CAC Backup Documents 08/16/2009
HUMISTON
& MOORE
ENGINEERS
( '\')81 ttvm;~ )
-tw~d "/Y') Yu Coorf
-J p.eptf"~
COASTAL
ENGINEERING DESIGN
AND PERMITTING
5679 STRAND COURT
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34110
FAX: 2395942025
PHONE: 239 594 2021
August 13, 2009
Memo to: Members of the Collier County CAC, FOR THE MEETING RECORD.
From: Humiston & Moore Engineers
Re: BVO #08-5124, CAC August 13, 2009 Agenda Item VII-2 New Business
Page 1 of your Executive Summary states that H&M's cost proposal was considerably
higher than the other two firms. This is incorrect for the following reasons:
1. H&M's submittal was the most responsive in that it provided costs as a separate
line item for each task, including aerial photography, data collection, and reports,
with provisional cost savings that would be realized by grouping projects.
2. One of the other firms did not include any aerial photography costs at all, when
those costs were specifically requested.
3. Both of the other firms provided costs only on the basis of combining certain tasks.
H&M's equivalent costs for those groupings were not considered.
4. H&M is the only firm which completely filled out the Cost Proposal form for all 15
tasks. The posted Q&A stated "if you elect not to participate in certain tasks, it
lessens your chances of being selected." The H&M total in your executive summary
includes costs for all tasks whereas those for the other firms do not, and the
evaluation as presented in your agenda item therefore penalizes H&M's submittal
for being the most responsive of the three.
While objective evaluation of the selection process would actually place our cost
proposal second, and may not change the outcome, we wish to have this entered into
the record because the Executive Summary makes it appear as if H&M's fees are
unrealistically high, which they are not, as has been documented during our long past
history of working with Collier County. Furthermore, this discrepancy between an
objective cost comparison and the ranking was pointed out during a meeting on July 16,
2009 between our subconsultant Turrell Hall & Associates, Marla Ramsey, and Gary
McAlpin, and it is therefore of additional concern that the biased cost comparison has
subsequently been included in your Executive Summary.
It is more difficult to quantify bias that may exist in evaluation of the four other scoring
criteria, which are more subjective, however, the magnitude of the bias on the part of two
members of the selection committee in scoring based on price criteria alone puts the
entire process in question. That the H&M price was clearly the lowest for the combined
Biological Monitoring and Near Shore Hardbottom Monitoring, with the subsequent
decision not to award those at all, further raises concern about the objectivity of this BVO
process.
'I:
'.
r
1, APPENDIX 7
~
.~(
1l)rred i () 101
tOUr{- P.efxY1er
FOER DiagnoDtic/F"asibility study (or MOOringsCrYJ. OOV~
Day, Collier County, Florid.), 1981 (fl'om FDEH,
1981).
DIAGNOSTIC/FEASIBILITY STUDY
FOR
MOORINGS BAY
COLLIER COUNT'{. FLORIDA
January 1981
';d~i.'
it'-:~-:-".~ ;.S,~'~
.:;~ .... .-7. .'
'41 ' \ '
;~'~~1t~~J~
"~t Of ,.~d'
Prepared by the
Water Resou~ces Restoration and Preservation Section
Department of Environmental Regulation
Tallahassee. Florida
.
-
IV - 23 -
i
r
,
~
i
SECTION V
~
RECOHHENDATION$
"
~
1
f,
J
!
,
I
I
#-
i
I
~
I
,~
;<
~
I
!
.:1
~
^. RecOlnlllendcd ^ltcl]~~iVC6
RccolIllllcndcd alternatives for improving vater quality in Hoor1oBs
Bay can be divided into tvo ~jor catcgoric6: (1) me~Gures to decrease
the pollutant load entering the bay through voluntary citizen action or
regulation, aDd (2) measures to improve the circulation and flUBhing of
the bay. Three alternatives are recommended under each category as
follows:
1. Mea6ures to Decrease tbe Pollutant Load
a. Conduct public avareness campaigns about the sources
of pollution.
A campaign should be initiated to inform the public about sources
of excess nutrients and other pollutant substances which enter the bay.
It seems evident that lawn and garden debris represent one type of
"
pollutant. A voluntary committment by the citizens should be encouraged
to eliminate as many pollutants as possible which may enter the bay.
Residents should be urged to use this biodegradable debris as mulch or
compost in place of fertilizers or to place the debris 1n sealed (prefer-
)i
~
t
~
II!.
ably reusable) containers to be collected. This action will pre~cnt the
debris from washing into the bay.
..
i
.f.
1-
{~
~~
\:.
~~
..
Pesticides and fertilizers are other c~n pollutants. Residents
~hould be encouraged to use native plants when landscaping. Native
plants are generally 'resistant to insect pests and disease and are
.....
adapted to the amount of qutrient9 and vster which i9 characteristic of
,<
.'
the area. Therefore. the addition of pesticides and fertilizers and
(
excessive yaterlng should not be necessary.
IV - 24 -
ResIdentS ohould sloo be wQrncd about the hazal'du of dumping paints,
011. g<lool~nc find similar 8\Jbstoncca directly into the bay, or on the
street snd 1n storm drains ",here the substances enter the bay indirectly.
RaW sewage entering the bay via recreational boat6 i6 another 8ubstsnte__
which will degrade the bay. BoatIng enthusiaGtB should be urged to
prevent raW se",age from entering the bay from thcir boats.
There are numerous ways to increase the public's awareneS6 of these
problems. Informative pamphlets could be printed at a nominal cost and
distributed with utility bills, or by other means, by the city or the
county. Public service announcements in local newspapers and on local
radio and T.V. stations should also be of little cost. Technical
assistance from the state would be available, if needed, for the develop-
ment of pamphlets and public sorvice announcements. Messages could be
displayed on biLlboards. buses and similar outlets for advertising. A
tfhot line" could be established to encourage public involvement. The
tlhot line" could be used by citizens who wished to report incidents
which might adversely affect the water quality. The line could also be
used for residents seeking guidance as to how they might help prevent
further pollution. The public a~reDess approach is the least costly
and potentially the most effective of all proposed alternatives.
"
b. Decrease excess nutrients and other pollutants.
Informing the residents about the need to prevent pesticides.
fertilizers. yard debris, sewage and similar substances from entering
the bay and relying on voluntary comm1ttments to this end may be suf-
ficient. However. local governments have the regulatory authority to
control these types of pollution. Enforcement of actions to prevent
these types of pollution is generally most efficiently handled at the
IV - 25 -
'1
t
~
1
,
\
10(:n1 level. A UlOl'itol-1um could he placed on the npl'11cHl1ou of all
f c rl 11t z.('rs and pc!:; t ic1dc6 prior lO hc;)vy rn tllS. An on11 nnncc rcqut r1 nc
that nIl yard debris not used for COUlpOst 01" mulch oe pl.:lced 1.0 6~11cd
,
f
a
..
~
containers and left by the road for collection could bc devcloped and
i
1
j
I
i
;...
adopted. Those I"cs1dents nceding collection service could be required
'to purchase sturdy bins, or the bins could be furniahed by the city or
county.
c. Decrease the amount of 8tormwater entering the baX'
The first two recommendations do not address the complex problem of
dealing with 6tormwater. Re6idents can be informed about the excess
nutrients and pollutants carried into the bay via stormw8ter and they
can be encouraged or required to prevent certain of these substances
from being transported via stormwater. But the residents have little
control over the large quantity of stormwater ~hich 1s channeled into
!
c
~
i
t
~
1
1
.
,
i
S
\'
'\
the bay. This problem must be addressed at a higher level.
"
The city and county are encouraged to work v1th tbe SoutlNe6t
Florida Regio~l Planning Council on the 6tormwater issue. The council
15 in the process of compiling a plan for dealing with 9tormwater problems
00 a regional basis. Interest and input from the local level could be
very effective 1n mitigating the amount of pollutants which enter the
r
bay vith the stormwater.
~
The reason that stormwater has become such a problem in this area
is that prior to 1959 the majority of the surrounding shore 6tored the
rainwater. The ra1nvster was then slo~ly released and was filtered
through the ground and the mangroves before entering the bay. Now this
area features vast expanses of impervious streets. parking 10te and
'.
IV - 26 -
otructurcs. Rnin\Joter vhich was previously clcanocd And slovly released
to the bay,now picka up additional pollutants from lllW11B. strects and
parking lots and enters the bay in pulsce.
"
Because the area surrounding Moorings Bay 1a extremely developed '~
there will probably be little chance of constructing detention or reten-
t10n ponds for partial treatment of the stormvater if treatment 1s deemed
neceasary. An alternative that ~y be of benefit 1s the use of suitable
pervious materials to construct new streets and parking lots and to
repair existing facilities. Costs for purchasing and placing pervious
materials 1s not expected to be significantly greater than costs for
constructing streets and parking lots vith standard impervious materials,
but a significant improvement in vater quality could occur. More informa-
tion is needed to determine the precise benefits and costs of thie
\..,
alternative.
"
Erosion should not .be a significant problem in this area because of
the established residences. Construction sites generally present a
problem, though, and foremen should be required to take the necessary
precautions (e.g., placing staked bales of hay).
Mandating the removal of as many excess ~utr1eD~S L~d other pollu-
,
tants as possible is a 6tronger measure than merely educating the resi-
dents about the causes of pollution. However, the cost of this action
is minimal and recommendations 1a and Ib could readily be combined at
the local level for ^ more comprehensive attack on the problem.
At an additional cost to the'local goverNlle,nts. streets and parking
lots could be swept frequently v1th mechanical 5veepers to rp.MOve accumu-
lated polluting materials which would otherwise be transported into the
\
IV - 27 -
,-
.
1
.:r.
.~
-'
(
storm !i('\Jcrs via I'unoif. Vncu\lln-l\9Si6lCd l>l-u9h c\Jccpcro are beat cu1ted
~.
(or removing the very ara.all particles of ioorganic nutrients, which ore
:;,
I
not removed by conventionsl sweepers (Sartor 80d Boyd 1972). Sweepers
"j
could effectively reduce the amount of inorganic nutrients, organic
0,
':'f
-
.~
t
.1,
~
.<i..
:~
~
1'-...
:?
-;a
j
.:.
material. aod man-made pollutants entering the bay, but are costly to
acquire and maintain aod are energy intensive.
The l~ited water quality data available indicate tbat the level of
pollution 1n Moorings Bay may be decreasing. If a drive to reduce the
pollutant load is effective and the exchange of waters with the Cult can
be improved. the quality of tbe water in the body of Moorings Bay should
reach an acceptable level.
2. Measures to Improve the Circulation and Flueh10g
:.'
:t
(
~
~
f
'-6
~
~
f
!
~
y,
,C;
'~
s. Return the depth of Moorings Bay and the canals to a
morc natural level.
Mitigating the pollutant load of Moorings Bay is a necessary first
step in improving water quality but existing pollutants IIlUSt then be '
removed from the system. Improving the circulation aod flushing of the
bay would deal with this problem. Tbe most effective means of improving
the flushing of the bay Is by decreasing the depth. A depth of five or
.~.
.'
six feet at mean lov vater (KLW) should be 6ufficient to ~eet ~aVi&3-
~,
tional requirements but vould cause a reductioD 1n the volume of the,bay
to approximately one half of its present volume. This reduction should
.,
significantly increase the rate of flushing. The decreased depth vould
also result in a more effective vertieal mlx ing , partially alleviating
....
the problem of low oxygen content of deep waters.
Reducing the volume of the bay and canals by decreasing the depth
(
can be accomplished in one of two vays. The first way would be to place
IV - 28 -
clenn, uncontslD1n.ntcd fill in the boy nnd cnnals to bring the depth
w1thin five to a1x feet MLW. The alDount of fill r-equlred to produce
this effect vould be enormous (approximately 12 x 106 or 12 million
cubic yards).
Since large quantities of fill ~terial are not availabJe
......
in the vicinity of the bay, the fill would have to be imported. . The
cost of purchasing, transporting, and placing large q~ntities of fill
would be extremely high. Clean fill costs approximately $3/cubic yard
in Collier County, yielding a total cost of approximately $36,000,000
.for fill. Even if the funds could be obtained, or sufficient fill ~as
donated, fill of an appropriate composition and grain size vould have to
be located aod the necessary permits vould have to be procured.
An easier and less costly solution would be to simply wait for the
sedimentation process to fill in the deep areas of the bay aDd canals.
'-
It is difficult to estimate how long this process might take. If no
maintenance dredging 1s conducted 1n the body of the bay, a gradual but
"
noticable improvement in flushing 1s expected because of the decreased
volume.
b. Widen the underpasses beneath the Barbour Drive and
Parksbore Drive brid~es.
Increasing the cross eectior.Dl ~re3S of tbe bridge underpasses
could enhaoce flushing of the central and northern segments of the bay
by increasing the flov of water to and from these areas. Widening of
these u0gerpasses would also allow the waters of the three segments of
the bay to intermix more freely. This actloQ would primarily benefit
the northern reaches of the bay through an increased rate of removal of
introduced nutrients and organic detritus. Widening of thes~ under-
\,
passes would be a relatively costly undertaking, since the bridges vould
IV - 29 -
1 I
11
J,
,~
~
.~
t
have to be dC!;ll'oycd llnd ~ebul1t. TIle cost of constl-uctlng a b,'id{;c
over a body of vater 1s approxll11:1l1cy $36/square foot according to
~
estimates from the Florida Dcp.Jl'tment of Transportation. A bridge 30
"
5-
fect vide and 250 feet long \Jould cost approx1..matly $270,000 to con8truct.
.
7i
The cost for reconstructing the bridges at Harbour Drive and ParkGhore
J
.)
;
Drive would be expected to exceed $5,000,000; hovcver, the improved
circulation and vater quality which would accrue could be substantial
enough to warrant serious consideration of the corrective action.
C. ~ntaln existing bathymetric contours at Doctors PaBs
and at bridge und~rpasGe8.
t
i
I
C,~
~;
-j
,....
'~
.
i
'"
~
,
Bathymetric measurements suggest that Doctors Pass aod the bridge
underpasses are subjected to considerable shoaling and infilling (MisGimer
and Associates 1980). Periodic dredging of these areas could improve
flov and. thereby. increase flushing.
This limited ~intenance dredg-
ing should be relatively inexpensive. aod should be considered, State
,.
dredging permits are required and vould need to be obtained before
ma1nte~nce dredging could take place.
i
B.
Alternatives Considered But Not Recommended
i
:.
-!
Six additional alternatives were considered but are Dot recommended.
I
':
Some of these alternatives were proposed by Missimer and Associates
(1980) vhile others had been regarded at the local level as options vhich
might remedy the vater quality problem. Rejection of the alternatives
listed below is based primarily on the limited ~provement in vater
~quality vh1ch vould be expected. the extreme costs. and the possible
detrimental effects to o,ther systems.
(
IV - 30 -
convuun1cDt1on). Placing dprap alone the entire shorcl1nc of HoodnGo
Bay would cost approximately $4,))6,000 to $/~.B)2.000. It 18 douutful
that the degree of improvcmcot in vatcr quality would justify Guch a
large expenditure.
If riprap could b~ acquired at low cost aDd placed using city or
(
.
f
county equipment the cost might be reduced considerably. It 1s also
~
possible that certain areas of shoreline could be identified where the
defraction 1s greatest. R1prap could be placed only at these locations
.~
~,
,
>
It
~
i
i
.
I
::I
If
~
to affect the greatest benefit for the least cost.
3. Construct an Additional Pass to the Gulf
A pa6s could be excavated through the narrow strip of land which
separates the northern reach of the bay from the Gulf. By providing an
10'
additional route of exchange of bay vater and Gulf water, flushing might
~
be increased, particularly in the northern segment of the bay. However.
. .
a
~.
.'
"
i
t
~.
construction of a new pass vould be very difficult to accomplish since
"
'.
the strip of land which separates the bay from the Gulf 1s almost
totally developed. In addition. there 1s an excellent possibility that
~
'"'
4
~
a-
t
the new pass would exper1eoce continuous shoaling. The lack of adequate
undeveloped land through which a pass could be excavated and the expense
~
of creating and ~aIntalnlng a new pass makes thIs alternative an un-
;<
desirable one.
,I.
I.
4. I06tall Culverts to Connect the Canals
Culverts could be installed at the eastern ends of the canals in an
attempt to increase flushing and circulatioo 1n the canals. While some
~ovement of water would take place through the culverts, the magnitude
of exchange would be 9light because there vould be little drl~lng force
\,
IV - 31 -
1. Enlarge ,_t_'~Coflnc~~ct\olC~ Hoo~!~,~_~.i'~_nd Outer CJalll Bay'
Con6ide~8tlon V8S given to replacing th~ cauocvay at Sco&ste Road
with a bridge. nle vidth of t.he connection between the tvo bays would
be increased to approximately 275 feet (Missimer and Associates 1980).
The cost of replacing the causeway ~lth a bridge would be approximately
$300,000. Increased exchange of water between the t\olO bays could enhance
flushing of the northern extremity of the bay. Hovever, 1n order to
prevent excessive dewatering of Clam Bay, a structure vhich would permit
only northerly flow would have to be constructed. Such a structure
would limit tbe potential increase In flushing aDd add to the overall
costs. In addition, the: flow of water from Moorings Bay to Clam Bay
c'ould have a significant negative impact on the water quality of Clam
r
Bay. Activities vhich could significantly degrade the water quality of
.....
a Class II waterbody are stringently regulated. In view of tbe Itmited
benefits expected in terms of flushing of Mooring Bay. the possible ad-
verse consequences for Clam Bay and the sizsble costs. this alternative
is Qot recommended.
2. Place Riprap Along tbe Vertical Seavalls
Ripra,p placed against the concrete seavalls could enhAnce circula-
tion and flow of water. Flov defraction and the formation of eddies at
protruding seawalls vould be decreased. vith an ensuing increase 1n
circulation in the canal. Rlprap would also provide a narrow lone of
shallow vater babitat for organisms which inhabit the bay. The cost of
plac~ng riprap 1s estimated to be betveen $70/11near foot and $90/1inear
foot. The entire shoreline within Moorings Bay Is approximately 64,800
linear feet (Tom McDaniels. Collier County Planning Office. personal
IV - 32 -
.
r
t
,
f
f.
r
"
I
I
l
f
.
~
~~
to induce movement of wllter bet....een the cnda of the c<l1\1l1o. In addition.
p lace..en' of cu 1 ve r'. would nere.. it a' e ex ,en.i ve exr. va,ion 'h<cugh
priva,e developed proper'y, .nd rould gre.'ly inconvenienre ,he lando,,"er..
5. Reroute the Storm Se....er System
The storm se....er system vhich empties into Moorings Bay could be
rerouted to retention or detention areas on land, or to the sanitary
sewer system where it ....ould enter the Naples se....age treatment plant.
This action vauld almost completely eliminate the influx of pollutant
laden fresh....ater into the bay. the improvement in the water quali~y of
the bay which would result from this course of action could be'8ubstan-
"
tial. However, rerouting of the storm sewer system would be extremely
costly and time consuming.
A detailed stormwater study ....as not possible with the l~ted funds
,-,
available for this Phase I Study. Information concerni~g the type and
amount of pollutants which eoter the bay via stormwater would be oecessafy
before large sums of money are spent to reroute the stormwater. In addi-
cion it is doubtful that a sufficient amount of undeveloped land exists
in the vicinity of the bay for the construction of retention or detention
ponds. Diversion of collected runoff to the Naples sewage treacment
plant is inadvisable because the increased burden would overload the
plant and the effluent fro~ the plant is discharged into Naples Bay.
Increasing the load of freshwater and contaminants ....hich enters the
plant could have a ~1gnifl~nt negative ~pact on Naples Bay which 1s
already polluted (Simpson et al. 1979). Therefore. neither of these
methods of rerouting the storm sever system 1s recommended.
....
IV - 33 -
\
\
~OPOSED
-----,
,
i
Cl
c
r
""i
o
'1
J:
fT1
X
>-~
n
o
f
SCALE
, ,'- r----r-...---,
o .5
M1LES
CLAM
PASS
DRIVE \
_J
f':X! fllll 'I' ,\
- -..
(
ci
I
(")
~
So
u::
;:::
1~
o
5
o
-
en
-
CIS
o
~
~/---' i
//J~ I
l~
Ie:
~
,
,.Bays./
-,--.--,"-.,--
Save The Bays Assodation
Is a aonprofit OI"pft~OD
Dedieated to preserving the quality
and Davigability of the water iD the
bays inside Doctors Pass
Board of Directors
SteYe Burberry
Dave Craig
Dudley Herndon
AI Katz
Bill KroescheII
Will Larson
BIll Lazear
Dan Spina
Jon Staiger
Marilyn Tempest
Ed Ten Eyck
Michael Wiliams
OffIcers
ChaIrman Emerilus - Dan SpIna
Pre8ident - M8riIyn Tempest
VIC8- President - Ed Ten Eyck
Treasurer - Dudley Herndon
Email: ,
S8vAttlebavs8aol.com
Web SIte:
www-SaVethebavs.com
..h"~-~-'.'--'-~,,~,~ :...;..;:..~_:-.-..-~..,.~ __ _ _4
Web Site
Ed Ten Eyck is doing ~
_ m~gnificent job of adding so
much information to our site! He
has pictures of all current -
bappenU1gs, all of our Reports,
and has links to all city meetings
and news items for your
information. We have tide and
depth information on the site for
the boaters and fisherpersons. Our
Web Site can be found at:
www.savethebays.com..
Check it out!
The Save the Bays Report
Vc:~a 6 August 2008
ANNUAL MEETING
Save the Bays held its annual meeting on April 8, 2008.
Director Doug Finley had resigned and Steve Burberry was
selected as a Director. All directors were reelected. Dr. Bauer,
City Natural Resources Manager, gave us a report of the new
testing regulations from the State of Florida and he included
information on the water quality of Naples Bay, Moorings
Bay and Clam Bay. Director Bill Kroeschell reported from the
Mooring Bay Advisory Committee, and Councilman John Sorey
. - -rold-us-aboutthe new-€ity fertilizer regulations:-Birector-Al'~~--_..
Katz gave an exhaustive report on current projects, summarized
below. The minutes of our annual meeting are on our web site
along with pictures (www.savethebays.com). If anyone wishes to
receive a paper copy of our minutes and Treasurer's report, please
contact us.
Director Bill Lazear bas provided the latest depth charts of
Moorings Bay, attached below.
WHAT GOES ON HERE
As the summer progresses, we want to bring our membership
up to date on what Save The Bays bas been working on to help
improve and maintain the Moorings Bay System.
-.- Water QUaJity: . We:continue-to-monitof-,-on a- quarterly= basis~'-, -
in co-opera.tion with the Conservancy, our water quality. We
measure, at five locations Within the Bay and one location in the
Gulf, for things such as water clarity, oxygen levels, nitrogen,
phosphorus and the like. You can check our 8m web site (http://
www.savethebays.coml) for the latest results. Also, we used to
do the same testing at four locations in Clam Bay, but our source
for boat transportation left us. Also if anyone would like to go out
while we do the regular testing in Moorings Bay, just let us know.
Oysters/Clams: This year long project will come to an end this
fall. A detailed report will be prepared by our grantee at FGCU.
So far, our grants for this project to FGCU have amounted to