman. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. V. Budget Report—Discussed under IX. VI. Landscape Maintenance Report— CLM -Jim Fritchey Jim Fritchey reported: o Fertilization was conducted o Estimate for Tree Trimming is minimal ($10.00 per tree) 1 2 3 1611 B234 VII. Utilities Report- Charles Arthur perceived the two major issues with the Line Burial Project are as follows: • Easement (Acquisition) • Comcast Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement and the order in which the work is performed Chris Tilman reported: • Pole License have not been received by FPL - Staff requested Pole License(s) from FPL on numerous occasions to no avail • The County Attorney cannot advance on the Comcast Agreement until Pole License(s) are obtained Charles Arthur recommended County Legal pursue the Pole License(s) with FPL Legal Department. Discussion ensued regarding the November 15th conference call with FPL and Comcast to coordinate Underground Line Burial and Pole removal. After discussion the following was determined: • Comcast will perform the Underground Facilities Conversion prior to FPL Pole work • Staff and Malcolm Pirnie will contact Comcast prior to November 15th to discuss the sequence of work on the Underground Line Burial and Pole removal Chris Tilman reported information on the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Phase 1 Easement List: (See attached) Location (3) Vanderbilt Shores • The Board President is in favor of granting the Easement • A Board meeting is not required as the President is authorized to approve the Easement • The Board President requested a final review of the Easement Drawings and Property prior to signing the Agreement • RWA Survey and FPL Agreement will be distributed to the Board President and Property Manager for review (prior to November 13th) Location (4) Vanderbilt Bay Condominiums o Meeting is scheduled with the Condo Association on November 8th to discuss the location of the Equipment and purpose Locations (5A and 9) o (5A) Easement was divided between Mr. Chafee and Mr. Thompson's Property (as requested by Mr. Chafee) o (9) Mr. Chafee requested to center the Easement between his Property and Mr. Forbis (9A) - (9A) No response from Mr. Forbis 2 1611 B23 o John Leer approved the centered Easement configurations Location (11) • Mr. Costantini denied approval of Easement per Attorney recommendation • Transformer will be located in the ROW - Transformer location is non negotiable - 3 X 10 ft. Easement is required by FPL for access - The Costantini Property will be served by the Transformer • Malcolm Pirnie will contact Mr. Costantini to explain the benefits of approving the access Easement Location (12) La Playa o Signed FPL Easement Document was received Location 13 Villas of Vanderbilt Beach o Status is Pending - Requested contact from the Manager via email Location 14 Casa Grande o Survey and FPL Easement Documents were emailed for Board approval Location 15 Manatee Resort o Easement Sketch (with dimensions) was submitted to Pam Petit to review with the Board Location 16 Vanderbilt Beach LLC • The Association denied the proposed location for the Equipment • A Legal opinion is required as there is joint ownership of the Property (3 owners) • General Manager will convey to the Property Owners that (2) Units will provide service to their building • General Manger will provide Property Owner contact information to Malcolm Pirnie Location 18 & 19 Vanderbilt Beach Motel o Easement location is North of Lighthouse Inn 0 5 X 20 ft Easement is for FPL access VIII. Project Manager Report-Darryl Richard reported the following: (See attached) (VA -35) Water Line Relocation Project • Water Line Relocation was reviewed by ROW Permit Division • Asbestos concrete pipe will be removed to address Environmental concerns 3 1611 g23 r (VA -32) Conversion of 31 Residential Properties to Underground o Mr. Bowein obtained services from an Electrician to address Code Violations Budget Report (See attached) Gloria Herrera reviewed the following information: • Received Ad Valorem Tax $4,637.92 • Available Operating Expense $184,917.70 Darryl Richard distributed the Adjusted Balance Sheet. (See attached) IX. Old Business A. Pathway Alison Bradford reviewed information on the Pathway Project o (2) Public meetings were held o Finalization of Plans are underway o Confirmed the Project was approved by the BCC o Projected start date Spring 2011 Discussion ensued concerning the timing and location of the Pathway Project and the subsequent Utility Line Burial. Alison Bradford stated: • The Designers planned the Pathway Project with consideration of the Utility Line Burial Project • Conduit for the Utility Line Burial Project may be installed by the Pathway Project during construction Darryl Richard requested Alison Bradford provide Staff with Survey information and Plans (for review by Malcolm Pirnie.) Charles Arthur noted the Conduit is supplied by FPL. Michelle Arnold suggested submitting the Pathway Plans to FPL for review and recommendations. Darryl Richard will coordinate review of the Pathway Project Plan with John Leer and Malcolm Pirnie. X. Update Report A. Maintenance —Bruce Forman —None B. Tax Analysis —Bud Martin —None XI. New Business Darryl Richard distributed and reviewed an aerial photo of the Vanderbilt Pavilion. (See attached) Discussion took place on the proposed Vanderbilt Beach Pavilion Project. 1611 823A Staff confirmed the following: • Vanderbilt Beach Rd. circle will be repaved • Restrooms will be installed (South of the circle) • Requested the Committee contact Staff with questions Charles Arthur recommended goal setting for the Construction commencement date for the Utility Line Burial. After discussion the following was determined by the Committee and Staff • Initiate Easement Construction May 1, 2011 • Easement Acquisitions completed by March 31, 2011 XII. Public Comment—None There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 3:28 p.m. Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Committee de Charles Arthur, Chairman These minutes approm d by the Board /Committee on ►01- a - (0 as presented or amended The next meeting is November 4, 2010 at 2:00 P.M. ST. JOHNS PARISH LIFE CENTER 625 111 T" Ave. Naples, FL. 6R J 1 61 A W N O (O O J O N N A W N s 0 t0 CD V (n O A W N— c)-00 nprC)O��cnz� mmm0 Zwmr - 1- imC�c»� �Z Z?i 00 0� m> 0 0 >�> m m= x 2 G) m� � D m Cn D m 0 O= Z� 0 o 0 --1 x < m< m M c �XX Wmm NW DO §�=Xr 7,m=mz�� �DTXwmI<(mmD ID - w �00 zx� =DD CD fTrl�� m-� rm �O m�D cf) ZrZ Xox �00-<MT X rffI TI TI TM C0 � _ �O vim --I --I m0 prn G) X co <n<m0 zXm0 -imG)Zmo OW <0 --1XX J N� Z r-D Q O n�� ciZ mD c)m�nm nNG)cn 2: -n�� Z �m��MX m �D o p0 m m O Z Z c�� x -j = r� x r m m m n m x c m D D O O c x z D ��D Z �O mc����'cai �;--j im �p�Ct)x m0<oOkgoOm ZKD� -i 0-0 n zcn mG)G) onyx cz 00 mCrm��x D pX p m-0 O m Cl) r D co m_ mxm mm m r r m C m n D D c °� z C) m { N m Z r Z p— f/) (n cn �? r cn V► fA 69 69 fA fA 69 fA (A ffl 69 fA fA fA fA fA fA fA fA fA fA fH 69 69 fA fA fA fA fA 69 64 V: w fA fA fA fA V9 fA 69 w to 69 fA fA Cn Cn �_ W s V J W to W N W W 00 (b A W W W A t0 J (n 01 O O Q OD (D (fl W (n V N N O O W W (n O O N -� W N O OD O J N C D O O !n W (b (T W O C O 0 0 O O O N N J N (n Co (n O O (n A (n O (n O W m (n O (D (n (n (D O O N A 0 0 0 0 O O O A A (fl O O O O O O O O O (n (n 0 0 0 00 O A A O A O O O O "'" G N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J J J O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O J O O tr (n O Cn O O O O A 00 0 0 0 0 0 (n (n CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 O O O O (o 6 0 cif A O A O O O O to O O O O O 00 W W (n 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O (n O O O Oo O Cb O O' O O V► b9 69 69 in 69 fA fA fA fA fit fA fA fA fA fA 69 EA 69 69 fA 69 fA fA fA fA w fA fA fA w V1 fA to 69 fA fA w fA fA fA 69 fA 69 0 O N oO W O A ) A r 3 A t0 W N N— Cn O A � � m w o n o to m w w -P, L" A O O O CD J J O -4 -4 Cn A (n J O ' 1 W (D O O O V 00 Co 4. (D O N Gs O (n O O O J O Cn (fl (n O 3 O 3 fA 1691 fA I fA fA AIN O N C Mi :ilC� f= if -��-Z �•: Vi 69 69 fA fA fA EA 69 619 69 w 69 69 fA 69 69 fA fA fA fA 69 W W A (P A A A V W 00 W A O O co O O V Cn lb (n O N V O w O O W W (r O O A Cn A O O A A O O O O N (n O O O O O (n O O O O w l (n I (n I <n I fA I fA fA 69 69 L9 fA 69 fA 69 fA fA fA fA w fA fA fA ffl fA 6 Cpl wI DI(DIODIN (n1 NI IN E l 1 O IA (O (j010 I O O A O X -z' y CD N m CD n CD 0 V O O N N N N O ?1 N (O V [b N o V co A W N V W N A W N J O N N O 00 W J A (n O N (n N W O Cn W O O (n O O O (T O O O (n W O J O O O O O O (n O A (n O Cn O O O O J O J O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J O J O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T -n -n -n { [ r o m m m T T -9 Cx O T N 7 7 S O /n j N N N D) + w o v 1 _I w O O X X cT 0. Iv N II A (D h N m m m a m (D N fA 0 o m m n A j CD C A < W (D p m A W O V O V V W A OO (A169 fA fA fA fA fA fA Efl EA 6 V (n (Y) O) O O O W O Cn (n A O A O Cn C) (n O A O A O 00 O 00 O fA 69 ffl V3 m D 3 n (nay (Nn CNn A C m N Cn Cn CD N N O A fl V) fA to fA D _ O O T J N W V (fin A lD OD 00 G) cn ;U X X K K K K L E E T TI TI -m o o 0 < m m m m N S1 O O m O O O m= CD D D D aaci n rn' m r a 3= m' a m o o o o m v 0 c m m 3 0 CD n 0 0 0 m m m= CD O n 0 0 Z 7 7 3 7 O CD .N-. (D (n m' c O (D m CD 3 m = = o- c = U) N CD O_ Oa <cc)mmC) c>> 0 -n mm cn "O o ', �_- = 0 3 m m= 0 � N O c 0 O= O m CD C1 (D = c= � =1 O O O O m c (D CD c 0 N CD N' �. _ CD =3 7r "c0 W N c0 (fl m 0 (fl ((D (D c Cn O Ur Q co N N co ? �' (D N -0 Q° C (D 2 3 (D Z N `G (D CA r -_ O = = O N _— ,G CD O CD __ CD N N m N 3 w CD o Op_ '_^ O U). o m = (D N O .m 7 (D G CD A WO A A A A A A A A A A A A A (n 0 CP 0 cn 0 (n 0 (n 0 (n 0 (n 0 Cn 0 Cn 0 (n 0 Cn 0 (n 0 (n 0 0 0 0 0 0 ZJ O O O O O O O O O O Z O m O O N G) G) N N N N N N N °_° W D# W w A o m cn N N ONO (Nn co O 6) W A (n (n O J W O J (n N J 69 69 69 fA 69 fA fA fA 69 fA (A Ffl fA 69 fA fA 69 fA CD (n J A O m N A W — O m W co N_ -� O (D 0o a) C) — (n (n O A O O N) (D _3 O O J T Cl O (n (D O O O O (n co (b (n 0 O 0 O O O (D 1 (n 1 O O W O 00 W O O A (D J J 69 fA69 69 fA fA fA 69 4;9 fA fA fA fA fA 69 fA co W O� W W A (n A m J 00 A 03 co w O A w A O. 00 0) N (D 00 (n (n O — Ou W (D O Cn O O W O O A W A O O y N N 0 0 0 0 y 0 (n N O (n O O O Cn O O A O W O y T v v n z v (D T 3 cM (D Z W v N � � A N W O cn O C Collier County, Florida Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Adjusted Balance Sheet (Unaudited) As of respective date Pooled cash and investments Market valuation of investments (done annually) Due from Tax Collector Due from Property Appraiser Due from other funds Interest receivable Total Assets 1611623' Unaudited (52,470.00) (11,865.15) Fiscal 2011 - Unaudite As of Legal Fees (1,473.95) - 9130/2010 10/13/2010 11/412010 12/2/2010 $ 5,080,344.09 $ 5,078,094.93 $ 5,079,155.37 $ 5,102,971.32 $ 2,615.91 2,615.91 2,615.91 2,615.91 8,458.21 8,458.21 - - 1,037.70 1,037.70 (10,000.00) - 7,293.01 7,293.01 7,293.01 7,293.01 $ 5,099,748.92 $ 5,097,499.76 $ 5,089,064.29 $ 5,112,880.24 $ Other Contractural Services (52,470.00) (11,865.15) (12,415.15) (16,025.15) Legal Fees (1,473.95) - 503.65 503.65 Engineering (44,320.00) - (36,880.00) (36,880.00) Surveying Fees (14,982.05) - 13,085.17 - Abstract Fees (875.00) - (1,921,723.09) - Indirect Cost Reimbursement (10,000.00) - (4,000.00) (4,000.00) Water and sewer (46,810.77) - (2,136.40) (4,490.23) Sprinkler maintenance (846.07) - (486.00) Landscaping (13,345.71) - (394.51) (1,174.51) Mulch (3,218.60) - - Other miscellaneous (fertilizer, electricity, etc.) (8,523.52) - (7.07) (717.19) Improvements - General (Capital) (315,614.76) (19,780.00) (23,400.40) (43,400.40) Transfer toPA (6,412.89) (924.16) (1,961.86) (1,961.86) Transfer to TC (10,619.12) (139.14) (2,180.90) Transfer to Fund 111 (Unic. MSTD) (23,000.00) - Total Liabilities and Equity $ 5,099,748.92 $ 5,097,499.76 $ 5,089,064.29 $ 5,112,880.24 $ Collier County, Florida Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Source of monies from inception - CUMULATIVE Ad valorem taxes $ 6,687,191.75 $ 6,687,191.75 $ 6,691,829.67 $ 6,783,736.99 $ Miscellaneous income (refund) 503.65 503.65 503.65 503.65 Interest earnings 581,659.97 581,659.97 581,659.97 583,168.27 Insurance recoveries 13,085.17 13,085.17 13,085.17 13,085.17 Good and services (1,915,896.45) (1,918,145.61) (1,921,723.09) (1,991,322.76) Transfers out to other County funds (286,200.00) (286,200.00) (286,200.00) (286,200.00) Cash balance as of respective date $ 5,080,344.09 $ 5,078,094.93 $ 5,079,155.37 $ 5,102,971.32 $ 1611 B23 Report for: December 2, 2010 Meeting Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manger, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Project Status (VA -35) - ACTIVE — Water Line Relocation Project — Project V -1 12- 02 -10: Asbestos Removal procedures are being added to project plans. Final Plans will be reviewed after all required details related to Asbestos removal are included in bid set. Bidding is anticipated within 2 weeks. (VA -34) - ACTIVE — Survey for Phase II & III (PO 4500118493) 12- 02 -10: RWA survey in progress. Malcolm Pirnie reviewing survey data. (VA -32) —10021 Gulfshore Drive Underground conversion of residential meter. 12 -02 -10 Code Enforcement & Building Permitting report that Property owner at 10021 Gulfshore Drive is in the process of bringing the noted code violations into compliance with building code. As soon as property is reported as being 'compliant' with code — staff and Engineer Consultant will review for project to convert this property to underground. (VA -30) - ACTIVE — Comcast "Phase One" Coordination 10 -14 -10 Draft Agreement received from Comcast as per tariff 6.310 requirements. Draft is under review at County Attorney's office. Total project cost is estimated to be: $331,351.25. Comcast in `draft' agreement is requesting a 10% contingency fund. Copy of pole agreements is pending from Comcast. 12 -02 -10 Copy of Pole License agreements between FPL & Comcast is pending. (VA -27) - ACTIVE — Phase One "Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement" (UFCA) 11 -10 -09 COMPLETED for Channel Drive (only); UFCA approved by BCC for'Channel Drive' 12 -02 -10 Overall Phase One UFCA is pending resolution of `easements' required for Phase One Project; As soon as easements are obtained FPL will proceed with Final Engineering Cost Estimate and production of Final Design Plans for project. (VA -26) - ACTIVE — Malcolm Pirnie; (EASEMENT AQUISITION) Review preliminary design provided by FPL 12 -02 -10 Ongoing review of easements and negotiation with property owners in progress. (VA -19) — ACTIVE - ONGOING — On Call Services — Malcolm Pirnie Engineering On -going services for meeting attendance and preliminary investigation regarding underground power line installation. 12 -02 -10 Ongoing On -Call Engineering Services by Malcolm Pirnie Engineering (VA -18) — ACTIVE- ONGOING - — Maintenance Contract — Award to Commercial Land; Annual Maintenance 'base contract' per Quote 12 -02 -10 Ongoing Maintenance Services by Commercial Land Maintenance (:i) 1611 J23 Brief summary of "Underground Utilities Conversion" project activity Since December 11, 2007 Initial BCC Approval of Agreement 12 -11 -07 BCC Approval of ROW Agreement with FPL date Dec. 11, 2007 03 -26 -08 TEAM TELECONFERNCE (FPL, COMCAST, COUNTY, MSTU (C.ARTHUR), VBPOA (JACKIE BAMMEL, RWA, MALCOLM PIRNIE) 03 -10 -08 PUBLIC MEETING AT ST. JOHNS 05 -12 -08 Review of RWA Survey w/ Malcolm Pirnie and C. Arthur 06 -05 -09 Confirmation of 4 residential units affected by "Channel Drive Pilot Project" with FPL (Ryan Drum); Field Meeting to review project; Affected Properties are: NANCE, HAROLD 283 CHANNEL BASTANI, KEN K 261 CHANNEL KOHLER, RUTH H 227 CHANNEL REYNOLDS TR, HENRY E 213 CHANNEL 06 -23 -09 CHANNEL DRIVE: Hart's Electrical begins work per PO 4500107832 09 -11 -08 Review of 1st RWA Survey Submittal Sept 11, 2008 09 -12 -08 Confirmation of FPL Red -Line Comments for survey Sep. 12, 2008. 09 -17 -08 TEAM TELECONFERENCE (FPL, MALCOLM PIRNIE) 09 -22 -08 FPL "Pot Hole" digs recommended locations identified Sept 22, 2008 11 -21 -08 TEAM MEETING (C. ARTHUR, J. BAMMEL, MALCOLM PIRNIE) 02 -02 -09 FPL Approval of Survey Feb. 4, 2009 02 -04 -09 Staff request $13,027.00 Engineering Deposit Invoice Feb. 4, 2009 03 -09 -09 PUBLIC MEETING AT ST. JOHNS 04 -02 -09 MSTU Committee makes motion to proceed with "Channel Drive Project" 04 -10 -09 Verification of easements for 'private property' April 10, 2009 04 -28 -09 BCC Approval of Modified Ordinance adding installation of powerline within `easement' to private properties. This is to allow installation of power from ROW Line to private property connection. C�� 1611 B23 06 -01 -09 CHANNEL DRIVE: Ryan Drumm (FPL) request .pdf of ROW Agreement for review; forwarded via email 06 -25 -09 FPL Draft Design submittal Phase One Plans 06 -26 -09 Staff request (1) Cadd file of Phase One Submittal; (2) Review indicates drawings are not sufficient for bidding purposes; (3) Full size prints 'to scale' requested' 06 -26 -09 TELECONFERNCE; CALL IN FROM FPL (John Lehr, FPL; Troy Todd, FPL; Ryan Drumm, FPL; Darryl Richard, Collier County) Troy Todd (FPL) clarifies that "tariff charges" apply to Channel Drive Project (ref: Tariff No. 6 per PSC approved Tariff); $566.59 for the 4 properties on Channel Drive 07 -27 -09 CHANNEL DRIVE: Hart's Electrical completed electrical from ROW to Home /Resident for the following Channel Drive Address': 213,283,263 and 227 08 -07 -09 RYAN DRUMM SUBMITTAL — Channel Drive UFCA; and 'Draft' plans; Ryan confirms no existing underground FPL Facilities on Channel Drive 09 -16 -09 RYAN DRUMM 2nd SUBMITTAL — Channel Drive UFCA (dated 8- 18 -09); and 'Final' Channel Drive plans (marked 'check set') 09 -17 -09 CHANNEL DRIVE RESIDENT COORDINATION: Kent Smith called on behalf of Mr. Nance to report that he has received the mailing /letter regarding Channel Drive project and that Mr. Nance chooses to 'not participate' at this time due to financial concerns. He mentioned his wife was in the hospital and that he did not have the money to pay the $650.00 for his "private conversion" to underground. 09 -22 -09 TELECONFERENCE (FPL, COUNTY LEGAL, STAFF, MALCOLM PIRNIE, C. ARTHUR) Recommendations: FPL to submit 'agreement' in word format (if possible); staff to proceed with obtaining payment for'private' underground conversion from property owners Nance and Bastani on Channel Drive. FPL confirms that survey has been accepted and 'Final Plans' are pending for Phase One Project. 09 -21 -09 Ryan Drumm provides FPL Cost Breakdown for Channel Drive; Staff intends to process payment for an "FPL Invoice" upon BCC approval of UFCA (Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement) for Channel Drive; UFCA is pending completion of 'legal review' TOTAL CHANNEL DRIVE COST: $23,242.00 09 -23 -09 Message from Mr. Kent Smith (Legal Representative for Mr. Nance (Property Owner at 283 Channel Drive); Mr. Smith stated that the 'owner' has 'no desire' to underground his private connection, and furthermore has 'no intention of spending any money on his home' (at 283 Channel Drive) related to the power line underground conversion. 09 -24 -09 COMCAST COORDINATION; Channel Drive Plans forwarded to Comcast for quote of underground conversion for Comcast overhead utilities 10 1611 B23 10 -01 -09 Phase One "Legal Description" forwarded to FPL for confirmation of FPL formal acceptance of 'Legal Description' per 'Right of Way Agreement Section 2. Sub - section (d)' 10 -05 -09 FPL ACCEPTANCE OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION; John Lehr via email confirms FPL's official acceptance of the legal description for the Phase One Project; Staff request confirmation of "EXISTING FPL FACILITIES" per 'Right of Way Agreement Section 2. Sub - section (e)) documentation of all existing FPL underground facilities within the ROW that will not be included under ROW agreement (for Exhibit C) 10 -06 -09 COMCAST COORINDINATION: Mark Cook informs County Staff that Comcast has re- assigned project review to himself and Andy Vaspasiano; Mark indicates he and Andy are working on "Channel Drive" Cost estimate. * *COMCAST CONFIRMS 100% of conversion of Comcast Utilities is to be by the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU as the project sponsor. Comcast indicates that there will be no 'reductions' in cost due to 'depreciation' of equipment /existing installation. Services are identified as 'new' and 'not in need of upgrade'. Installation of underground conduit for Comcast is through Comcast contractor managed 'entirely by Comcast'. 10 -09 -09 Malcolm Pirnie submits letter for review of Project Drawing submittals and recommendation related to which party should install the underground conduit for Phase One Project 10 -12 -09 County Legal provides legal opinion from Nabors Giblin & Nickerson, 1500 Mahan Drive, Suite 200, Tallahassee, Florida 32308 (letter dated 10 -8 -09 Gregory T. Stewart 10 -12 -09 RWA Proposal submitted for survey of Phase II, III, and IV 10 -13 -09 TELECONFERENCE (C. ARTHUR, STAFF, MALCOLM PIRNIE) 10 -14 -09 FPL SUBMITTAL; PLANS FOR PHASE ONE PROJECT (Marked 'Preliminary') 10 -14 -09 John Lehr notifies staff (via phone call evening of 10- 14 -09) that the 'one page' agreement submitted on 8 -7 -09 has to be revised to a new 4 page agreement (delivery pending from FPL) 10 -22 -09 John Hart Electrical received check for $650.00 for Bastani on Channel Drive 'Private Can Conversion to underground. 10 -28 -09 Bastani Channel Drive private conversion project completed by Hart's Electrical 10 -28 -09 Revised UFCA Agreement received from FPL for BCC approval on Nov. 10, 2009 11 -03 -09 Confirmation of Comcast cost for Channel Drive Project is $4,000.00 per FPL plans. 11 -03 -09 Scott Teach and Michelle Arnold teleconference with Nabors Giblin & Nickerson results of teleconference to be presented at 11 -05 -09 MSTU meeting. to 1611 1823 11 -05 -09 Discussion Nabors Giblin & Nickerson legal consult related to 'underground conversion' and potential 'ordinance'; Committee makes motion to direct staff to pursue Ordinance for the MSTU to pay for homeowner's conversion and Ordinance to 'require' participation and mechanism to address non - participation. 11 -10 -09 BCC Approval of UFCA Agreement with FPL for Channel Drive'pilot project' 11 -10 -09 Field Meeting to review Proposed "Easements" for Phase One Project; Ryan Drum FPL was in attendance with Chris Tilman, Darryl Richard, Jeff Gower, and Charlie Arthur. Inspection indicated that all of the easements proposed were not necessary, and that 'alternative' site planning would locate the electrical boxes within existing ROW. Follow - up meeting with John Lehr scheduled for December 8, 2009 (1 pm) 12 -08 -09 Meeting with FPL (John Lehr, Kate Donofrio, Ryan Drum) and Malcolm Pirnie (Chris Tilman, Jeff Gower) and County Staff (Darryl Richard); Review of easements proposed; approximately 50% of easements were determined to not be necessary; However, the other 50% of easements require (1) detailed re- survey, (2) placement of stakes in field identifying ROW and property lines, and (3) re- identification of utilities in the field (call into Florida One Call system) Staff will coordinate with Malcolm Pirnie and RWA for necessary project activity; additional proposal from RWA is necessary for scope of work identified. Proposal from Malcolm Pirnie for'easement acquisition' is also recommended at this time in anticipation of possible requirement for easements. 12 -15 -09 BCC Approval of Ordinance Modification to add 'private' connections to MSTU Ordinance thus allowing MSTU to complete 100% of private meter connections as required to obtain 25% GAF waiver from FPL. 01 -04 -10 Draft Letter to 37 residents requiring underground conversion for meter connection under review 01 -04 -10 Channel Drive Project Under Construction 01 -19 -10 Letter sent to 35 residents in Phase One Project that have 'overhead' meter connections; staff is monitoring confirmation of receipt of this mailing by Certified Mail 02 -09 -10 Channel Drive Project 90% completed; missing 2 transformer boxes pending from FPL; Comcast is 100% installed on Channel Drive. 02 -09 -10 RWA Delivers 13 exhibits for locations for transformers and switch cabinets; These exhibits will be used in review of proposed easements by FPL in Preliminary Design 02 -09 -10 Malcolm Pirnie provides Final Bid Documents for Electrical Conversion of 35 properties in Phase One Project which have existing overhead meter connections. Staff preparing bid for advertisement and release to 'all bidders' not restricted to annual contractors. 1611 B23 03 -04 -10 MSTU Committee awards bid to ITran Partners, Inc. for underground conversion of 31 private residential units. It was determined that only 2 additional properties require underground conversion. Since the 2 additional properties are 'Commercial Property' and will require extensive review and investigation prior to conversion —these will be handled through Collier County Annual Electrical Contractor. 03 -11 -10 Meeting with ITran Partners to review 31 properties to be undergrounded. Some properties were noted as 'possible change order items'; namely saw cutting concrete driveway and re- installation of concrete slab over newly installed conduit. Malcolm Pirnie is assisting staff in review of each property and related 'issues' that may require further review. 03 -24 -10 EASEMENT ACQUISITION MEETING: 9895 Gulf Shore Dr.; Laplaya LLC; Jeremy Arnold, PE; Barron Collier Enterprises Summary: Mr. Anrold was very agreeable to granting easement 03 -26 -10 EASEMENT ACQUISITION MEETING: 10352 Gulf Shore Dr.; Mr. Epright; Summary: Mr. Epright is not agreeable to all 4 boxes being located on his property. He would like for the County to pursue alternative of placement of "2 boxes North of his property line — on the Condo Property" (10420 GULF SHORE DR; "Vanderbilt Bay Condominiums); Staff will coordinate with Engineer Consultant in bringing an alternative solution to the property owner; after preliminary review /approval by FPL as a viable alternative 03 -26 -10 Meeting with ITran Partners to review furthermore in depth' some of the technical issues related to each property conversion. Further coordination with FPL (Troy Todd) to identify certain items which appear to be 'non-standard' installations and modifications to FPL's meter connections is required. 03 -30 -10 All Tariff charges for the 31 properties have been approved for payment to FPL. Note there is a $566.59 Tariff charge for each of the 31 properties. Material supply for conduit will be by FPL for the residential units. With wire being 'pulled' by FPL. FPL will notify County once material supply has been received and is in stock. 03 -30 -10 EASEMENT ACQUISITION MEETING: 9635 Gulf Shore Dr.; Casa Grande Summary: Pam Pettit (Manager) and the Board President of Casa Grande. Appeared to be in agreement with granting easement. Was in favor of project. 03 -31 -10 COMMERCIAL PROPERTY CONVERSION: Meeting with Bentley Electric to review project details for conversion of 2 Commercial Properties (1) 9140 GULF SHORE DR (Hotel /INN) (2) 10540 Gulf Shore Dr (multi -unit condo) Bentley Electric to provide quote under annual contract 09 -5325 On Call Electrical Services Contract 03 -31 -10 Malcolm Pirnie Provides layout alternatives (Options 1, 2, and 3) for Mr. Epright's property. All 3 alternatives require an easement of some sort. FPL appears to be 0 1611 B23 interested in Option #1 which places 2 boxes to the north parcel and 2 boxes on /near Mr. Epright's property. (requires easement from both property owners) 04 -01 -10 Meeting with Lighthouse Hotel Owner Kevin Dugan regarding easement. Kevin is in favor of project and is willing to provide easement 04 -06 -10 ITran Partners begin underground conversion of 31 Commercial Properties. 04 -21 -10 Meeting with Charles Chaffee; Mr. Chaffee is in favor of project and will provide easement 04 -21 -10 Meeting with Mr. Epright; Mr. Epright is not in favor of project and is willing to offer very limited easement (5 ft. along Northern Edge of property) 04 -28 -10 Meeting to review proposed Park & Recreation plans for 111th Ave. parking lot. It was determined that no conflict exist between MSTU FPL Project and proposed changes by Park & Recreation. 04 -30 -10 Final Draft for Agreements for (3) Three Easements submitted to Kevin Hendricks, Director, Collier County Property Acquisitions 04 -30 -10 Easement Exhibits received from Malcolm Pirnie 05 -03 -10 Meeting with Collier County Utilities (Joe Thomas, P.E.) regarding the easement proposal for Vanderbilt Towers (North of Epright Property); Proposed alternative involves relocation and /or disconnection of existing water force main. Joe Thomas, Collier County Utilities indicates his staff will have to review what is proposed and then get back to Malcolm Pirnie /Staff. Note: a 7.5 foot off -set requirement is noted as being `required for our project'; staff /consultant had previously been utilizing 5 ft. off -set per FPL requirements for existing utilities. Malcolm Pirnie is to provide an exhibit for Joe Thomas illustrating the locations for utility boxes and off -sets as relates to utilities (water main lines in particular) Wednesday, May 26, 2010 Follow -up meeting with Collier County Utilities (Joe Thomas, P.E.) regarding relocation of water main for required off -set for FPL utility boxes. Friday, June 18, 2010 Notice to Proceed sent to RWA for Phase II & III Survey; P. O. #4500118493; CONTRACT: RFP #06 -3944 Annual Fixed Term Surveying & Photogrammetric Services; 360 day contract period. Thursday, June 24, 2010 Inspection of Residential Electrical Meters -Vanderbilt Beach MSTU 1) 10021 Gulfshore Dr; BOWEIN, LLOYD L; LURLINE S BOWEIN; 10021 GULF SHORE DR; NAPLES FL 34108; FOLIO NO. 27530040005; FAILED INSPECTION: CODE DEFICIENCIES NOTED BY BUILDING INSPECTOR. PROPERTY REFERED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT FOR CODE RELATED DEFIECIENCIES. 2) 10091 Gulfshore; FORBIS, ROBERT C =& DEBRA J; 10091 GULF SHORE DR; NAPLES FL 34108; PHONE: 239 -254- 8484; Mobile: (230) 641 -8000; PROPERTY OWNER PAID ELECTRICIAN UNDER PRIVATE CONTRACT TO RESOLVE CODE DEFIECIENCIES; STATUS: RESOLVED. 1611 623 11 Friday, August 27, 2010 Comcast Coordination Meeting; Review of basic requirements for agreement per Tariff 6.310 (Fla. PSC Approved Tariff regarding underground conversion of powerlines) September 23, 2010 Comcast Coordination Meeting; Update on progress toward 'draft agreement' And discussion /clarification of details related to project. Monday, October 04, 2010 Jeff Gower, P.E. provides bid documents for bidding Water Line Relocation Project — Project V -1. Project Plans reviewed by staff. Total Project cost is estimated at: $82,500.00 Friday, October 08, 2010 First Draft of Comcast Agreement with Vanderbilt Beach MSTU /Collier County received and forwarded to County Attorney's office for review. Tuesday, October 12, 2010 ROW Section confirms Water -line relocation project is being tracked under ROW Permit Application #10 -0520. ROW Permit is required prior to bidding project. Tuesday, October 12, 2010 Jeff Gower, P.E. confirms that FPL has 'approved' 12 out of the 13 total easement proposals. Staff and consultant are negotiating with property owners in obtaining owner approval of proposed easements. LIST OF PROPOSED EASEMENTS: Easement No. Owner /Parcel No. 1A 3 Vanderbilt Shores 1 4 Vanderbilt Bay Condo Phase 2 2 5A Chaffee 3 5A Thompson 4 9 Chaffee 2 5 11 Mario Costantini 6 12 La Playa 7 13 Villas of Vanderbilt Beach 8 14 Casa Grande 9 15 Manatee Resort 10 16 Vanderbilt Beach LLC 11 17 The Watermark Condo 12 18 & 19Vanderbilt Beach Motel Easement Size FPL Review 15'x40' In Progress 4'x 10' Approved 5' x 10' Approved 5' x 5' Approved Tx 10' Approved Tx 10' Approved 5'x 20' Approved 2'x 10' Approved 20'x 20' Approved 1' x 10' Approved 4'x 13' Approved 4'x 13' Approved 5'x 20' Approved Thursday, October 13, 2010 Code Enforcement meeting with Property Owner at 10021 Gulfshore Drive (Bowein); Code Case # Code case reference #CEPM20100017920 Summary: 14_ 1611 623 Code Enforcement Staff (Susana Capasso, Supervisor, North Naples District) meeting with Mr. Bowein. Mr. Bowein has coordinated with FPL and the electrical wire that was resting across the roof has been addressed (inspection pending). He is working on the closing the open permit for replacement of windows and will be working with Mark Thomas, Building Inspector, Building Review & Permitting, on the electrical code deficiencies noted. Monday, November 1, 2010 Code Enforcement meeting with Property Owner at 10021 Gulfshore Drive ( Bowein); Code Case # Code case reference #CEPM20100017920 Summary: Resident had obtained services from an electrician (company name undisclosed) and had met with Richard Long, Chief Building Inspector to review the details related to the code deficiencies at 10021 Gulfshore Drive. Friday, November 12, 2010 Comcast Teleconference- Coordination on Agreement A: Who goes First: Comcast opened the discussion with statement that Comcast had no problem with 'going first' and completing their underground installation given that 2 conditions be met — as stated below: 1) Comcast request written confirmation from FPL that once Comcast installs all of their utilities underground —that in the case that the FPL contractor 'hits the line' —that the FPL contractor will be responsible for repair of any damaged Comcast utilities. (attn: John Lehr — we could use a letter or email for clarification on this item) Note: Comcast will provide 'As Built' plans during and upon completion of the Comcast underground project. 2) Given that Comcast will 'go first' and install all underground utilities necessary for conversion (given condition #1 is met), Comcast request that they be allowed to keep the overhead utilities "in service" until all FPL underground conversion is completed. Once FPL underground conversion is completed Comcast will transfer service to the newly installed underground Comcast lines. The intention here is to ensure that there is no disruption of service (especially regarding 911 emergency service to residents) ensuring smooth transition between the old overhead lines to the new underground system. (attn: John Lehr— we could use a letter or email for clarification on this item) [NOTE: RESPONSE FROM FPL (John Lehr) IS PENDING REGARDING THIS REQUEST FROM COMCAST] B: Review of Agreement (see attached original draft as received from Comcast) 1) 110% of contractor cost needs to be reduced down to 100% or actual project cost only. Staff will not authorize 'overage' at onset of project. If unforeseen condition(s) should arise which require modification of agreement amount — another addendum would be required with BCC approval. 2) An amount of retainage must be determined. Staff is recommending 10% retainage for this project. At onset of BCC approval of Agreement 90% of project cost will be paid out within 45 days of BCC approval and then upon project completion payment of 10% retainage will be made within 45 days of project completion. CSC 1611 g23 3) Comcast is to provide a letter regarding the 'contractor selection' process related to Comcast sub - contractor for the project. Details related to contractor experience and specific qualifications should be included in this letter. 4) The agreement letter needs to be modified to include new BCC approved requirements for all contractors associated with Collier County Projects to have verification that all employees can lawfully work in the US. (additional details related to County Purchasing requirements (re: E- verify) for this item will be forwarded to Comcast under separate cover) 5) Staff is still in need of actual copies of the 'pole licenses' for Comcast utilization of the existing poles on Gulfshore Drive. Copy of these licenses is necessary for County Legal to review the proposed agreement. 161,1 V 01 A W N D N D 1D D D A W G < � m a v 0 o a o n 0 ro � 3 ❑. d d fU O ro N< n n 0 N o 3 ° c m m �' o < 0 pw m n vo tCOD d < R Li H N ro v N 0 O �0 m v C G m a v Z o 2- m o s T O ow d m 1 a o r o x o °1 P ( 01 !x � N n 'S 3 , o bo b A O 'S It t0 < O_ O l0 to O �P w ? N D 7 N ,0 O n� O o o N A rr O Q J T b Z x o V1 A 0�0 3 V S !� ro �I b H . 3• ro V b v F+ N 0_ O l0 + O W J t0 O N Ol O J v Ot ^ D- V �,` o= N w w fJ N C O 0 V o V A 7 a 'n0 3 a, - fJ d O a 00 o m rt H m �: `G 3 1., 01 ro v1 ro l/1 O X F+ D o m Ao 01 ro v+ ro 3 H A oa J N O a. o A 3 •QN1 N _ F-' = 3 » o N 3 N N ~ 0 0 3 o .O-r 3 0=0 A w A w O O O N .Jo. w W O O O O J w w O w O O O V VJi w OV N O O O w lVn w W w O O O w VJi w l00 N O o O N VJi w .OA w O O O ut VJi w ° N O O O A lJn w I~-� N o O O V1 Z 3 ro o N lo A ID t�Dn v O a NO w oAO O O 0 J Gl L1 a O O O o O O O O o O- ID ID fD ro N fD N fD O fD H < m r<o r<o �. r<o r<o m m r<u v N v o 'o a b o O o o O O O S 3 fi 3 3 3 3 3 3 Ro N x O VI x O W x O W x O W x Vi W x V? In x Vt V2 x O A x O N K O D b b 0 < ro D a 13, < ro D a - D b o D a c D a 'o < rom D b o N X a N N O n d X v • b ro �N O ro^ ro v o ro 2L m o m v .. •- _. o._ n N o oR < aoo 2 G O 1, O b d a OT j ❑ O b o = - a O CJ u x d 2 c 3 a p _ x c c- c 3 a = On 3 a x N= c • c Z O i, Z O Z o 2 o Z o Z O Z O Z O Z O Z o Z O Z O 2 o Z o Z o Z O Z O 2 O I0 3 s '^ o 'o o o 3 I s m \^ 3 < 0 3 w o r°.�i z__ 'O N m N ° N o -o s£ H o\ iD H o N T �3�pp Q$ N o S' n N fD ry3ry Q$ Ki N C a £ N O C N '" °< °• x. m_ O F w tN° N^ n� 3 2_ 5' ? D _n n a tD �. �' d .� o? a m n o 3 '" °• °� n c n v 3 m£ 3 F �' °_ y ? 'm 4 °° 3• v° °° a' E A 0'6 ° g u ° w v' F N rt Z ry ^ O \ P } ° v w .. 3 d$ ti a O- o$ M a. o'Sa• _\ oa a. _ 0 3 `° m _ °v Q s E j �, n N f _• m m£_ o c a n a o v s v w A o` s N$ c w o n S_ i o _ ° �' 9 ° m ° _ o. > z 3 R o. 3 3 = R d a m f, '°°" � _ o m °, °u c o. ° 3 > '3 ' ° ° u s qq Si a o g E v m v ° o ° ° y '. ? ° n v < F > ° ° s o � '- w \ n"i "a ^� -0 w �':° 3 .�.. v = �• E r s v �• £ 'S^ ` ° � o ° • n O v c N ° °° 3 d a � <° c. fi' � 0. v 3 °• ° a a �• N F s a o o n c a 3 - ° >? Dirt QyQ m R F F c. o ? o? o .°o F Z r °° 3 �:, °- �; c m m- `'° v o° G w s a n° 3 s 3 o i m° v 'm" m ro m m v v 2 E '°�^ `° a o •' s o 3£ u m 3 `�° v ;} T ? �• >' ? s ^ Q ° G c o U c o o£ v> >> 3 p, o _nv w3 °w3$ N Nn ° °° °.� < n F x o ° -• 9 ° N £ L4i o o CL 0. a m v n 3 o- N O O d 3 � d M M N -1 T =S iu .Y ry W 3 v M n LA C C (D O 1611 N + O O 00 co n Q m � a O d 3 W m to ' n 0 C o m O `o• e �p m m 3 y = a a a s W T W 3 W m` 01 W ?. O W O N • m Z m .i '° :o . 3 Ln t V 37 V' W io m . a A 4 V ry o V n V A F+ m W 0 O d V W O rF W .'S re) W 7 M Ln m 3 iD O 3 n w o an 3 3 3 3 N N A O O V A 0o A O O N A OD T O O O A OD N O O J V W 0�0 O O In N ID W LO A lopl�l Owl VI C N O C N 0w0 C 01 C H W G) C O m 0 O m 0 O fD 0 O N o O 0 v m < m < m Z' m < m N s o 0 m 0 o , CL 9 (n X O A X W A % W O X O o X O D a 0 < � D v 0 < m m X n a a N a 0 0 a o 0 v a < » m < m D - o N 0 O o a o' - m » z 0 ° m 0 m a 0. a CL o 0- D ° c' a n a a 0 A n -I- 0. o o' o n a O x a 2 m o o -v c 3 Z O Z O Z O N Z O Z O 2 O Z O Z O o 'w Pt 5 o m y w '8 f r> : r° v B. ° o 0 d$$ o A m N ° $ m m'R o 0 0 9 c d a m a c o a a g$ N? w m w R a °9 B• N a a 'o 4. B. a a d E a ' a n o m in c e d d.g _ .: ww c E M o 5 °c d E ° N a °° ,�' -w s o w y L E 3 m 3° 3 S B v A o-• 3 m 0 :E o ° ^ ry 6 T N £ m f 3 0 3 N£ H �.i 3 m T m £_ 0 3 0 o -0 '° - £ o d �w° 80 m :; ° 3 £ c m o a c w° s ti o c °• 3 5. o m A o w H ° m' •�• ° g �, rt L' o 3 ° m X. 3 a c w 3 0 3 a '\" w n w u .m_^., .°°. w � e o 0 a o. m v 3 v N N r 0 � 3 to O. N � d a ( W (D S v� 3 Dom! H �I h C (AD .O O A m G� A LZ O N N N N N N N S S S S S S S CL `L a a a a o_ c c c c c c c m C. C_ n C_ 0_ C_ ro ro m o ro ro 0 fD fD fD /D fD fD (D 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 CL O. O. O_ ❑. O_ C. fD (D fD fD (D fD fD O+ M M :-, r�r r3+ :1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > > > > > 0 0 T T T -0 -0 0 a v 0 0 0 0 0 r r r? 3 a •o I m O 0 r 3 � m v N � M N v 1611 T T T T T T n (� (•} n C C C C� T� v 'O � 'O V�� O O O O •+ � p er ry O v 3.m D z z z o 0 0 0 3 3 0 C N ] W v 0 ro N 0 n n n n rD 7 o 0 0 0 c; = =-1 Z) o D o o o' o D C 0 + > > > _C C OV O O 0 p O = '^ rD C o O v W O 0 0 FD " z 0 o 7 < o 0 E \ O C O d nY M N M ? d O < v � � 7 G; O < .+ F N v c m FJ FJ m F+ w to ~ F w to N N N I--' N T O I,j O O 00 O A O O C) A O O A F+ A A F+ N v n r O v T (D O' N N N N H N N N G F+ N C 7 F� N C N N D c r N N n a N O n Z 0 N m n N N B23 C, r+• Ol D1 v d ID _. � m W � N N (D N N A C =r CD o (D � rt M S m Q fD Fiala Hiller 161 Henning Coyle Coletta BY: """ 1VIMTT ES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE Naples, Florida, October 15, 2010 ~C1 ctober 15, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Special Magistrate, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Administrative Building "F," 3rd floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following persons present: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: Honorable Brenda Garretson ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor Kerry Adams, Code Enforcement Administrative Secretary Misc. Gans: DO Cc?Nes to: 16 ctolier,10 I. CALL TO ORDER The Honorable Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson called the Hearing to order at 9:00 AM. All those testifying at the proceeding did so under oath. A. Special Magistrate Garretson outlined the Rules and Regulations for the Hearing. The Special Magistrate noted that, prior to conducting the Hearing, Respondents were given an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officer(s) for a Resolution by Stipulation. The goal is to obtain compliance without being punitive. RECESS: 9:12 AM RECONVENED: 9:31 AM II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Jennifer Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor, noted the following changes: (a) Under Item IV (A), "Motions," the following case was withdrawn by the County: • Agenda #1, Case #SO 172390 — CEEX 20100009496 — BCC vs. Michael A. Novakowski (b) Under Item IV, "Motions, " the following cases were added to the Agenda: (B) "Motion for Continuance" • Agenda #20, Case #CEPM 20090007445 — BCC vs. Zack and Gretchen Moen (C) "Motion for Extension of Time" • Agenda #9, Case #CEPM 20090017229 — BCC vs. Palm Lake. LLC (c) Under Item V (A), "Public Hearings," a Stipulation was reached in the following case: • Agenda #18, Case #CEPM 20100004757 — BCC vs. Paul- Michael Conroy (d) Under Item V (B), "Hearings, " the following case was dismissed by the Park Ranger: • Agenda 0, Case #PR 045290 — CEEX 20100009952 — BCC vs. Felipe D. Santos , (e) Under Item V (B), "Hearings, " the following cases were withdrawn by the County: • Agenda #1, Case #SO 167251— CEEX 20100018148 — BCC vs. Joseph R. Pelletier • Agenda #4, Case #PR 045259 — CEEX 20100018293 — BCC vs. Edward L. Williams • Agenda #6, Case #CEPM 20080016475 — BCC vs. San Janie Trevino and Guadalupe Martinez N 161 11C 1=O 11 • Agenda #14, Case #CEPM 20100015711— BCC vs. James and Renee Queck • Agenda #15, Case #CENA 20100003335 — BCC vs. Lakeview Drive of Naples, LLC • Agenda #16, Case #CENA 20100017661— BCC vs. Lakeview Drive of Naples, LLC • Agenda #17, Case #CENA 20100017665 — BCC vs. Lakeview Drive of Naples LLC • Agenda #23, Case #CEV 20100009788 — BCC vs. O'Neill Partners, LLC (f) Under Item V (C), "Emergency Cases, "the following case was added by the County: • Agenda #1, PU 4502 — CEEX 20100019011— BCC vs. Creative Choice Homes XIV, Ltd. (g) Under Item VI (A), "Motion for Imposition of Fines," the following cases were withdrawn by the County: • Agenda #4, Case #CEPM 20080010842 — BCC vs. Johann and Asta Marti • Agenda #5, Case #CEV 20100002640 — BCC vs. IEC Rentals, Inc. • Agenda #6, Case # CELU 20090018069 — BCC vs. IEC Rentals, Inc. The Special Magistrate approved the Agenda as amended, subject to changes made during the course of the Hearing at the discretion of the Special Magistrate. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — September 3, 2010 The Minutes of the Special Magistrate Hearing held on September 3, 2010 were reviewed by the Special Magistrate and approved as submitted IV. MOTIONS: A. Motion for Re- Hearing: (Withdrawn per amended Agenda) B. Motion for Continuance: (previously under "Hearings ") 20. Case #CEPM 20090007445 — BCC vs. Zack and Gretchen Moen The Hearing was requested by the Respondents who were present. Collier County Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joseph Mucha was also present. Violations: Collier County Property Maintenance Code 2004 -58, Section 12 The left rear corner of the property was burned in a house fire. Folio No: 37923600000 Violation address: 4645 13th Ave SW, Naples, FL The Respondents reside at 4625 3 0th Place SW, Naples, Florida 16 1, 1 C VA October 15, 2010 Respondent, Zack Moen, has been working out of state and is in the process of applying for a home equity loan. He has contacted an engineer to obtain a letter verifying that the property, which is vacant, is structurally sound to repair as required by the County before a permit can be obtained. The Respondents requested a Continuance for a period of six months. Investigator Mucha verified the structure has been securely boarded and the County would not object to a Continuance. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the Respondents' Motion for a Continuance for a period of six months. C. Motion for Extension of Time: (previously under "Motion for Imposition of Fines') 9. Case #CEPM 20090017229 — BCC vs. Palm Lake. LLC The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was represented by Attorney Louis Erickson. Collier County Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joseph Mucha was also present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22 -231, Subsections 4, 8, 9, 12i, 12k, 120, 12p, 19 and 20 Mobile home being used for rental purposes that is maintained in poor condition. Folio No: 61842240009 Violation Address: 3131 Tamiami Trail, #3, Naples, FL Attorney Erickson stated the former residents were evicted and the notification process for demolition of the mobile home has begun. He requested a sixty -day Extension of Time. Investigator Mucha confirmed the structure is vacant and has been secured. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the Respondent's Motion for an Extension of Time for a period of sixty days. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Stipulations: 18. Case # CEPM20100004757— BCC vs. Paul- Michael Conroy The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joseph Mucha who was present. The Respondent was not present. 4 k 1 `'' h ' 1 Paler 15, 2010 Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22 -231 12 (c) Occupied stucture with incomplete re -roof. Folio No: 35775120002 Violation address: 4449 19th Place SW, Naples, FL The Respondent entered into a Stipulation on October 14, 2010. Investigator Mucha met with the Respondent who agreed to the terms of the Stipulation. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to obtain all required inspections and a Certificate of Completion/Occupancy for Permit #2010040982 to re -roof the structure on or before December 1 S, 2010, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the terms of the Stipulation. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.12 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.12 B. Hearings: 2. Case #SO 173456 — CEEX 20100018296 — BCC vs. Lloyd L. Bowein The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present. Collier County Sheriff's Office Deputy Paige Long was also present. Lawrence Glazer appeared as a witness for the County. Violations: Code of Law & Ord., Section 130 -67 Handicapped Space Violation address: 2550 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL The Respondent resides at 10021 Gulfshore Drive, Naples, Florida 34108. The Respondent claimed the placard was properly displayed according to the Statute and did not understand why the Citation was issued. He introduced two photographs which were marked as Respondent's "A" (placard) and "B" (permit) and admitted into evidence. 16111 P Oc e 5, 2010 Deputy Long was on patrol in Sam's parking lot when she observed the vehcile in a Handicapped parking space without a placard. She walked around the vehicle to inspect it and issued the Citation because she did not see a placard anywhere in the vehicle. Lawrence Glazer stated he accompanied the Deputy on a "ride along" and witnessed her inspection of the car. He noted he did not see the placard inside the car but did not recognize the car in Exhibit "A ". The Respondent stated the placard has remained in the same spot in his car and has never had a problem or received a Citation previously for an improperly displayed placard. He reiterated the placard was suspended from the mirror. The Special Magistrate noted the Respondent is an attorney and ethically bound to be truthful. She did not dispute the Deputy's recitation of the facts. She stated there was only a difference in memory but the Respondent's recollection was more specific. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found NOT GUILTY of the alleged violation. Agenda #5, Case #CEEX 20100019099 — BCC vs. Thomas and Luann Wyss, was initially called but, due to technical difficulties, was postponed until the IT Staff arrived. It was noted the County's witness will supply a hard copy of her I -PAD photographs within the next two days. C. Emergency Cases: 1. Case #PU 4502 — CEEX 20100019011— BCC vs. Creative Choice Homes XIV, Ltd. The Hearing was requested by Collier County Public Utilities Senior Investigator Ray Addison who was present. The Respondent was represented by Cindy Walters, Regional Property Manager — Proxy Pro Management and Solange Michel, Property Manager. Violations: Ordinance 2005 -54, Section 19 C (9) Litter on ground creating a Health/Safety /Welfare issue. Litter consisting of, but not limited to, paper, plastic, cardboard, rugs, food, household solid waste. Putrescible waste not properly stored. Folio No: 00296840003 Violation address: 8690 Weir Drive, Naples, FL Ms. Walters resides at 5421 Ginger Cove, Tampa, Florida. Ms. Michel resides at 4030 Winkler Avenue, #204, Fort Myers, Florida. Ms. Walters has been in communication with Waste Management regarding payment that was sent ($3, 875.00). Waste Management claims it was not received and they will not return to the property without pre - payment. 16 I 5, 010 She stated the initial violation was caused by the disconnection of the trash compactor by the owner. Ms. Walters stated her company was misinformed concerning the ownership of the compactor. There was a change of administration within the company and invoices were inadvertently not paid. The trash compactor was inoperable for two weekends but has since been reconnected. There was one open -top container on the premises and Waste Management delivered a second container in an attempt to control the trash. Proxy Pro Management was not aware that household waste could not be disposed of in the open top container until Code Enforcement informed her of the violation. Ms. Walters admitted the situation was "horrible" but efforts were being made to rectify it. Ms. Michel stated the maintenance crew consists of only four individuals and trash collection was not normally such a problem. The Special Magistrate stated the situation created a Health/Safety /Welfare issue and the trash should have been picked up on a daily basis. Investigator Addison stated a site visit was conducted by Investigator Tonya Phillips and the Citation was issued /delivered to Ms. Michel on September 27, 2010. He introduced 14 photographs, dated September 27th, and 5 photographs, dated October 15th, which were marked as County's Composite Exhibits "A" and "B" respectively. They were admitted into evidence. Ms. Walters stated Waste Management will not empty the open top containers until they receive payment. She reiterated the check was sent last week and she is still attempting to solve the problem between her company's accounting department and Waste Management. The open top containers will be tarped after they are emptied. The Special Magistrate stated it was a very serious violation and noted the photographs showed vultures around the trash. She suggested Ms. Walters contact Waste Management in person at their offices to solve the problem. Mr. Addison stated the normally assessed fine would be $1,000 per day but, in view of the economic climate and the cooperation of the Management Company, he stated he would defer to the Special Magistrate's discretion. The Special Magistrate stated an immediate solution was necessary. She suggested the Investigator contact Waste Management with Ms. Walters and suspended the Hearing to allow for phone calls to be made. RECESS: 10:32 AM RECONVENED: 10:55 AM 5. Case #CEEX 20100019099 — BCC vs. Thomas and Luann Wyss The Hearing was requested by the Respondents. Thomas Wyss was present and represented his wife, Luann Wyss. 7 1 C 1 `# October 15, 2010 Collier County Domestic Animal Services Officer Peter Hinkley was also present together with Marsha Harvey, the victim. Violations: Collier County Ordinance 2008 -51, as amended, and Chapter 767, Florida Statutes Dangerous dog Violation address: Pomarine Court, Naples, FL The Respondents reside at 4380 Mistlethrush Lane, Naples, Florida 34110. The Special Magistrate noted the Respondents were appealing the finding of "Dangerous Dog" concerning their dog, "Chloe, " a brown Labrador Retriever mix. Respondent Thomas Wyss stated the incident which occurred on July 5, 2010 was an unfortunate, isolated incident. She was running with her dog when it pulled away and bit Mrs. Harvey. He stated the reason for Chloe's behavior was unknown but they have been taking her to dog trainers since she was a puppy (adopted in 2008) and they will continue to do so. He claimed to declare the dog as "dangerous" is unnecessary and "over the top." He introduced the following documents which were marked as Respondents' Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • "A" — Basic Ordinance Course material and Certificate • `B" — Flyer from dog trainer • "C" — Letter from Joe Smith, dog trainer, dated October 11, 2010 • "D" — Certificate of Completion of the Canine Camper Program from Camp Bow- Wow, dated March 18, 2010 • "E" — Statement from Respondent Luann Wyss • "F" — Letter from Gregory H. Lewis, dated October 14, 2010 Mr. Wyss stated he does not condone what happened and will do everything possible to see that it never happens again. Gregory H. Lewis, a retired Collier County police officer, stated he is the head softball Coach at Gulf Coast High School and Tracy Wyss is a member of the team. He has observed Chloe when she attended numerous games. He noted she was around children and adults and did not show any signs of aggression during the many times he saw her over the past year. He further stated he had investigated numerous dog bite cases while he was on the force. Mr. Wyss stated their dog is kenneled when in the house and is always on a leash — both inside and outside of the house. He reiterated Chloe is not dangerous and the trainer indicated Chloe was not accustomed to running and had run approximately 2.5 miles from their home. It was hot and her demeanor may have been affected by the temperature and exertion. She was on a leash at the time of the incident. The Special Magistrate asked if the Repondent could give any assurances that the 1611 Octo er , 2010 incident would not be repeated. The Respondent stated the training is on -going and Phase II will continue for approximately 20 one -hour sessions. He stated the trainer will not allow introducing anything new to Chloe's routine until he has first observed Chloe in the behavior. A video of Chloe was reviewed by the Special Magistrate. The video was marked as Respondent's Exhibit "G" and admitted into evidence. Officer Hinkley stated the County investigated a previous incident with Chloe on November 23, 2009. The Respondent noted the dog, as a young puppy, did jump on people. He disputed classifying the incident as a "bite" and recalled the dog was walked by a professional dog walker while the family was out of town. He was informed the dog jumped on a woman but the dog walker claimed the dog's paw scratched the complainant's left arm. The dog walker did not think there was an actual bite because the woman didn't realize she was bleeding and didn't react as if she had been bitten. Chloe has since been trained not to jump on people. Officer Hinkley stated the incident was unprovoked. To be declared "dangerous," a dog must have "... aggressively bitten, attacked, or endangerd, or inflicted severe injry on a human being on public or private property." The Ordinance defines a "severe injury" as "... any physical injury that results in broken bones, multiple bites, or disfiguring lacerations requiring sutures or reconstructive surgery. " He further stated the dog bit the victim multiple times — not just once. Marsha Harvey, the witness, stated she was walking the morning of July 5, 2010 and saw Ms. Wyss approaching with her dog. She noticed the dog was leashed but was not panting or barking. She greeted Ms. Wyss and they were behind her when the dog jumped out and bit her arm. Ms. Wyss was unable to control the dog because, as Mrs. Harvey turned to leave, Chloe bit her on her calf. She returned home and her husband called EMS because she was bleeding profusely. EMS advised her stitches were necessary. She received four stitches which became infected. A course of medication was required to treat the infection. The scars will be permanent. She presented photographs on her I -POD which were reviewed by the Special Magistrate. As previously noted, the photographs will be sent to Code Enforcement for inclusion in the file. Respondent Wyss did not deny what happened but stated it has not happened again. Officer Hinkley stated when he visited the Respondents' home, the dog was in the living room. It was sitting calmly when it suddenly started barking and lunged at him. If a dog is classified as "dangerous," the following rules must be observed as required by County Ordinance: • The dog must be housed in a 6' x 6' caged enclosure at all times when outside; • The dog must wear a muzzle when walked; 16 I= C ctober 1 , 010 • The dog can only be walked by an adult; • The owner's property must be posted with signs identifying the dog as dangerous; • A microchip will be inserted into the dog for identification; • The owner must register the dog on a yearly basis and pay a fee; • DAS will inspect the property to ensure the rules are observed. Officer Hinkley noted if a dangerous dog attacks again, the Ordinance states it will be euthanized. The Special Magistrate asked the Respondent to describe the incident at his home when the Officer was present. Mr. Wyss stated Chloe was initially very protective of the family, i.e., "alpha" dog. She is no longer allowed to freely roam the house, which contributed to the "alpha" attitude. He further stated declaring Chloe as "dangerous" and posting his home would place a hardship on his family since the Homeowners' Association will not allow the dog to remain — his family will be required to either move or relinquish the animal. He reiterated the dog "has come a long way," and continual training of the dog and the family will prevent an incident from occuring. Officer Hinkley stated even though the dog has been through training, he considers it to be unpredictable because of its behavior during his visit to the Respondent's home. There are a number of children living in the neighborhood where the Respondents reside and he expressed concern for their safety. The Special Magistrate stated there have been several incidents of unpredictable behavior which is an indiction that something unexplainable is affecting the dog. She questioned if the unexplained issues can be trained out of the dog. It appears the dog has a problem with impulse control. While there was not enough information about the first incident, the second incident was severe, and the third was when the dog lunged at the Officer even after it was in training. She noted the Respondents did not present any reasons or new information to overturn the previous determination. There is no part of the Ordinance that allows for rehabilitation or lifting of the determination. Mr. Wyss stated he will do whatever is necessary and reiterated the "dangerous dog" decree is not warranted. Putting up signs will create problems. He stated he did not object to muzzling the dog whenever it is outside. The Special Magistrate DENIED the Respondents' appeal and ruled the determination of "dangerous dog" will stand. The Special Magistrate explained to the Respondents that the County has placed the burden on them and if there was another incident, Chloe will be euthanized. She cautioned them to not take any chances or relax their diligence. 10 Ib l 1 C I ,-A October 15, 2010 Case #PU 4502 — CEEX 20100019011— BCC vs. Creative Choice Homes AI V, Ltd. was recalled. Senior Investigator Addison stated the Management Company has paid a total of $8,611.33 to Waste Management who confirmed it will deliver another roll -off (open top container) by the end of business. The Investigator will conduct a site inspection on Saturday, October 16th, to verify compliance. The Special Magistrate ruled if the Investigator determined the problem has been resolved, she will not impose a fine. If not, a fine of $1,000 per day will be imposed. The Respondent is required to pay the Operational Costs of $55.00 on or before November 15, 2010. 7. Case #CEPM 20100005779 — BCC vs. Terry Dilozir The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator James Kincaid who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22 -231 (15), Chapter 22, Article II, Section 22 -26 and The Florida Building Code, Chapter 4, Section 424.2.17.1 A private dwelling swimming pool with stagnant green water without a proper pool barrier. Folio No: 62093680006 Violation address: 5322 Catts Street, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on October 4, 2010. Investigator Kincaid introduced three photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits "A" (April 27, 2010), "B" (July 27, 2010), and "C" (October 14, 2010) and admitted into evidence. The violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either. (1) Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi- weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate -OR- (2) Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water, pursuant to HUD standards, on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 11 161,1 Petler 15 2010 The Respondent was further ordered to obtain all applicable Permits and required inspections to erect an approved temporary or permanent safety barrier on or before October 25, 2010, or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. If a temporary barrier is erected, the Respondent must obtain an applicable Permit, all required inspections and a Certificate of Completion for a permanent pool enclosure and/or protective barrier on or before December 15, 2010, or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owner. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.73 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.73 8. Case #CESD 20090011040 — BCC vs. Peter V. Schrvver The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator Reggie Smith who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, Permits, Section 105.1 and Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) Unpermitted shed on property. Folio No: 63100480004 Violation address: 4851 Catalina Drive, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 21, 2010. Investigator Smith introduced two photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits "A" (June 24, 2009) and "B" (October 14, 2010) and admitted into evidence. He stated the property is vacant, in foreclosure, and the violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to obtain either a Collier County Building Permit for the existing shed or a Collier County Demolition Permit to remove the shed, and all required inspections and a Certificate of Completion on or before November 15, 2010, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each 12 1 day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.29 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.29 9. Case #CEPM 20100008671— BCC vs. Katherine Sheffield The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator Christopher Ambach who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22- 231(15) GIS Property Appraiser satellite imagery from the years 2005 to 2010 shows the pool on this property has become stagnant, polluted, and unsightly. Folio No: 36814240004 Violation Address: 660 291h Street SW, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on October 5, 2010. Investigator Ambach introduced three pages from the Property Appraiser's website which were marked as County's Composite Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He also introduced two photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits `B" (July 20, 2010) and "C" (October 14, 2010) and were admitted into evidence. The Respondent contacted the Investigator claiming the pool had been cleaned but she would not allow him access to the property until she contacted her attorney. She did not contact the Investigator again and the violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either: (1) Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi- weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate 13 1611I 1 O'6e�15, 24 -OR- (2) Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water, pursuant to HUD standards, on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owner. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.38 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.38 10. Case #CEPM 20100003672 — BCC vs. Charles and Geraldine Bulicz The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator Carmelo Gomez who was present. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22 -231 (15) Private swimming pool containing green, algae water and debris. Conditions conducive to insect infestation. Unsightly appearance. Folio No: 72650004662 Violation address: 2183 Canary Island Cove, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on October 4, 2010. Investigator Gomez introduced one photograph, dated June 9, 2010, which was marked as County's Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He performed a site inspection on October 14, 2010 and noted the violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either. (1) Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi- weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate -OR- (2) Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water, pursuant to HUD standards, on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, 14 1�1 Oc obe 5, 2010 unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owner. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.38 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.38 11. Case #CEROW 20090015230 — BCC vs. Chase Home Finance, LLC The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator Renald Paul who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 110, Article II, Section 110 -31(a) Several trees that were planted in the right of way with no Permit. Folio No: 36239560000 Violation address: 5133 20th Court SW, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 10, 2010. Investigator Paul introduced one photograph which was marked as County's Exhibit "B -1" and admitted into evidence. In December, 2009, the owner died and the property was deeded to Chase Home Finance. The bank received a copy of the Notice of Violation, via certified mail, but has not contacted the Investigator and the vilation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either obtain an after-the-fact Right -of -Way Permit, all required inspections and a Certificate of Completion, or remove the trees from the right -of -way on or before October 25, 2010, or a fine of $200.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code 15 16IE1' C 1 " October 15, 2010 Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.38 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.38 12. Case #CESD 20100004782 — BCC vs. Dusan Petric The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator Carmelo Gomez who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1 Permits, Section 105.1 Shed No Permits Folio No: 36459080001 Violation Address: 3122 Santa Barbara Blvd, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 20, 2010. Investigator Gomez introduced one photograph, dated April 22, 2010, which was marked as County's Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. The violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to obtain a Collier County Building Permit for the existing shed, or a Collier County Demolition Permit to remove the shed, all required inspections and a Certificate of Completion on or before November IS, 2010, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.20 on or before November 1 S, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.20 13. Case #CEPM 20100008282 — BCC vs. Judith Harbrecht Hill, Tr and William P. Hill, Tr The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator James Kincaid who was present. The Respondents were not present. 16 Octo r T Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 23 -231 (15). A private dwelling swimming pool that has been improperly maintained so as to create a safety hazard or harbor insect infestation. Water has been allowed to stagnate and become polluted with green algae. Folio No: 55402400004 Violation address: 451 Torrey Pines Point, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing as posted at the property and Courthouse on October 4, 2010. Investigator Kincaid introduced two photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits "A" (June 17, 2010) and `B" (October 14, 2010), and were admitted into evidence. The violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either: (1) Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi- weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate -OR- (2) Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water, pursuant to HUD standards, on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owner. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.73 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.73 19. Case #CEPM 20100013252 — BCC vs. Troy M. and Michelle R. Maddux The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator Carmelo Gomez who was present. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22 Building and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22 -231 (15). Water green with algae. 17 16!11 Ct i Octo 15, 2010 Folio No: 23946008703 Violation address: 674 Lambton Lane, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 20, 2010. Investigator Gomez introduced one photograph, dated August 5, 2010, which was marked as County's Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. The violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either: (1) Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi- weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate -OR- (2) Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water, pursuant to HUD standards, on or before October 22, 2010 or a fne of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owner. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.20 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.20 21. Case #CEPM 20100005355 — BCC vs. Olga Nikolakopoulos The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator Carmelo Gomez who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Chapter 22, Building and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22 -231 (15) Pool water black. Folio No: 23971640000 Violation address: 1412 Monarch Circle, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 10, 2010. 18 1611101 October 15, 2010 Investigator Gomez introduced one photograph, dated April 26, 2010, which was marked as County's Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. The violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either: (1) Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi- weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate -OR- (2) Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water, pursuant to HUD standards, on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owner. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.20 on or before November 15, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.20 22. Case #CENA 20100009705 — BCC vs. O'Neill Partners. LLC The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joseph Mucha who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54 -181 Unauthorized accumulation of litter on the property. Folio No: 35745280008 Violation address: 2136 Sunshine Blvd, Naples, FL 34116 The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 28, 2010. Investigator Mucha introduced 10 photographs (July 21, 2010) and 10 phtographs (October 11, 2010), which were marked as County's Composite Exhibits "A" and "B" respectively, and admitted into evidence. The Notice of Violation was sent to the owner via certified mail and delivery was confirmed. The violation has not been abated. 19 16 11 1 cl October 15, 20 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to remove the unauthorized accumulation of litter on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $50.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owner(s). If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.12 on or before November 1 S, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.12 24. Case #CESD 20090000340 — BCC vs. John M. Mueller, Jr. and Elizabeth Mueller The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Field Investigator Jonathan Musse who was present. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article II, Florida Building Code, Adoption and Amendment of The Florida Building Code, Section 22- 6(b)(104.5.1.4.4) Fence Permit #2006120659 issued on 12 -7 -06, expired 6 -5 -07. No final inspection was made. No Certificate of Completion was issued. Folio No: 66480400002 Violation address: 834 Bentwood Drive, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on October 4, 2010. Investigator Musse introduced three photographs, marked as County's Exhibit `B 1 — 3," and a copy of a three -page Permit, marked as County's Exhibit "C1 -3," which were admitted into evidence. He stated Permit #2006120659 was issued on December 7, 2006 for a pool fence but expired on June 5, 2007. The Building Inspector failed Final Inspection the because the fence did not completely surround the pool. The Investigator noted the fence layout was originally approved by the County when the Permit application was submitted. The Special Magistrate questioned how the County could approve the application and then find the fence was in violation when it complied with the issued Permit. 20 16P1 C I ``' October 15, 2010 The Special Magistrate ruled the owners were NOT GUILTY of the violation., 25. Case #CESD 20100008544 — BCC vs. HAPA Investments. LLC The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joseph Mucha who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 4.06.01(D)(1) Overgrown hedges blocking the visibility of oncoming traffic on the corner of 41St Street SW and 18th Avenue SW. Folio No: 35776440008 Violation address: 1797 41s' Street SW, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 17, 2010. Investigator Mucha introduced the following documents which were marked as County's Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • Composite "A" —two photographs dated June 29, 2010 • "B" — a diagram from the Land Development Code illustrating a clear line of sight triangle • "C" — an aerial photgraph from the Property Appraiser's Office He noted the violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to trim the hedges to a level between 30 inches and eight feet above the crown of the adjacent roadway, and continually maintain visibility at the intersection, on or before October 22, 2010 or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owner(s). If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.20 on or before November 1 S, 2010. Total Amount Due: $112.20 RECESS: 12:50 PM RECONVENED: 1:00 PM 21 l � l C �- � October 15, 2010 VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines: 1. Case #CEPM 20090013071— BCC vs. Edward A. and Paula L. Kaulbars The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigative Supervisor Jeff Letourneau. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, and Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22- 231(15)) Pool is green in color, stagnate and not properly maintained. Folio No: 74901001448 Violation Address: 1579 Whispering Oaks Circle, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 14, 2010. Fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from June 12, 2010 through August 17, 2010 (67 days) for a total fine amount of $16,750.00. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.56 have not been paid. Abatement costs incurred by the County of $948.70 have not been. paid. The total amount due to date is $17,811.26. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $17,811.26. 2. Case #CEROW 20090019407 — BCC vs. Matthew J. Ryan The County was represented by Code Enforcement Field Investigator Jonathan Musse. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 110, Roads and Bridges, Article II Construction in Right -of -Way, Division 1, Generally Section 110 -31(a) Permit #20924 -E for a "Replace Culvert and Driveway" expired on 10 -31 -04 without obtaining all inspections and approval. Folio No: 62841200007 Violation address: 569 1041h Avenue N, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 16, 2010. Fines have accrued at the rate of $100.00 per day for the period from September 7, 2009 through October 15, 2010 (39 days) for a total fine amount of $3,900.00. 22 161 C C1 October 15, 2010 Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.29 have not been paid. The total amount due to date is $4,012.29. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $4,012.29 and noted fines continue to accrue. 3. Case #CEV 20100007342— BCC vs. Alvus M. Perkins The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigative Supervisor Jeff Letourneau. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 2.01.00(A) Vehicle on site with expired plates and inoperable commercial equipment. Folio No: 38160480008 Violation address: 6311 Copper Leaf Lane, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 15, 2010. Fines have accrued at the rate of $50.00 per day for the period from September 8, 2010 through October 15, 2010 (38 days) for a total fine amount of $1,900.00. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.20 have not been paid. The total amount due to date is $2,012.20. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $2,012.20 and noted fines continue to accrue. 7. Case #CEPM 20100002802 — BCC vs. Gabriela Guzman The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigative Supervisor Jeff Letourneau. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22 -231, Subsections 1, 9, 12b, 121, 120, 12p, 19, and 20 Vacant mobile home with several property maintenance violations. Folio No: 00765000002 Violation address: 17034 Lockhart Drive, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 10, 2010. 23 1611 C I 'a October 15, 2010 Fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from September 7, 2010 through October 15, 2010 (39 days) for a total fine amount of $9,750.00. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.82 have not been paid. The total amount due to date is $9,862.82. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $9,862.82 and noted fines continue to accrue. 8. Case #CEV 20090013615 — BCC vs. Lorrie L. Callow The County was represented by Code Enforcement Field Investigator Jonathan Musse. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 2.01.00(A) Two vehicles with expired tags and one of the two is inoperable. Folio No: 62650320000 Violation address: 786 103rd Avenue N, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 16, 2010. Fines have accrued at the rate of $50.00 per day for the period from September 8, 2010 through October 15, 2010 (38 days) for a total fine amount of $1,900.00. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.20 have not been paid. The total amount due to date is $2,012.20. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $2,012.20 and noted fines will continue to accrue. 10. Case #CEPM 20090015776 — BCC vs. Alexander Dominguez and Joanka C. Diaz - Dominguez The County was represented by Code Enforcement Field Investigator Jonathan Musse. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22- 231(15) and 22- 231(12)(1) Pool area in disrepair, also green water and items in water. Folio No: 62635080006 Violation Address: 669 99th Avenue N, Naples, FL 24 16 1 October 15, 2010 The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on. September 16, 2010. For Part `B" of the Order, fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from April 27, 2010 through July 27, 2010 (92 days) for a total fine amount of $23,000.00. For Part "C" of the Order, fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from April 27, 2010 through July 27, 2010 (92 days) for a total fine amount of $23,000.00. Abatement costs incurred by the County of $990.20 have not been paid. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.64 have not been paid. The total amount due to date is $47,102.84. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $47,102.84. 11. Case #CEPM 20100003285— BCC vs. John Kolak The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigative Supervisor Jeff Letourneau. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22 -231 (15) Private swimming pool not maintained. Presenting unsightly appearance, water stagnate, polluted with conditions conducive to insect infestation. Folio No: 72650003346 Violation address: 1372 Areca Cove, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 13, 2010. Fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from June 15, 2010 through August 17, 2010 (64 days) for a total fine amount of $16,000.00. Abatement costs incurred by the County of $700.00 have not been paid. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.38 have not been paid. The total amount due to date is $16,812.38. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $16,812.38. 25 16IVI C I October 15, 2010 12. Case #CEPM 20090004566 — BCC vs. Edith Granados The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigative Supervisor Jeff Letourneau. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22 -231, Subsections 12c, 12n, and 15 Vacant structure with roof damage, wood fence in disrepair, and swimming pool that is not being maintained. Folio No: 35882280000 Violation address: 1818 41" Street SW, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on September 22, 2010. For Part "B" of the Order (roof), fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from June 8, 2010 through October 15, 2010 (130 days) for a total fine amount of $32,500.00. For Part "C" of the Order (fence), fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from June 8, 2010 through September 17, 2010 (102 days) for a total fine amount of $25,500.00. Part "C" has been abated. For Part "D" of the Order (pool), fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from June 8, 2010 through October 15, 2010 (130 days) for a total fine amount of $32,500.00. Fines continue to accrue on Part "B" and Part "D." Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.82 have been paid. The total amount due to date is $90,500.00. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $90,500.00 and noted fines continue to accrue only on Part `B" and Part "D. " VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Motion to Rescind Previously Issued Orders: 1. Case #2006050608 — BCC vs. Marion Smith and James Seals Violations: Collier County Ordinance 2004 -58, Section 6, Subsections 10,11,12b, 12i, 12j, 12k, 121, 12m, 19a and 19c, the Property Maintenance Ordinance Numerous internal and external minimum housing violations as described in the Property Maintenance Inspection Report. Folio No: 62100120006 Violation address: 5408 Carlton Street, Naples, FL 26 _16Ia,,, f October 15, 2010 Supervisor Waldron stated an original Order and an Amended Order were issued. The County requested to rescind the original Order and the Imposition of Fines Order to be able to impose on the Amended Order at a future date. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion to Rescind. VIII. CONSENT AGENDA A. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as referenced in the submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's Request. B. Request for the Special Magistrate to Impose Nuisance Abatement Liens on Cases referenced in the submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's Request. IX. REPORTS None X. NEXT HEARING DATE November S, 2010 at 9:00 AM, located at the Collier County Government Center, Administrative Building "F, "3rd Floor, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. There being no further business for the good of the County, the Hearing was adjourned by Order of the Special Magistrate at 1:17 PM. COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL, MAGISTRATE HEARING Bren -da Garretson, pecial Magistrate The Minutes were approved by the Special Magistrate on as presented , or as amended 27 Fiala Hiller 1j SOMETIMB Henning Coyle December 3, 2010 i AW 12 4 2011 Coletta BY; ,,,,,,,,e, 1JTES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE Naples, Florida, December 3, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Special Magistrate, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Administrative Building "F," 3rd floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following persons present: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: Honorable Brenda Garretson ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor Kerry Adams, Code Enforcement Administrative Secretary misc. Corn:: Oats: Item t to: l6 December 3, 2010 I. CALL TO ORDER The Honorable Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson called the Hearing to order at 9:12 AM. All those testifying at the proceeding did so under oath. A. Special Magistrate Garretson outlined the Rules and Regulations for the Hearing. The Special Magistrate noted that, prior to conducting the Hearing, Respondents were given an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officers for a Resolution by Stipulation. The goal is to obtain compliance without being punitive. RECESS: 9:26 AM RECONVENED: 9:47 AM II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Jennifer Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor, noted the following changes: (a) Under Item V (A), "Public Hearings," Stipulations were reached in the following case: • Agenda #21, Case #CESD 20090018853 — BCC vs. Neftali M. & Marie D. Ortiz • Agenda #24, Case #CESD 20100009592 — BCC vs. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP (b) Under Item V (B), "Hearings, " the following cases were withdrawn by the County: • Agenda #1, Case #SO 158840 — CEEX 20100019296 — BCC vs. Alyssa R. Jones • Agenda #4, Case #SO 153357 — CEEX 20100017894 — BCC vs. Stephen M. Morstein • Agenda #5, Case #SO 02189 — CEEX 20100019302 — BCC Vs. Pharicien Fradet • Agenda #6, Case #SO 02198 — CEEX 20100019285 — BCC vs. Pekens Andris • Agenda #7, Case #SO 02199 — CEEX 20100019288 — BCC vs. Pekens Andris • Agenda #8, Case #SO 02200 — CEEX 20100019290 — BCC vs. Pekens Andris • Agenda #10, Case #SO 162664 — CEEX 20100019614 — BCC vs. Fabiano Pinto • Agenda #11, Case #SO 02194 — CEEX 20100019901— BCC vs. Balboa C. Sawyer • Agenda #12, Case #SO 02195 — CEEX 20100019939 — BCC vs. Balboa C. Sawyer • Agenda #13, Case #SO 02196 — CEEX 20100019941— BCC vs. Balboa C. Sawyer • Agenda #14, Case #SO 02191 — CEEX 20100020374 — BCC vs. Gabriel L. Field • Agenda #15, Case #PR 045337 — CEEX 20100019972 — BCC vs. Tyler D. Manring 2 1611:1 December 3, 2010 • Agenda #16, Case #PR 046378 — CEEX 20100020254 — BCC vs. Thomas G. Broderick • Agenda #17, Case #DAS 12214 — CEEX 20100020744 — BCC vs. Arthur Corry • Agenda #19, Case #CEV 20100008279 — BCC vs. Martin Castro Villagomez and Rosa Leon • Agenda #22, Case #CEPM 20100008271— BCC vs. Jarred Kaplan & Scott M. Diament • Agenda #23, Case #CEPM 20100009575 — BCC vs. Steven M. & Debra Mastrangelo • Agenda #28, Case #CESD 20090012012 — BCC vs. Ernie J. & Delayna Blain • Agenda #30, Case #CELU 20100007056 — BCC vs. Christopher Combs • Agenda #31, Case #CEAU 20100008895 — BCC vs. IndyMac Federal Bank • Agenda #34, Case #CEPM 20100007869 — BCC vs. Regions Bank • Agenda #41, Case #CESD 20100005160 — BCC vs. Jose A. & Raquel Nunez (c) Under Item VI (A), "Motion for Imposition of Fines," the following case was withdrawn by the County: • Agenda #1, Case #CEAU 20090008537 — BCC vs. Anton Karaba & Eva Karabova The Special Magistrate approved the Agenda as amended, subject to changes made during the course of the Hearing at the discretion of the Special Magistrate. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — October 15, 2010 The Minutes of the Special Magistrate Hearing held on October 15, 2010 were reviewed by the Special Magistrate and approved as submitted. IV. MOTIONS: None V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Stipulations: 21. Case #CESD 20090018853 — BCC vs. Neftali M. & Marie D. Ortiz The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Weldon Walker, Jr. who was present. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 10.02.06 (13)(1)(a) On site observed two sheds to the rear of property. Research reveals that sheds are unpermitted. Folio No: 60182160002 3 1611 C1 December 3, 2010 Violation address: 606 Roberts Ave. W, Immokalee A Stipulation was entered into by Respondent, Maria D. Ortiz, on behalf of her husband, Neftali M. Ortiz, and herself on December 1, 2010. Investigator Walker outlined the terms of the Stipulation agreed to by the parties. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to apply for and obtain a valid Collier County Building or Demolition Permits, all required inspections and a Certificate of Completion on or before April 3, 2011, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondents are to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondents. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the terms of the Stipulation. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.29 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.29 24. Case #CESD 20100009592 — BCC vs. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Renald Paul who was present. The Respondent was represented by Attorney Robert N. Johnson. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) Shed on property with no Permits. Folio No: 36312520006 Violation address: 2267 51S` Terrace SW, Naples A Stipulation was entered into by Robert N. Johnson, Esq., on behalf of the Respondent, on December 3, 2010. Investigator Paul outlined the terms of the Stipulation agreed to by the parties. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to obtain any /all Permits as required by Collier County Building for any /all additions to the property, or obtain any and all Permits for removal of all unpermitted additions to the property, all required 4 1611 CJ December 3, 201 inspections and a Certificate of Completion on or before March 3, 2011, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the terms of the Stipulation. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.47 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.47 Attorney Johnson confirmed the terms of the Stipulation were accepted by his client. B. Hearings: Supervisor Waldron noted the following case was WITHDRAWN by the County: • Agenda 0, Case #SO 02190 — CEEX 20100019183 — BCC vs. Jean Martino Stanis 29. Case #CENA 20100009616 — BCC vs. Jean Claude Martel The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Azure Sorrels who was present. The Respondent was also present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54 -181 and 54 -179 Repeat Violations of litter /derelict items consisting of but not limited to: chemical jugs, paint cans, wood, broken furniture, plastics, metals, cloth material, and other misc. items scattered throughout the front yard. Folio No: 61839320000 Violation address: 3190 Karen Drive, Naples, FL 34112 The Respondent resides at 3190 Karen Drive, Naples, Florida 34112. Investigator Sorrels introduced the following documents, which were marked as County's Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • `B" — two photographs dated July 30th (taken by Investigator Sorrels) • "C" — three photographs dated September 24th (taken by Investigator Crowley) • "D" — two photographs taken on November 30th (taken by Supervisor Petrulli) 1611 C 1 !. December 3, 2010 The Investigator stated the County abated the previous violations in 2007. The current violations have not been abated — the Respondent merely rearranged the items on his property. The Respondent stated he would move the items to a location near Airport and Davis Roads to sell. The Special Magistrate noted the Respondent had not presented a defense to the repeated violations and stated his property was an eyesore. She explained the daily fines were higher due to the repeat nature of the violations. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to remove the litter to an appropriate disposal site or store the items in a completely enclosed structure on or before December 10, 2010, or a fine of $200.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.20 on or before February 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.20 The Special Magistrate admonished the Respondent against making threatening statements to Code Enforcement Investigators or Sheriff's Deputies. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines: 2. Case #CEPM 20080010842 — BCC vs. Johann and Asta Marti The County was represented by Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joseph Mucha. The Respondents were represented by their son, Roy Marti. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Article VI, Section 22 -231 Subsections 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12b, 12c, 12i, 12j, 12k, 121, 12m, 12o, 12p, 12r, 19, and 20 6 161 C1 December 3, 2010 Rental property with several minimum housing violations to include but not limited to: no hot water supply, no water heating facilities, no heating equipment, refrigerator not in good working order, no ventilation for bathroom, electrical outlets and lights not in good working order, exterior walls poorly maintained, fascia in deteriorated condition, exterior door that needs to be replaced, broken windows, missing screens, damaged interior doors, ceiling damage, carpet that needs replaced, interior walls with holes, gutters and downspouts that need repair, shower valves that need repair, and no smoke detector provided. Folio No: 61481640002 Violation address: 1888 Airport Road S, Naples Roy Marti resides at 6070 English Oaks Lane, Naples, Florida 34119. He stated his mother was deceased and presented written authorization from his father giving permission to represent him. The initial Order was issued on October 17, 2008. Investigator Mucha stated Part `B" of the Order was abated on November 10, 2008 and Part "C" was abated on November 2, 2010. For Part `B" (Boarding), fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from October 25, 2008 through November 10, 2008 (17 days) for a total fine amount of $4,250.00. For Part "C" (Minimum Housing Violations), fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from December 18, 2008 through November 2, 2010 (685 days) for a total fine amount of $171,250.00. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $117.96 have been paid. The total amount due to date is $175,500.00. The Investigator noted the rental property is vacant and securely boarded. Roy Marti explained his parents sold the property in 1995. In 1999, the new owners asked his parents to privately finance their personal home (1882 Airport) and the property at 1888 Airport Road. Due to the lack of payment of the mortgage and property taxes, Mr. and Mrs. Marti sued the owners who filed for bankruptcy. In March 2010, they were able to retrieve 1888 Airport Road. Roy Marti was advised by Counsel to remain away from the property during litigation. He requested reduction of the fines because the property had not been under his parents control when the violations occurred. The Special Magistrate DENIED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines. 3. Case #CEPM 20090012924 — BCC vs. Federal National Mortgage Corp. The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigative Supervisor Cristina Perez on behalf of Investigator Patrick Baldwin. 16L1 C1 December 3, 2010 The Respondent was represented by Randall Mogg, Esq. of Marshall Watson, 1800 NW 49th Street, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33309. Lee Frank, Broker, Marilee Realty, was also present as a witness. He is the listing agent for the property. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22 -231 (15) Swimming pool water is black, filled with algae and stagnating. Folio No: 69060108488 Violation address: 14131 Fall Creek Ct, Naples The initial Order was issued on August 6, 2010. Supervisor Perez stated the violation was abated on August 24, 2010 by the Respondent. Fines have accrued at the rate of $250.00 per day for the period from August 10, 2010 through August 24, 2010 (15 days) for a total fine amount of $3,750.00. Previously assessed Operational Costs of $112.38 have been paid. The total amount due to date is $3,750.00. Attorney Mogg stated the Respondent did not receive a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure until August 17, 2010, and could not make repairs until it obtained title to the property. Mr. Franks introduced four photographs of the property that were marked as Respondent's Composite Exhibit 1 and admitted into evidence. He stated the property has been sold and will be closed within the next in two weeks. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines but reduced the total amount due to $750.00. RECESS: 11:03 AM RECONVENED: 11:41 AM V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: B. Hearings: 2. Case #SO 171470 — CEEX 20100020388 — BCC vs. Diane True The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. Collier County Sheriff's Office Deputy Kenneth Robins was present. Violations: Code of Law & Ord., Sec 130 -66 Unlawful area, not a designated parking spot Violation address: Barefoot Beach Preserve 1611 ic December 3, 2010 The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on November 17, 2010. Proof of delivery on November 29, 2010 was provided by the USPS. Deputy Robin stated the Citation was issued on October 23, 2010. He introduced three photographs which were marked as County's Composite Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He noted the Respondent's vehicle was parked in front of" a "no parking" sign which was clearly visible. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay a civil fine of $30.00 and an administrative fee of $5.00. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $50.00 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $85.00 9. Case #SO 173068 — CEEX 20100019894 — BCC vs. Helen J. Lundergan The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. Collier County Sheriff's Office Deputy Lawrence Keller was present. Violations: Code of Law & Ord., Sec. 130 -67 Handicapped space, no Permit visible Violation address: Borders Books, 10600 Tamiami Trail, Naples The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on November 17, 2010. Proof of delivery on November 22, 2010 was provided by the USPS. Deputy Keller stated the Citation was issued on October 1, 2010 and observed the Respondent's vehicle parked in a Handicapped lane. A Handicapped Parking Permit was not displayed in the vehicle.. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay a civil fine of $250.00 and an administrative fee of $5.00. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $50.00 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $305.00 18. Case #CEPM 20100007875 — BCC vs. Dennis & Roberta Wolfe The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Renald Paul who was present. The Respondents were not present. 9 161 1DCnlr 3 2010 Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22- 231(15) Green pool. Folio No: 36380720003 Violation address: 2500 55th St. SW, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on November 17, 2010. Investigator Paul introduced the following photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • `13-1" —photograph of the weeds in the front of the property • `B -2" — photograph of the pool dated October 13, 2010 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either: (1) Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi- weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water on or before December 10, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate -OR- (2) Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water, pursuant to HUD standards, on or before December 10, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owners. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.56 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.56 20. Case #CELU 20100006221— BCC vs. Albert Houston, Sr The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Ed Morad who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 1.04.01(a) A Fleetwood Pioneer Travel Trailer with expired license plate parked/ stored on improved, abandoned property in a residential zoned district. 10 161IDeeeCerl, 20114 Folio No: 25631200005 Violation address: 216 4th Street, Immokalee The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on November 15, 2010. Investigator Morad introduced two photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits `B -1" (dated May 12, 2010) and `B -2" (dated October 4, 2010) and entered into evidence. He stated the owner resides in a nursing home. He met with Patrick Houston, the owner's son, and numerous extensions of time to comply were granted. The violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to remove the travel trailer to an area zoned for outside storage of vehicles by the close of business on December 6, 2010, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.29 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.29 25. Case #CEPM 20100009607 — BCC vs. David & Pauline K. Healey Family Trust U/T/D 9/1/03 The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Reggie Smith who was present. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22- 231(15) Pool water unmaintained, dark in color, and stagnate /algaed. Folio No: 31055004800 Violation address: 6650 Harwich Ct, Naples The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on November 18, 2010. Proof of delivery on November 22, 2010 was provided by the USPS. The property and 11 1611 C 4 Decem er 3, 2010 Courhouse were posted on November 17, 2010. Investigator Smith introduced one photograph of the pool (dated July 22, 2010) and one photograph (dated December 2, 2010) which were marked as County's Exhibits "A" and `B" respectively, and admitted into evidence. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either: (1) Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi- weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water on or before December 10, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate -OR- (2) Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water, pursuant to HUD standards, on or before December 10, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the property owners. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.29 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.29 26. Case #CEPM 20090015732 — BCC vs. Citibank The County was represented by Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joseph Mucha who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22 -231, Subsections 12c, 12i, 12p, and 19 Vacant structure with boarded up windows and roof damage. Roof damage has caused damage to the interior of the structure to include the ceiling and walls. Folio No: 62632680001 Violation address: 612 102nd Ave. N, Naples The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on November 18, 2010. Proof of delivery on November 22, 2010 was provided by the LISPS. The property and Courthouse were posted on November 17, 2010. 12 1614 X1 December 3, 2010 Investigator Mucha intorduced the following photographs which were marked as County's Composite Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • "A" — two photographs taken on October 5, 2009 • `B" —three photographs taken on June 8, 2010 He stated the case was referred to the Foreclosure Team. On December 7, 2009, the bee infestion was abated by Citibank. A Notice of Violation was issued to the Bank in September 2010. A representative of the Bank stated a bid proposal to demolish the structure was under consideration, but to date, a Demolition Permit has not been issued by the County. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to hire a licensed General Contractor to obtain all applicable Permits, required inspections, and a Certificate of Occupancy /Completion for required repairs to the structure or for the demolition of the structure on or before January 3, 2011, or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.47 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.47 27. Case #CEPM 20100019213 — BCC vs. Citibank The County was represented by Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joseph Mucha who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22- 231(19) Vacant structure with bee infestation in the soffit and rear exterior wall. Folio No: 62632680001 Violation address: 612 102nd Ave. N, Naples The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on November 18, 2010. Proof of delivery on November 22, 2010 was provided by the LISPS. The property and Courthouse were posted on November 17, 2010. 13 161.1 C1 December 3, 2010 Investigator Mucha introduced two photogrpahs dated September 30, 2010 which were marked as County's Composite Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He stated the bee infestation had returned. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to remove the bee infestation from the vacant structure on or before December 10, 2010, or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.38 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.38 32. Case #CESD 20100014276 — BCC vs. Denton II, LLC The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Ed Morad who was present. Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 10.02.06 (B)(1)(a) Large metal type shed placed in the rear of improved property without a Permit. Folio No: 66930120007 Violation address: 437 Carver Street, Immokalee, FL 34142 The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on November 19, 2010 and proof of delivery on November 22, 2010 was confirmed by the US Postal Service. The property and Courthouse were posted on November 12, 2010. Investigator Morad introduced three photogrpahs dated August 8, 2010 which were marked as County's Composite Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He spoke with David Egozi of Gulf Group Holdings, property manager for the Respondent, and sent a list of local Contractors. The violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to obtain either a Collier County Building and Land Alteration Permit for the shed, or a Demolition Permit to 14 161 C1 December 3, 2010 remove the shed, all required inspections, and a Certificate of Completion on or before January 3, 2011, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.29 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.29 33. Case #CESD 20100003742 — BCC vs. Sandra L. Castro The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Tony Asaro who was present. Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) Fence and structures on the property without Collier County Building Permit(s). Folio No: 40060360106 Violation Address: 3950 31St Ave. NE, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on November 23, 2010. Invesitgator Asaro introduced the following photographs which were marked as County's Composite Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • "A" —two photographs dated March 22, 2010 • `B" —three photographs dated June 15, 2010 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to obtain either a Collier County Building Permit or a Demolition Permit, all required inspections, and a Certificate of Completion for the fence and the sheds on or before January 3, 2011, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. 15 161 1 C1= December 3, 2010 If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.29 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.29 35. Case #CEPM 20100018647 — BCC vs. Tarpon IV, LLC The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Ed Morad who was present. Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22 -231 (12)(i) Structures with exterior doors open to units and not properly fitted within its frame and not provided with lockable hardware, and not weather -tight and weatherproof, and not maintained in good repair. Windowpanes not maintained without cracks or holes. Folio No: 65070800000 Violation Address: 616 Palmetto Ave, Immokalee The Noice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on November 19, 2010 and proof of delivery on November 29, 2010 was supplied by the US Postal Service. The property and Courthouse were posted on November 12, 2010. Investigator Morad introduced eleven photographs dated September 15, 2010 which were marked as County's Composite Exhibit "A" and one photograph dated October 8, 2010 that was marked as County's Exhibit `B -2" and all were admitted into evidence. He spoke with David Egozi of Gulf Group Holdings, property manager for the Respondent. The violations have not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to: (1) obtain a Collier County Boarding Permit to securely board the doors and windows of the structures on or before December 10, 2010 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains, and (2) to repair the doors and windows of the strutures in compliance with Code on or before January 3, 2010 or a fne of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement 16 16 I 1 04 em 3, 2010 of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.47 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.47 36. Case #CEV 20100007074 vs. Timothy Steiner The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Renald Paul who was present. Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 2.01.00(A) Trailers on site with invalid license plates. Folio No: 38160640000 Violation address: 6291 Copper Leaf Lane, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on November 16, 2010. Investigator Paul introduced six photographs dated October 22, 2010 and marked as County's Exhibits `B -1" through "B -6" and admitted into evidence. The violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to either obtain a current registration for each boat trailer, or remove them from the premises, or store them in a completely enclosed structure on or before December 6, 2010, or a fine of $50.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.29 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.29 17 16 t l C I December 3, 2010 37. Case #2007100659 — BCC vs. Lonny Moore TR The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigators Christopher Ambach and Michele Scavone who were present. Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Ordinance(s): 2005 -44 Sections 6,7, and 8 Accumulation of litter. Folio No: 37161440006 Violation address: 120 7th St. SW, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on November 23, 2010. Investigator Ambach introduced the following documents which were marked as County's Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • Composite "A" —ten photographs dated September 2, 2010 • Composite `B" — Property Appraiser's Office aerial photograph (1) dated 2007 and Sheriff's Department photograph (1) dated 2010 • Composite "C" —eleven photographs dated December 2, 2010 The case was initiated by Investigator Michele Scavone who met with the owner. The owner and the tenant were cleaning the property until the owner died. The tenant has made some progress but the violation has not been abated. A Probate proceeding may be pending and Supervisor Waldron will research for a current owner address. Investigator Scavone stated there were two properties, back -to -back. The owner cleaned up the rear property which has been sold. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to remove all litter and debris to an appropriate disposal site, or store the items in a completely enclosed structure on or before January 3, 2011, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.29 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.29 18 1611 C1 December 3, 2010 Supervisor Cristina Perez stated property records identified The Morrison Living Trust as owner, Alaura Morrison as Successor Trustee, and an address was obtained. 38. Case #CESD 20100001280 — BCC vs. Edilbray C. Perez & Belkis Martinez The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Renald Paul who was present. Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) Unpermitted shed on site. Folio No: 36234240008 Violation address: 5563 17th Ave. SW, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on November 16, 2010. Investigator Paul introduced two photographs dated January 27, 1020 which were marked as County's Composite Exhibits "A" and copies of two aerial photographs from the County Appraiser's Office which was marked as Composite Exhibit `B" and admitted into evidence. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to obtain all required Collier County Permits for any /all additions, or obtain Permits for removal of the unpermitted additions from the property, all required inspections, and a Certificate of Completion on or before January 3, 2011, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.47 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.48 19 1611 C1 "• December 3, 2010 39. Case #CEV 20100006169 — BCC vs. Katherine Sheffield The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Christopher Ambach who was present. Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 2.01.00(A) Several unlicensed and inoperable vehicles and trailers on the property. Folio No: 36814240004 violation address: 660 291h St. SW, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on November 23, 2010. Investigator Ambach introduced the following photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • Composite "A" —three phtographs dated July 16, 2010 • Composite `B" —two photographs dated August 26, 2010 • "C" —one photograph dated September 16, 2010 • Composite "D"— eleven photographs dated December 2, 2010 He stated he spoke with Ms. Sheffield who stated she abated the violation "to the best of her ability" but refused to allow him access to the property. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to either obtain and affix a valid license plate to each vehicle/trailer and repair defects to make operable, or remove them from the premises, or store them in a completely enclosed structure on or before December 10, 2010, or a fine of $50.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.20 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.20 20 1611 C December , 2010 40. Case #CENA 20100006172 — BCC vs. Katherine Sheffield The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Christopher Ambach who was present. Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54 -179 and Section 54 -181 Litter consisting of but not limited to: metals, wood, plastics, household trash, rusted broken bicycles, old car parts and tires throughout the property. Folio No: 36814240004 Violation address: 660 291h St. SW, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and Courthouse on November 23, 2010. Investigator Ambach introduced the following photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits and admitted into evidence: • Composite "A"— six phtographs dated September 1, 2010 • Composite `B" — eleven photographs dated December 2, 2010 He stated the violations have not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to either remove all litter and debris to an appropriate disposal site, or store desired items in a completely enclosed structure on or before December 10, 2010, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.20 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.20 42. Case #CESD 20100001211— BCC vs. John Pono & Maria Perez The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Renald Paul who was present. Respondents were not present. 21 1611 C I A December 3, 2010 Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04 -41, as amended, Section 5.03.02(A), Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1. Fence failing, broken and leaning. Fence unpermitted. Folio No: 36383840003 Violation address: 5400 26t' Place SW, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on November 16, 2010. Investigator Paul introduced photographs which were marked as Exhibits "B -1" and "B -2" and admitted into evidence. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violations and ordered to: (1) obtain a Collier County Building Permit for the addition of the fence and complete all non - structural repairs to the fence, obtain inspections and a Certificate of Completion on or before January 3, 2011, or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. -OR- (2) obtain a Collier County Demolition Permit to remove the fence, all required inspections, and a Certificate of Completion on or before January 3, 2011 or a fine of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondents are to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid -out and assess the costs to the Respondents. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case for $112.64 on or before January 3, 2011. Total Amount Due: $112.64 C. Emergency Cases: None VII. OLD BUSINESS: None 22 Cecemb A, 161 1 D� "a�! 201 0 VIII. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as referenced in the submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's Request. B. Request for the Special Magistrate to Impose Nuisance Abatement Liens on Cases referenced in the submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's Request. IX. REPORTS: None X. NEXT HEARING DATE: January 14, 2011 at 9:00 AM, located at the Collier County Government Center, Administrative Building "F, "3rd Floor, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. There being no further business for the good of the County, the Hearing was adjourned by Order of the Special Magistrate at 1:22 PM. COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING Jda��Gakrretsou', pecial Magistrate The Minutes were approved by the Special Magistrate on as presented , or as amended 23 Fiala 1611 C2 Hiller Henning December 17, 2010 Coyle BY'. Colette MU TES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE DANGEROUS DOG APPEAL Naples, Florida, December 17, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Special Magistrate Dangerous Dog Appeal, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Administrative Building "F," 3rd floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following persons present: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: Honorable Brenda Garretson ALSO PRESENT: Kerry Adams, Code Enforcement Administrative Secretary Colleen Davidson, Code Enforcement Administrative Secretary Misc. COfres: DO: �3 tWM Gies to: 6 Li17, 2010 I. CALL TO ORDER The Honorable Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson called the Hearing to order at 9:06 AM. The individuals testifying during the proceedings did so under oath. The Special Magistrate announced, in addition to the two Dangerous Dog cases, an Emergency Case would be heard under the Utility Ordinance, and outlined the Rules and Regulations to be observed during the Hearings. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Emergency Hearing: PU 4516 — CEEX 201000021558 — BCC vs. Creative Choice Homes XIV, LTD. Public Utilities Senior Investigator Ray Addison and Compliance Officer Tonya Phillips requested the Hearing and were present. Cindy Walters, Regional Property Manager for Proxy Pro Management, and Solange Michaels, represented the Respondent. Violations: Ordinance 2005 -54, Sections 19, C (9) Repeat Violation: Litter on ground and in roll -off without cover /lid creating a Health/Safety /Welfare issue. Litter consisted of, but was not limited to, paper, plastic, and putrescible waste not properly stored. Folio No.: 00296840003 Violation Address: 8690 Weir Drive, Naples, FL Cindy Walters resides at 5421 Ginger Cove, Tampa, FL 33634. Solange Michaels resides at 4030 Winkler Avenue, #204, Fort Myers, FL 33916. Citation #4516 was issued on December 1, 2010. During a routine patrol, Investigator Phillips observed excessive litter /trash around the compactor, and hand - delivered the Notice to Appear to the Respondent's representative, James Puckett.. Thirty-four photographs were introduced by the Investigator, marked as County's Composite Exhibit "A," and admitted into evidence. The Investigator inspected the site twice a day for seventeen days after the Citation was issued. The violation has not been abated. Ms. Walters stated several reasons contributed to the problem: • The compactor broke and there were delays delivering the necessary part. • Waste Management was slow to deliver additional dumpsters and gave conflicting information to Code Enforcement. • Trash was placed in the roll -off container to prevent animals from further dispersing the trash but it did not have a lid or tarp to contain the trash. C 1 1 I cember , 1 2010 • Residents would toss trash bags from their cars as they left the apartment complex. Ms. Walters noted the Maintenance staff did not begin work until 8:00 AM. The photos taken by Public Utilities were prior to the start time. The groundskeeper's hours have been changed to 6:00 AM — 3:00 PM.. Corrective actions taken by Proxy Pro Management: • Compactor was been repaired and the site will be monitored more frequently by Maintenance. • The entire maintenance staff was terminated and new staff begins work on December 20, 2010 • Cameras with lights have been ordered to photograph residents who dump trash and residents will continue to be fined for non - compliance. • The previous contract has been terminated and a new contract entered into with Waste Management. • New equipment will be obtained directly from Waste Management and delivered before the end of February 2011. Additional measures suggested by the Special Magistrate and the County: • Hire a security guard to patrol during the evenings. • Request Sheriff's Department patrol the premises and issue Citations. • Investigate hiring a commercial cleaning company. • Remove compactor and place several dumpters around the premises. • Increase trash pick -up by Waste Management (twice a week or more). Public Utilities volunteered to go door -to -door in the complex to hand out pamphlets and/or schedule a meeting to instruct residents on the proper dispoaal of their trash. The Special Magistrate stated a Health /Safety/Welfare issue was present. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay a civil fine of $1,000.00 per day for each day the violation remained unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Special Magistrate ordered the Respondent to immediately clean the area surrounding the compactor by the close of business on December 17, 2010. She further ruled the fine would be imposed, but it was stayed until the Respondent presented a Plan of Action to Public Utilities on or before Monday, December 20, 2010. The Special Magistrate noted if compliance was not achieved, the fine will be imposed retoractively. The case was referred to the January 14, 2011 Docket by the Special Magistrate and Ms. Walters acknowledged notification. blP Cz y b 7,2010 B. Hearings: 1 CEEX 20100021107 — BCC vs. Jerry House and Herbie House Domestic Animal Services Officer David Levitt requested the Hearing and DAS Supervisor Dana Alger was present. The Respondents were also present. Mark Smith and Eric Bertelsen appeared as witnesses for the Respondents. Violations: Collier County Ordinance 2008 -51, as amended, and/or Subsection 767.11 (1), Florida Statutes, Dangerous Dog Violation Address: 2914 Randall Circle, Naples, FL The Respondents reside at 2914 Randall Circle, Naples, Florida. Mark Smith resides at 2912 Randall Circle, Naples, Floirda. Eric Bertelsen resides at 2920 Hawthorne Court, Naples, Florida 34104 The Special Magistrate noted the Respondents were appealing Domestic Animal Services' Finding and classification of the dog as "dangerous" under the Ordinance which was derived from Florida Statutes, Chapter 767.11 (1). Supervisor Alger cited the County Ordinance under "Definitions and Procedures ": "Dangerous or vicious dog means any dog that, according to the records of the appropriate authority: A. Has aggressively bitten, attacked, or endangered or has inflicted severe injury on a human being on public or private property ... " "Definition of severe injury: Any physical injury that results in broken bones, multiple bites, disfigurement, or lacerations requiring sutures or reconstuctive surgery. " The dog, "Harvey," is a mixed breed and is currently held at the DAS facilities. The date of the incident was October 24, 2010 and the Finding was made on November 16, 2010. Respondent, Jerry House, presented his case. • The dog is a Labrador mix, was acquired by Herbie House at six -weeks of age, and is now 1 '/2 years old. • The dog is theraputic for Jerry House who suffers from PTSD due to his service in Viet Nam. • On the date of the incident, Jerry House was playing with the dog in his yard and briefly went inside and upon returning, heard Daniel Forbes, the Victim, who rents from Mr. House's neighbor, screaming at the dog, Harvey. • Mr. Forbes swung an axe handle at the dog who was carrying a toy football in his mouth. • Daniel Forbes then "charged" at Mr. House, who was in his driveway, swinging the axe handle at him. 4 I. C 2 r.0 IUer][er 17, 2010 The Special Masigrate asked if the police were called to the scene. The Respondent replied they were, but he did not file charges against Mr. Forbes to "keep peace in the neighborhood." • At that point, the dog bit Daniel Forbes and could have seriously injured him but did not. The Special Magistrate questioned the Respondent concerning whether his property was fenced, if the dog was allowed to run free, and how he controls the dog. The Respondent stated his yard is not fenced, the dog does roam free but responds to verbal commands when called. The Special Magistrate further questioned the Respondent regarding the dog's interactions with other dogs and why the Respondent thought the attack occurred. The Respondent stated his dog often played with his neighbor's puppy in their combined yards. He further stated the bite was a result of a physical attack on himself by his neighbor's renter who grabbed the Respondent, ripping his shirt. It was only after the Respondent was attacked that his dog bit the renter. When the renter stopped his attack, the Respondent was able to control his dog who responded to the command to "sit," and put the dog inside the house. In response to the Special Magistrate's question, Mr. House stated he did not see any blood on Mr. Forbes who refused the offer of medical treatment, as stated in the police report. He further related: The police were initially called by Mr. Forbes. The dog was placed under quarantine by DAS despite proof that it had been vaccinated against rabies, and has been under the control of DAS for the past 60 days. In his opinion, the dog did not show aggression to the Victim. (Note: A copy of the Sheriff's Department report was included in the information provided to the Special Magistrate.) • According to the Sherrif's report, Mr. Forbes went into his house and obtained the axe handle, then chased the dog from the yard into the street. • The Respondent observed Mr. Forbes chasing the dog who still had his toy in his mouth. • The Respondent was confronted by Daniel Forbes in the Respondent's driveway. • The Respondent stated the dog has played with his 7 -month old grandson, a neighbor's cat, and puppy without incident. • Documents provided by DAS stated a hearing would take place within 21 days after the dog was declared to be "dangerous." 16 IDImbql 010 Mark Smith testified as follows: • Has known Harvey since it was approximately six -weeks old and Harvey plays with his three dogs. • Has had almost daily contact with Harvey and has not seen the dog show aggression toward anyone. • Daniel Forbes rented his guest house, but the Witness is in the process of evicting h \im. • Mr. Forbes was a problem tenant and Mr. Smith had felt threatened by him, stating "I think Daniel has a real problem with people ... he takes everything as a personal threat and engages in a fight." The Special Magistrate questioned Mr. Smith about his personal observations of Harvey and if there were any problems. The Witness replied he has seen the dog on a daily basis and the only thing the dog has ever done was to bark briefly when startled. If the dog was told to stop or go home, it would respond appropriately.. The Witness stated he owns a black Lab, a Retriever, and a Lab -Chow puppy. He questioned how the definition of "dangerous dog" applied since it was "a very provoked attack" upon Mr. House. The Witness cited the Sheriff's report which stated the bites were moderate. He observed the tenant provoking the dog, chasing the dog, and attacking the dog. The Special Magistrate asked Mr. Smith if he thought it was a defensive action on the part of the dog? Mr. Smith agreed and stated Daniel Forbes has been around the dog, Harvey, many times without incident. It was his opinion there was a problem between Daniel and Jerry — that Daniel did not like Jerry. He concluded Daniel could have stopped his attack on Jerry at any time but did not and that was when Harvey nipped him. Objection by the County: Supervisor Alger noted the Sheriff's Office report stated there were no other independent witnesses to the incident. When the DAS officer was at the scene, only the Respondent and the Victim were present. She was surprised that witnesses were produced. The Special Magistrate advised the Supervisor to question the next witness and determine if she needed to call a rebuttal witness. RECESS: 10:30 AM RECONVENED: 10:47 AM The Respondent read an exercpt from West's Florida Statutes Annotated: "No dog may be declared dangerous if the dog was protecting or defending a human being within the immediate vicinity of the dog from an unjustified attack or assault. " 1611DImbeq , 10 � 4 (—+ 767.12 — Classification of dogs as dangerous; certification of registration; notice and hearing requirements; confinement of animal; exemption; appeals; unlawful acts) DAS Animal Control Officer Darcy Andrade was sworn in, stating she had additional information to present. Eric Bertelsen testified as follows: • Heard some yelling and a little bit of barking. • Looked over his back yard fence and saw Daniel chasing after the dog with some kind of club in his hand. Mr. Bertelsen explained there are 5 or 6 lots in the neighborhood that are pie- shaped, so he could view his neighbor, Jerry's, yard. • He stated Daniel threw the club which hit the dog. He ran over and grabbed it again. Then he saw Jerry come out. • The dog yelped when the club hit him and continued to run away from Daniel • The dog nipped Daniel approximately three times in reaction to his attacks on Jerry. • The Witness was very familiar with Harvey and has seen him around the neighborhood — the dog frequently plays with Mr. Bertersen's cat. • He did not observe any blood on Mr. Forbes and was approximately 75 to 80 feet from the incident. Supervisor Alger stated Officer Andrade conducted a door -to -door survey of the neighbor. In her report, the Officer wrote: "One person I spoke to witnessed the majority of the attack but basically was not willing to come forward and sign an affidavit or allow me to use his name" and "... other neighbors claim that the dog runs loose." The Supervisor continued that many neighbors were concerned the dog has been allowed to loose. The Special Magistrate noted the dog was not charged with running loose. There were no further questions by the County. Michael Browne, residing at 112312`* Street North, Naples, Florida 34102, testified as follows: • Has witnessed Harvey playing in Mark's yard with children and other dogs and has not witnessed any aggression from Harvey. • Has known Harvey since he was a puppy and Harvey has played with his 7- month old puppy who is smaller than Harvey. • Had felt threatened by Daniel in the past, whom he has known since before he lived at Mark's. • He stated, "Daniel is emotionally unstable — there are times when is okay and other times when he is not." • He stated, "Harvey is not a bad or vicious dog." 16Leln&Z,010 ' John Raby, residing at 4651 Gulfshore Blvd. North, Unit 905, Naples, Florida 34103, testified as follows: • Has known Jerry for 8 or 9 months and has been to his house on an almost daily basis. • Has played with the dog and never showed any aggression and has seen Harvey play with other dogs. • The dog listens to Jerry. • He stated Harvey is not an aggressive dog in his opinion — an aggressive dog would bite anybody. There were no questions from the County for either Witnesses. Respondent, Herbie House, the dog's owner, testifed as follows: • Picked up Harvey when he was six weeks old • Would not allow a dangerous dog • Dog plays with his nieces and nephews • Has a good temperament There were no questions from the County. The County presented its case: Supervisor Alger stated: • Mr. Forbes was not present to testify, but his Affidavit was presented to the Special Magistrate. • Another affidavit was from a neighbor who claimed that Harvey chased her children and herself while riding bicycles until Mr. House came out and pulled the dog back. The neighbor was with her seven year old and the two - year old was on the back of her bicycle. Supervisor Alger noted a pattern of behavior on the dog's part. • The problem stems from the fact that the dog was allowed to be alone. Mr. House would settle the situation after - the -fact. She further stated: • Mr. Forbes was threatened by the dog, Harvey, when he exited his house to make a trip to his car — he chased the dog from his property and Mr. House came out to contain the dog after -the fact • She asked if no one is there to monitor the dog, how do you know the dog is not acting in an aggressive manner when someone is afraid to tell you? • The dog is allowed to go do whatever it wants to do. • When people come to Mr. House's residence, he control the dog and the visitors do not witness any aggresion on the dog's part. The Special Magistrate noted the Supervisor was discussing there was an opportunity or a possibility, not citing other instances of aggression. 161102 December 17, 2010 Supervisor Alger continued: • When Mr. House was on scene and Mr. Forbes was running around, the dog was not being controlled and able to bite Mr. Forbes while Mr. House was right there. The Special Magistrate viewed the photographs of Mr. Forbes' wounds and asked why Mr. Forbes did not attend the Hearing. The Supervisor stated he had been sent the information concerning the Hearing, but she was unable to reach Mr. Forbes by telephone. The Special Magistrate stated she would review Mr. Forbes' Affidavit carefully, and asked why Mr. Forbes felt compelled to come back out if he was afraid of the dog? • He has children in his family and was afraid his family might arrive home while the dog was still out and acting in that manner. There was a comment from the audience that Mr. Forbes did not have any children. Supervisor Alger stated she could only go by what she was told. The Special Magistrate explained to the audience that DAS is required to present the case and enforce the Ordinance. She was concerned that Mr. Forbes did not attend the Hearing and asked if he had contacted DAS at all since the incident. The Supervisor stated he called in the beginning but has not called since the investigation began. The Supervisor detailed the puncture wounds shown in the photographs on Mr. Forbes' wrist and the back of his leg, noting there was a bruise on his back from the impact of the bite — trauma around the puncture. She stated it was apparent the dog was in pursuit of Mr. Forbes. She also acknowledged Mr. Forbes refused medical attention and confirmed the incident report and photographs were taken within an hour after the incident. Supervisor Alger stated the basis of the incident was the animal running at large — if the animal had been contained or walked on a leash, the situation might not have happened. Rebuttal by the Respondent. • He stated Harvey would never have been bitten Daniel if he had not attacked him. • Harvey was protecting the Respondent. The Special Magistrate stated she would examine the documentation presented carefully in order to give a ruling at the conclusion of the Hearing. BREAK: 11.24 AM RECONVENED: 11:45 AM 161, 1 #.4 December 17, 2010 The Special Magistrate posed additional questions to Mr. Bertelsen and Mr. Smith concerning their observations of the incident and the location of the properties. She specifically questioned Mr. Smith about Daniel Forbes family and was informed Mr. Forbes was married but did not have any children as he claimed. FINDINGS OF FACT. • There were some inconsistencies in the testimony presented. • Mr. Forbes was not present and there was no opportunity for him to be cross - examined. • There were several inconsistencies in Mr. Forbes statement — he said he was chasing the dog from his "back yard" and the inconsistency about children. • The testimony presented a picture of the person who is alleged to be the Victim as being more of the aggressor in the situation than the dog. • In Mr. Forbes' own statement, he said the dog was able to be calmed down after he and Mr. House had words. • His statement continued, "The dog only did what was his instinct" which could be interpreted as being supportive of the testimony given here that the dog was instinctively trying to protect his owner. • His statement does not mention anything about his physically accosting Mr. House which is not a full statement and did not really present the whole picture. • He also wrote, "This has built up from a lack of control of his dog in my opinion" which is supported by the testimony from the Respondent and his witnesses that Mr. Forbes had a problem with Mr. House. The Special Magistrate referred to the Ordinance and the definition of a dangerous and vicious dog to "inflict severe injury on a human being. " She noted there were multiple bites but no broken bones and no "disfiguring lacerations requiring sutures or reconstructive surgery " She noted there was no testimony or evidence presented that the Victim had to have sutures. The Special Magistrate concluded: • Mr. Forbes did himself a disservice by not being present. • The decision is based on what has been presented. • DAS can only present the evidence that it has. • The weight of the evidence is on Harvey's side. The Special Magistrate found that Harvey was not a "dangerous" dog and overruled the assessment from Domestic Animal Services. An Order will be entered stating the Respondent won his Appeal. The Special Magistrate suggested that the Respondent should become familiar with the Ordinance in order to observe the restriction and protect his animal. 10 C 1 WeIr 17, 2010 2 2. CEEX 20100021104 — BCC vs. Veronica McCullion Domestic Animal Services Officer Peter Hinkley requested the Hearing and was present. The Respondent was represented by her attorney, Scott Rowland of Cardillo, Keith, & Bonaquist, PA, Esqs. Sandra Campanella appeared as a witness. Violations: Collier County Ordinance 2008 -51, as amended, and/or Subsection 767.11 (1), Florida Statutes, Dangerous Dog Violation Address: Ketch Drive, Naples, FL The Respondent resides at 560 Ketch Drive, Naples, Florida and the owner of the dogs. Ms. Campanella resides at 5083 28th Place SW, Naples, Florida 34116. Attorney Rowland presented a Trial Book to the Special Magistrate and to Officer Hinkley. The Special Magistrate stated she would take judicial notice of the Statutes contained in the Trial Book, the contents of which was admitted without objection from the County. The Special Magistrate noted the Respondents were appealing Domestic Animal Services' Finding and classification of the dog as "dangerous" under the Ordinance which was derived from Florida Statutes, Chapter 767.11 (1). Attorney Rowland stated: • There was a jurisdictional issue. • The time to hold a Hearing had expired as it has been more than 21 days since his client requested a hearing. The Special Magistrate asked Officer Hinkley if he wished to call the County Attorney's Office. Officer Hinkley declined. Officer Hinkley stated on November 24, 2010, the Respondent was notified that the Hearing was postponed and that both parties agreed to the postponement. The Special Magistrate asked if the initial Hearing had been previously scheduled within the twenty -one day period and the Officer concurred. Attorney Rowland objected to the Officer's statement. She asked if there was a Stipulation allowing the Hearing to be continued. Supervisor Dana Alger stated she contacted the Respondent by telephone when the initial Hearing, scheduled for November, was postponed to December. She cited a note in the file. Attorney Rowland requested to see the file note, and stated his client did not consent to a Continuation. C 4elbeV , :1.010 Supervisor Alger stated she was not aware the Respondent was represented by Counsel when she spoke to her. Attorney Rowland stated his client was prepared to testify she was called and notified the date was changed which did not constitute consent to a Continuance. Consent indicates voluntary acknowledgement beyond being told "this is the date of the Hearing." He continued the Statute was very clear about the time frame. He reviewed the file note and stated there was no written Consent or service of a Notice, or anything beyond what appeared to be the Supervisor's report of the telephone conversation. The Ordinance requires actual written consent to a Continance. Article Il of the County's Ordinance, Chapter 14 -35, Section B, "Procedure," Subparagraph (2), was cited as follows: "(2) Any owner of a dog that is initially declared dangerous by the Director of Animal Services may appeal that decision to the Code Enforcement Special Magistrate. This hearing shall be held as soon as possible, but not more than 21 calendar days and no sooner than 5 days after receipt of request from the owner. The hearing may only be continued by agreement of both parties. " Attorney Rowland stated the issue was what constituted agreement and simply notifing the Respondent that a date had been moved did not constitute agreement to continue the Hearing. He was representing Ms. McCullion at the time she was called, and he was informed by his client that December 17th was the scheduled date for the Hearing. He did not receive any prior Notice of Hearing only the Notice citing December 17th as the Hearing date. Colleen Davidson stated the November Special Magistrate Hearing had been cancelled and the cases were moved to the December P Agenda, but the McCullion case was received after the Agenda was filled. Since it could not be placed on the December P Agenda, notification of that date was not sent to the Respondent. Attorney Rowland noted that, technically, the case was never set and could not be continued. The Special Magistrate agreed since the case was never set, it could not be continued. She suggested because there would be consequences and the DAS Officers did not have legal expertise, DAS should consult the County Attorney's office to obtain legal advice concerning any response or rebuttal. The Special Magistrate noted she was operating under the County's Ordinance which referred to Florida Statutes. If the Ordinance was more specific, the Ordinance would control. RECESS: 12:10 PM RECONVENED: 12:17 PM 12 16117, 2� 2 - i Assistant County Attorney, Colleen Greene, appeared on behalf of the County, and spoke with the DAS Officers. The Special Magistrate reviewed Chapter 14 -35 of the County's Ordinance, Section B, "Procedure," Subparagraph (1) and suggested Attorney Greene also review it: "(1) If the Director of Animal Services, or his or her designee, makes an initial determination that a dog is dangerous, based on the initial investigation, the County shall provide written notification of that determination to the owner of the dog. Notice shall be by certified mail, by certified hand delivery, by service pursuant to Florida Statutes, Ch. 48, or as otherwise authorized by Florida Statutes. The Director's initial determination shall automatically become final unless the dog's owner, within seven calendar days after receipt of the Notice, files a written request for a hearing to challenge the Director's initial determination. The written request must be submitted to Animal Services. If the dog's owner files a timely written request for a challenge hearing, the effective date of the determination shall be the date of the final decision of the Special Magistrate. " The Special Magistrate asked where was the beginning point to count the 21 days. Attorney Greene stated the date was to be within 21 days of the Request for a Hearing. The Special Magistrate stated the seven days began to run from the date the Respondent received Notice and cited to the Chapter: "Notice shall be by certified mail, by certified hand delivery, by service pursuant to Florida Statutes, Ch. 48, or as otherwise authorized by Florida Statutes." Attorney Greene stated the DAS Investigation Acknowledgement, signed by Veronica McCullion, was hand- delivered to her on November 10, 2010. The Respondent did file a timely request for a Hearing. Proper notice was given initially and was not an issue. Attorney Greene stated the Hearing was scheduled to be held on November 16th, but was cancelled. The Special Magistrate summarized: • The case was to have been included on the November Docket which is prepared by Code Enforcement in advance. • Due to a personal issue, Code Enforcement continued the cases to December in order to assist the Special Magistrate. • The Respondent was not formally asked about her position. • Attorney Rowland stated the Respondent did not receive a Notice of Hearing because the case was not actually set and there could not be a Continuance. Attorney Greene stated the DAS records note the Respondent consented to continue the case. The Ordinance provides the Hearing may be continued by agreement of 13 1611 C2 December 17, 2010 both parties. The DAS Officer testified she did have the consent of the Respondent to continue. Attorney Rowland stated he was told, as was his client, that the Hearing was set for December 17th — it was the only date ever given. The Respondent did not dispute that DAS contacted her and said the Hearing was set for December 17th. He continued the Ordinance was very clear that a Hearing is to take place within 21 days and only the Hearing — "not the Docket or the intention of a Docket" — can be continued with the consent of both parties. Attorney Greene stated the conversation between DAS and the Respondent occurred within the 21 days and the Respondent gave consent to the December 17th date. She further stated DAS was within the guidelines of the Ordinance. The Special Magistrate stated the intent of the restrictions and notification is Due Process. She questioned if a Hearing was not set, did the Respondent have the right to consent to a Hearing outside the time line. Attorney Rowland stated it was not established that his client consented to anything — she was called and told of the date. There was no Notice of Hearing that the case had been set. The Special Magistrate agreed with Attorney Rowland that there could not be a Continuance. She stated if the Respondent consented to a particular date, it could also be interpreted that she consented to the Hearing being outside of the 21 days — whether it was set as an original setting or as a Continuance. The Special Magistrate asked for the Respondent's direct testimony in order to rule appropriately. DAS testified they believed it was consent and not a notification. Attorney Rowland stated he wanted the record to reflect his position and argument that it didn't matter because the case was never set. Direct testimony of the Respondent by Attorney Rowland. Q. Ms. McCullion, were you contacted by DAS and notified of a Hearing date? A. Yes. Q. When was that? Do you recall? A. Honestly, I don't have that in my records. Q. Were you asked if you agreed that the Hearing would be set for a certain date? A. No. Q. Were you told when the Hearing was going to be set? A. Yes. Q. Was that for today's date? A. Yes. Q. Were you told at any prior point that the Hearing had been set for any other date? A. I had never received any notice on any other dates. Q. Were you ever told that it had been "set" other than for today? A. No. 14 1611 1 4 December 17, O1 Re Direct questioning of the Respondent by Attorney Greene: Q. When the Hearing was scheduled and when you spoke to Ms. Alger on the telephone regarding the date, did you express any concerns or object to the date of the Hearing? A. No. In this whole case, I think I've been very compliant with all of the Officers and anybody in authority, so certainly, when she contacted me and told me that the date was set, I just accepted that. Q. Did you make any demand to have the Hearing date set any earlier than today? A. No. Q. And I think you just testified that there was some conversation in November about scheduling your Hearing for a time in November? Is that correct? A. Yes. Q. And at that time, did you consent to have the Hearing held in November? A. No. Q, Will you explain again, for the record, what was the conversation in November that you are referring to? A. I don't have full recollection of that — this has been seriously stressful for all these months — I just know that when the papers were given to me that I was told there would be a Hearing coming up at some point in time — I don't recall if there was an actual date said at that time or not — I believe that they told me it was to be the last Friday of the month or something like that or whatever the particular day was — but that they weren't sure they were going to get me on. The Special Magistrate reviewed the Respondent's written Request for a Hearing. Colleen Davidson stated Code Enforcement did not have any intention of scheduling the case for November 5th because the request had not been received — the case would have been scheduled for the December 3` Hearing, but the December Docket was too full so Code Enforcement scheduled the December 17th Hearing to handle the cases. The Special Magistrate asked Attorney Greene if she wanted to make an argument concerning whether or not the expiration of the 21 days caused her to lose jurisdiction. Attorney Greene stated. • The Special Magistrate still had jurisdiction to hear the case because the parties had been working together on the case. • DAS hand- delivered the Notice to the Respondent and acted within the scope of the Ordinance. • There was an extreme situation where the Special Magistrate's calendar was suspended and the Hearing was rescheduled. • DAS timely provided Notice to the Respondent and she agreed or did not object. • The dog is not in custody with DAS but is at home with its owner. • In accordance with procedural due process, the Respondent had an pportunity to be heard with the assistance of her attorney. 15 §eml CZ ber7 7 2010 The Special Magistrate ruled the Ordinance did say "agreement" and failure to object would not be agreement — agreement is in the affirmative. Neither side is able to say that the Respondent definitely, affirmatively said, "Yes, I am fine with the Hearing date. " The Finding is that the 21 days did expire. The Special Magistrate asked Attorney Greene if the County does not meet the 21 day deadline, what is the result? Attorney Greene stated the Ordinance provided the Hearing shall be held within 21 days, but her argument was DAS worked with the Special Magistrate's office and the Respondent and that there was a meeting of the minds. The Special Magistrate found that there was no meeting of the minds. It did not occur to anyone that there was a time deadline that would not be met. The Respondent's point was she was called and told "this is the date that we basically set" and she didn't#el she could make an objection. The Special Magistrate stated to obtain an agreement, you have to go beyond and ask, "Do you agree " or "Is there a problem " — which could mean to the Respondent that she could have had a conflict on her calendar. It was not affirmative enough to rise to the level of an agreement. She stated Attorney Rowland was correct and asked Attorney Greene if she had a comment. Attorney Greene stated the incident took place in Collier County and Collier County DAS has jurisdiction over the care and custody of domestic animals owned by the Respondent and the Victim's dog. If the Special Magistrate did not have jurisdiction, the County Court would have jurisdiction based on venue alone. The Special Magistrate ruled the case should be tried in County Court. The Hearing was concluded at 12:40 PM. COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING ends Garretson, pecial Magistrate The Minutes were approved by the Special Magistrate on as presented , or as amended 16