CAC Agenda 03/11/2010 R
Collier County: March 11, 2010
Page 1 of2
March 11,2010
MEETING AGENDA & NOTICE
MEETING AGENDA &. NOTICE
COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC)
THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 2010 - 1:00 P.M.
TURNER BUILDING (Administrative Building F, 3rd Floor Collier County Government Center,
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, naples)
PUBLIC NOTICE
I. Call to Order
II. Pledge of Allegiance
III. Roll Call
IV. Changes and Approval of Agenda
V. Public Comments
VI. Approval of CAC Minutes
1. Januarv 14. 2010
VII. Staff Reports
1. EXDanded Revenue ReDort - Garv McAIDin
2. Proiect Cost ReDort - Garv McAIDin
VIII. New Business
1. ADDointment of Marco ReDresentative to the CAC
2. Appointment of CAC Member to the Clam Bay Subcommittee
3. ADril 8. 2010 Agenda Item: Fiscal Year 2011 ProDosed Budget Plan: Grant
ADDlication Presentation: and Forcasted Revenue Fiscal Year 2011
4. FEMA Reimbursement UDdate and Status of our Mandatorv Reserve
Accounts
a. BackuD Material
5. Wiggins Pass Subcommittee UDdate/Status
a. BackuD Material
6. Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan Work Team Recommendations
7. Clam Bav Subcommittee UDdate/Status
a. BackuD Material
8 Best Value Offer CBVO} Pavment Issues with the Clerk Of Courts
a. BackuD Material
9. CAC Workshop with Pelican Bay Community
10. Consulting Services with James Lee Witt Associates
a. BackuD Material
11. Vanderbilt Beach - Beach Park Facilities
a. BackuD Material
IX. Old Business
1. NaDles Outfall PiDes Permit ComDliance
a.~
2. Wanless Report
a. Marsha Cravens -E-mails
b. Wanless review of PBS&.J ReDort
http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=2899
2/14/2011
Collier County: March 11,2010
Page 2 of2
X. Announcements
XI. Committee Member Discussion
XII. Next Meeting Date/Location
April 8, 2010 - Government Center, Administration Bldg. F, 3rd Floor
XIII. Adjournment
All interested parties are invited to attend, and to register to speak and to submit their objections, if any, in
writing, to the board prior to the meeting if applicable.
For more information, please contact Gail D. Hambright at (239) 252-2966.
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 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112,
(239) 252-8380.
Public comments will be limited to 3 minutes unless the Chairman grants permission for additional time.
Collier County Ordinance No. 99-22 requires that all lobbyists shall, before engaging in any lobbying
activities (including, but not limited to, addressing the Board of County Commissioners) before the Board of
County Commissioners and its advisory boards, register with the Clerk to the Board at the Board Minutes
and Records Department.
http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=2899
2/14/2011
o
C; <Jl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
'" '"
:2UJex>
0"";'"::
<l:=O
()>~
e .. ... ~ .. ..
~ ... ... - a a
a - ... ::~ ~ ~..
.,; c ,.:
.. ... .... .. ... ... ...
'e- a .. .. .. .. ..
:i~ N ~...~ N
.. ...... ... ....,.... ...
.. ~ :-:- i~
u
e
.!!! o co.. "'.. co..'"
~ 5~;;
~
"ii
a
u
<(
"ii
::l ~~S~~
e
e
<( .... (~
! :.......~
.=....~::
.. .......~
"S
e
e IIIII
0 ::l
.... 0 liiii
0
N
.
en ~
0 '"
0 "tl
N ::l
lD
>- "ii ggggggg~=::g a
u.. ::l a
e ..
e en.. ~ :.. :.. ~ :.. ::;.. .0 ,..: N iN"' 0 a'
t <( ~ ~ ~ t;:; ~ ~ :..~=t:..~.. ..
~ a
0 .......""'..N..'fIIt..U;cri'O.....""'NM :f
c.. .. .....................;;;;:; ...
Gl "S
It: e
e
Gl ::l
~ 0
r::
Gl
>
Gl
It:
)( .. cnNUi"O'N"
u
e "'It.....ONO
CI:l .;! oC>>.......,...
I- 'Ii an" N t4 0"
.. iN"'''''........
+' > .".~e~!!.
III
.;::
~
0 "ii
I- a cnco....~=
u
<( ....oocnwW)
>. en.. en.. t:t ...: ro"' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
:E :::~~t;..................ttt
'E
0 ......-:;;
::;;
~
'" a
"tl ooogggggoooo a
::l a
lD OQ oo..............coo 0
:":i~";!~"~" ~;"' ~~..:.. ~ a'
>. ..
S ....0.....0........."''''".............. a
:::.;;~~ti~:::: ....
e :;;
0
::;;
i
"tl
::l a
lD :::i~=~~~~~~~N a a
"ii .... ci
::l M...tu)cD~~:!~U;uiui ..; ~
e
e
<(
~
9
...
a
>-
u.
..
~~~o~o o~ j!
...!j~~~~~~~:j {!.
J E E!! l'lI ~=E >-!.2'!I E
S lD lD C 2l'l1 ~~:J:J OIlD
~~~.!I~:E4: "'"J"'"J.ii
zc <Jl
o
~
OVl
Nt
_ 0
..- Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
'" '"
:2U5~
~~O
U>N
x
<l:
l-
I-
VI
ii:
:l
o
I-
>
I-
Z
:l
o
u
a:
w
:::;
.....
o
u
~I
'"
cl
t-
~
::;
0:
~
,.
~
i
~
~I
~I
~I
~
II
~
II
I
I
il
....
CO
....
....
'"
..
M
<I>
N
o
OJ
,,'
Et
~
N
S~
'"
N
~
~
~
~
'"
~'
;;t
~
en
....
a
en
~
~'
'"
~
d
e::
'"
~
en
~'
'"
;q
a
::l
en
a
o
en
en
en'
~
'"
.,.
OJ
!
'"
~
o
~
co
o
....
,..:
'"
'"
M
<I>
'"
~~
~
OJ
'"
N
.,.'
a
~
.,.
",-
~
'"
"
.,.
en
",-
~
'"
N
en
0"
~
'"
'"
:1:
0'
~
'"
en
'"
en'
Et
'"
o
"
a
~
~
N
:!l
~'
;;t
'"
.,.
...
~
.,.
'"
OJ
a
"
g
!::!.
'"
~
\D
..
....
.;
...
....
M
<I>
'"
;!
~
'"
....
~,
~
'"
~
",'
~
OJ
'"
en
g
OJ
en
'"
:i
~
...
~
~-
'"
'"
~
o
~-
'"
'"
"
.,.
"
.,.'
*
....
'"
...
",'
~
o
"
.,.
a
'"
'"
N
.,.'
"
;;:
.,.
en
o
a
OJ
o
~
o
~
\D
\D
...
o
'"
...
M
<I>
......
",'"
o"!.
.'"
0..
"'...
.... .
.'"
......
<1><1>
'"
OJ
...
~
....
...
\D
.;
..
'"
<I>
:1:
o
a
..
....
...
....
co
\D
<I>
'"
~
E'
'"
'"
\D
'"
rtJ
co
'"
<I>
.,.
~
~
o
~
.D
'"
co
<I>
~
'"
~'
'"
'"
....
...
M
'"
'"
....
<I>
;;
'"
~-
.,.
'"
'"
'"
....
,..:
..
'"
N
<I>
....
N
'"
~'
'"
'"
'"
...
'"
...
'"
.....
<I>
'"
OJ
en
d
o
:;:
'"
'" co
o ....
...,., ..;
5~
'" .....
<I>
...
'"
'"
~'
'"
'"
:~
N.. N
.,....
~ ....
"'....
<I>
'"
R
en'
~
co
.... '"
~.. "!.
N '"
~ ~
"'<I>
'"
;;
;'
'"
'"
"'....
R.. C7!.
" ....
.,. ....
a~
...
'"
en
~r
'"
'"
"''''
:;:...
N' en-
o ...
a~
en
~
o
~
o ..
.... ....
~ <
-....
~ 0
~ ....
'" .... .... 0 DO DO DO
.... DO a> '" o:t '" 0
0 ;!: " 0 " '" "'!.DO
C; <Jl 0 en ..... ,.; ". '" ISi
>- DO o:t a> o:t o:t ....
Nt ~ .... .... \D .... 0 '"
, 0 tit: rr1 rr1 rr1 rr1 ,..j" o:t'
~ Co :l'i <J> <J> <J> <J> <J> ....
~ Q) <J>
.r;:O:: >-
~~ M ~ '" N
g ... 12
I 0 .... '"
:2U)~ ~' ",- ~ S' a>
~ N o:t
~~O '" '" '" .n
a>
U>C":l \D
<J>
::l M M '"
~ N '"
'" ... "' '"
II "" ...- ",- '" '"
0 ~ ... E: DO
,';( N .n
'"
'"
DO
<J>
'" "' ~ :1;
g '"
"' 0 '" '"
~- a ",- '"
~ N E: "
'" 0
o:t
a>
<J>
M '" "' "'
'" M ~ ~
.... "' '"
M- '" ! i o:t
~ );t N o:t
N ,';(
'" N
'"
DO
<J>
0 '" N "'
0 [;; 0 '" '"
0 '" '" '"
...- a ...- ~ DO
~I a 0 '" .n
~ '" DO
'"
,..j"
X <J>
cl:
~ ~ '" ... N
~ ... '" '" '"
... '" ~- '"
VI ",' ~' ",' DO
;:;: !I a '" ....
'" ... ,..j"
::l 0 '" '" '" ....
0 z '"
::5 N
~ <J>
> !!!
~ 0 "' '" '" '"
z u '" ~ :;; M "
... 0
::l II:: g a ~ :;;' 0
0 <( ~ '"
:i: ;J. rr1
u 0
a:: 0
u.I ",'
::; <J>
.....
0 ... "' '" :;: ...
u ~ '" ~ ~, ~
I i N
...- "'- N- (6"t
~ ~ a
'" Zi~
DO
,..j"
<J>
:;: ~ 0 '" '"
0 ~, M '"
0 0 g "'. '"
II ",' ",' ~~
~ ~ ~
'" "'....
'"
,..j"
<J>
N M ~, '" '"
M '" "' M
~ '" '" ~ "'_ o:t
....- .... "'DO
~ ~ ~ ~q
'" "'DO
'"
"
<J>
~ '" ... '" N
:;; :l: :::: N
II ... "'. DO
a :::f ",- "'- "' '"
'" ~ ~ ~C!.
"'o:t
a>
\D
<J>
'" .... '" ~ ~
:e :l: ~ "'_ DO
~ ~ ",- ~' ",' ... '"
~ ~ ~tt
'" "''''
'"
'"
<J>
~ '" .... "' '" .:..;
0 0 0 0
s ~ ~ 0 g ;::
!::!.
"' "'
is 0 0 N 0
~ ~ 0 ;;'1-
N N 0
0
N
o
......
OVl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
...... Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
'" '"
:2UJ~
~~O
U><t
X
<t
l-
I-
V>
ii:
=>
o
I-
>
I-
Z
=>
o
u
a::
w
:::i
....
o
u
w
w
....
<
::.t
o
~
~
~ I
~
I-
~
'"
<(
...
..
II
il
~I
~I
~I
~I
il
II
I
II
II
~
~I
M
lfl
....
<is
....
..".
N
....
m
;;i
N
o
'"
;;i
~
...
...-
<f>
o
o
'"
;;i
'"
~
;;i
~
o
~
~
....
<f>
m
ill
;;i
~
~
'"
~
;;i
...
:'1
...-
<f>
N
~
'"
o
i
lfl
....
'"
,.:
....
..".
~
;;i
'"
.,
1;>
..
o
~
'"
'"
..
;;i
...
m
;;i
N
.,
'"
;;i
N
m
'"
;;i
....
a
...
..
..
tf
:;;
.,
;;i
.,
'"
N
....
<f>
'"
~
;;i
....
~
"'
o
~
00
lfl
'"
....'
....
..".
a
.,
.,
;h
~
'"
<f>
....
*
...
~
;;i
'"
o
.,
N'
<f>
.,
N
.,
<f>
'"
..
....
<f>
!
~
'"
..
1;>
...
~
.,
~
....
o
o
N
....
lfl
'"
<is
..".
~~
N"!.
-'"
Mlfl
.."...".
'"
'"
;h
'"
N
lfl
M
..".
...
....
'"
<f>
....
oo:t
lfl
M
..".
m
N
1;>
....
lfl
'"
M
..".
i
....
....
00
.;
..".
..
!
N
N
'"
'"
..".
N
'"
'"
<f>
o
'"
....
....'
..".
~
;;i
oo:t
M
....
'"
..".
.,
o
~
o
~ ~
~yj
..".
:;;
;j(
..C!i
"''''
... .
<f> lfl
..".
~
;j(
M
~~ ~
., '"
..".
m
'"
"'
<f>
N
~ ~
~tti
..".
o
...
..
<f>
lfl
"''''
rDC7t
<f> '"
..".
'"
o
~
~
.:..;
~ <
~ b
(;;-1-
o
~
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
'" '"
:2UJex>
()~::
<l:=O
U>1O
x
cl:
I--
I--
VI
a:
~
o
I--
>
I--
Z
~
o
U
0::
w
:::i
.....
o
u
~
U
VI
w
o
:5
I.:l
0::
w
>
w
'"
;;t.
l-
I-
~
'"
;;'j
>
I
~
~I
~I
~I
II
~I
II
II
I
II
~
il
'"
'<l"
...
a;
DO
<II-
n
m
m
m'
<I>
N
~
:;j,
:;!;
a
o
G;
:;c;
m
N
V
a
;;';
m
~-
<I>
~
a
<D
'"
'"
zf
n
N
'"
~
m
'"
...
:;j,
N
N
'"
~
<D
~
<'i
<D
~
~
DO
'"
'"
.;
o
...
<II-
...
...
<D
m'
<I>
n
o
n
:;j,
g:
a
m
'"
<D
~
N
'"
n
~
~
~'
<I>
<D
<D
...
~
v
'"
'"
E:
n
<D
'"
zf
'"
o
...
~
N
o
<D
~
~
<D
:;j,
...
o
~
"'
~
'"
'"
...
.;
o
...
<II-
n
'"
v
~
~
:;j,
~
v'
<I>
n
'"
'"
E:
~
~
is
'"
~'
<I>
N
m
..
~
~
'"
E:
~
...
zf
m
:;0
~
~
;:
'"
n
o
:;j,
'"
o
~
...
o
~
'"
'<l"
...
'"
'"
<II-
",'"
DOO
o ....
....
IIlN
,." '<l"
<11-<11-
...
v
;:
'"
,."
'"
'"
...
<II-
g:
...
~
DO
N
...
v5
...
<II-
N
o
m
~
...
N
...
iii
...
<II-
N
'"
'"
~
'"
,."
...
.;
,."
<II-
'"
....
'"
~
...
...
N
a;
'<l"
<II-
<D
~
",'
~
o
o
N
N
'"
<II-
5
~
<I>
N
III
...
....
'"
<II-
:;:
a
m '"
N '"
V,O
N aQ
~~
...
'"
'"
",'
<I>
...
v'"
~ N
~3
<II-
~
:;c;
'"
<D III
RN..
",' 0
<I> ,."
<II-
'"
...
'"
:;j,
'"
m '"
~ ,."
~~
<II-
'"
v
v
~
DO
'" '"
~ort
",- DO
<I> ...
<II-
m
~
~
~
g .:.i
~t:
gO
NI-
.... ~ 0 N 0 Ul ....
'" 01 ~ .... N ~ ....
0 .... .... N .... 00 O"!.
,... 0 .,; ..... ..... .,; '01
o <Jl .... OlN
Nt ~ 00 0 .... 0 UlUl
.0 .... ~ N 01 .... .
~ Co II: iii ,..: ,..: .,; '01
:$ NN
~ Q) <f> <f> <f> <f> <f><f>
.r;:O:: >-
~lI:: '"
'" '" II
:2UJex> N ~ 0 ot '"
'" ~ :i1 0
U~: ot iii
r;f ", a ~ '"
<(:::0 oo
N ~ 0
u><O V> V> ...
<f>
Ul
I N .... * 0 '"
.... '" ~ N
N ... .,;
a ",' ~' m' 01
a '" ~ N
V> ...
<f>
0
0 ~ ~ m 01
.... N ~
~ oo ot .....
* oo' a & ....
* '"
...
<f>
Ul
N l'l '" '" ~
~ ... 0 ot ....
N ot ot ~ 00
'" ",' m' '"
'" * .... ....
;J. ;J. ...
<f>
~
ot ~ '" ::!l '"
m '" '"
~I ot 0 0 ... .,;
...' ",' :<:- ",' '"
~ '" ~ 00
t;> t;> V> N
x <f>
<l:
l-
I- '" N 0 oo '"
VI 00
ot N 0 .... ....
ii: ~I '" 0 '" '"
> ...' :;: ~ 6 .,;
::l I- ::. '" Ul
z a 0 0
0 :J ;;f ;;f .,;
I-
1= 0 <f>
U
Z a: N
w
::l :::i ~ m .... .... 00
il ~ N 0
0 ... N .... oo
U 0 ;~ ~~ N' ... .....
u ~ '" 00
ex: .... ~
;;f ;;f ..... ~
w V> ~.
:::; <f>
....
0
u '"
II '" ot '" N m ....
m ~ .... .... '" N
ot ... 0 ... .
....' ::0' m' .~
...",
* ot :;: '"
~ t;> V> .
~
<f>
0
i 0 .... ot '" N '"
~ m ot ot N 01
m 0 ... ~, ~
~ ot' N' ~
~ 0 ;;: ....
'"
V> V> V> V> V>N
<f>
II '"
m '" oo ... '" ....
~ g: ;1; m ot 0
0 .... .
",' ~- ....' ",' r--.' m
ot '" ffi ~ ....
;J. ot ;J.
V> V> .
N
<f>
II 0
... '" ~ ~ 00
.. ~ Gl....
'" ot '" .
& oo- N' ....' . '"
'" ~ a ~~
'"
V> V> .
....
<f>
II .... 0 '" oo ....
m .... '" ~ N '"
.... N 0 N Ul
ot ",- a ! ",- 00
& ~ a~
<f>
il '" .... oo m ~..:..i
I 0 0 ~
3. 3. l'l<
'" ~ ~ ~b
0
l'l l'll-
I en N ... ID en "
\11 DO DO '" 0 ID
0 " ID ID ... "'''!.
~ ",,' rsi .,; .,; , "
o <Jl '" N en "" "'"
Nt \11 N " '" "",
. 0 ... .; .; N "" ,
~ Co 'en
~ Q) ... ... ... ... ""\11
.r;:O:: <Il- <Il- <Il- <Il- <Il-<Il-
~lI:: DO
'" '" ;
:2UJ~ oo '" ~ " 0
en ~ 0 ID
en '" " ...
~~O ",' ~ ",' en' N
.; ~ ~ '"
U>.... N
<Il-
ID
~ " '" '" '" '"
;\ ~ ;g '" en
'" ~
g ~ ~ * '"
DO
'" N
<Il-
"
'" .... '" .... \11
;\ g ~ '" \11
~I :;, .,;
;;: ",' ID
'" ~
{;; " DO
'" N
<Il-
\11
'" '" '" :;; '"
> ~I ;\ 0 ~ ""
'" '" v5
I- "J,- ,,' ",- OO' "
Z 0 '" ~
::l ~ en ~ ""
'" '" ...
0 <Il-
U
a:
w ...
:::; '" ~ '" ~ ID
0 '" ~ '" ""
~I oo oo cii
o' ....' .... gf
U ~ ~ ... 0
~ ~ 00
> ;;f ;;f .,;
X I-
iJ <Il-
<(
I- III
W
I- 0 en oo '" ID
~ 0
VI c( :~ 0 '" ""
ii: .... ~I ... '"
I!l ~' ~f ;:f .,;
~ a: '" DO
'" '" ... 0 "
0 W ~ ~ ~ ",- cii
I- \111> '"
.... W <Il-
> :: ~
I-
Z 0.... DO
~ I- c( ~ .... N .... N
0 ~ i 0 ... :l: '"
oo .... v5
u 0 ....' ~~ ~~ ~'
:!: ;\ " ID
r:r:: '" DO
... ~ ",' ~ ~ ....- rsi
:::; '" '" <Il-
..... 0
0 Z
u :3 '" N '"
II ~ ~ ~ 0
'" ~ N
!:!! ~. ~ ~"l.
~' ~~ ",- OO' "
0 '" '" "'0
U ... a '" ~.. oct
a: ....- ;;f ;;f
'" ",DO
c( <Il-
:!:
III \11
w II .... N ~ :;; li5 en
.... .... a :Jl
... N ... " ",'1
c( oo ::f 6 ,,' ...' ...
Z ~ ;\ 2 ~ <t
a ~ :::.. "t
;;f ;;f ",\11
<Il-
II DO
'" .... N ~ '" DO
'" ~ g: '" ...
" 0 0.. 0
~' g:- 0' oo' ~&.
li5 '"
oo ~ {;;
'" '" "'<t
<Il-
II en
'" oo '" '" ID
~ '" oo ;\ ~.. ~
'" N
g ~ en' * '" DO
oo E1~
'"
'"
<Il-
...
I '" '" oo m '" DO
~ ~ '" ",0
'" ~ oo '" '
a ~. ! . \11
;q
;;. "'N
<Il-
il '" " oo en o ..
~ a ~ ~ .... ....
~ ~ c(
-I-
'" ~ oo ~ 0
~ 0 0
~ ~ ~ I-
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
,0
'<"" Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~15
"'-
:2U)~
~db
O>CXl
x
<
l-
I-
V)
ii:
:J
o
I-
>
I-
Z
:J
o
U
a::
w
::;
....
o
u
I-
Z
w
~
I-
a:
c(
D-
c(
~
;!:
...
~
"
:5
,..
II
I
~I
~I
~I
~I
il
II
II
II
I
I
il
en
o
or
,.;
M
<I>
g:
<f>
~
o
...
r-
;;f
'"
...
...
;f.
...
~
;;f
'"
'"
...
~
'"
r-
o
~
r-
...
;:
...
'"
'"
;;f
~
~
'"
'"
...
~-
<f>
'"
~
o
;;:
co
o
.....
,..:
.....
<I>
~
r-
...
...
;;f
'"
'"
'"
<f>
...
'"
'"
<f>
~
o
'"
~-
<f>
'"
...
'"
1i
'"
...
...
...-
'"
'"
r-
...
;;:[
2
:;;
'"
;;f
o
'"
'"
'"
'"
o
...
,j[
r-
o
~
'"
~
1.0
or
or
rtJ
.....
<I>
a
'"
~
"'
...
;:
r-
~
~
,j[
:l:
"'
~
'"
:l:
;f.
~
o
'"
~
o
r-
r-
,j[
~
'"
...
'"
r-
,j[
'"
~
'"
~
r-
o
;;:
M
...
.....
,..j"
.....
<I>
~
.'h
'"
~
'"
...
Zl
s
t;;
~
;;f
g:
...
1i
'"
~
...-
'"
~
:;;
;;:[
o
o
r-
;;f
'"
'"
~
~-
'"
~
~
~
'"
"'
...
~
'"
o
S
o
o
'"
....
"'0
1.0'"
P!. ro....
co....
<I> ....
<I>
.....
....
'"
<I>
'"
1.0
co
....'
<I>
1.0
.....
co
'"
<I>
...
1.0
M
<D
<I>
.....
M
....
,..:
<I>
...
1.0
or
....'
M
<I>
o
or
....
a\
....
<I>
co
~~
",- ....
"'.....
<I>
.....
'"
r- ...
r- ,
",- ....
'" ....
<I>
or
...M
~~
<I>
....
"' en
~'"
"''''
<I>
...
o
~ N...
'" '"
<I>
~ .:.;
;;: c(
-I-
g: 0
;;: I-
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~~
"'-
:2U)~
~~O
U>cn
x
<C
l-
I-
VI
a:
::J
o
I-
~
Z
::J
o
U
a::
UJ
.=i
....
o
u
:!:
::l
Z
~
o
o
z
o
u
..
....
"
>-
[2
::;
'"
:;'j
..
II
II
~I
~I
~I
;1
~I
i
~
II
I
I
II
....
<Xl
o
,..:
....
.....
if>
o
:;;
*
....
on
o
~
on
o
en
s:
....
:'\
a
on
'"
en
a
:g
'"
~
'"
....
...
....'
"
~
""
[;:;
R
"
'"
~
;;.
....
en
""
~
'"
~
~
on
....
....
a
'"
I
.....
....
N
o
....
<Xl
if>
'"
en
""
a
on
~
~
""
'"
'"
~
""
~
~-
<f>
on
...
...
a
o
;;
~'
'"
<f>
....
~
",,'
~
~
en'
~
en
""
o
....-
'"
<f>
....
on
"
a
on
...
'"
~
....
'"
o
9:
...
o
3.
~
'"
<Xl
....
v5
'"
en
if>
'"
~
'"
'"
~
~
'"
~
<f>
....
:<l
Et
'"
o
'"
0'
~
~~
.7,
:J!;
o
",'
~
'"
~
a
....
:;;
0'
~
~
'"
",'
:;(
""
'"
en
~
en
::.
~
""
~
~
'"
'"
N
v5
'"
<Xl
if>
'"
""
en
a
~
~
...
en'
~
....
'"
~~
<f>
'"
~
a
~
""
...'
'"
'"
<f>
~
'"
....-
~
<f>
on
o
""
....'
en
<f>
en
o
""
a
&J
R
~
a
'"
~
~-
<f>
en
~
o
~
~~
.... .....
......
.....0
en",
.... .
if>'"
if>
N
N
'"
v5
'"
if>
'"
....
'"
'"
'"
if>
....
N
.....
,..:
.....
if>
....
<Xl
....
,,;
o
....
if>
en
o
'"
,..;
'"
N
if>
N
'"
....
~
N
'"
.....
if>
en
<Xl
'"
,..:
'"
.....
if>
'"
'"
"'en
'" .
(;)~ ~
<f>....
if>
'"
en N
"" .....
~~
<f>N
if>
.....
~~
:;f ~
<f> ....
if>
~ ~
",,,,
-::r~ rtt:t'
....'"
<f>if>
...'"
...en
.,N
m~ ai'
~~
.:.i
i~
o
~
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
...... Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
ro.gCO
:2(J)~
()~O
<l:::!:O
u>~
x
c:(
I--
I--
V!
ii:
:J
o
I--
i:
z
:J
o
U
r:t:
...
:::;
.....
o
u
:.:
a:
c:(
0..
:>
a:
o
Z
::l
o
a:
Cl
0..
~
5
--'
;!:
~
~
~
..
II
I
~I
~
~I
~I
il
II
i
I
II
~
il
o
...
co
'"
'"
...
<f>
~
m-
V>
m
~
m
~
;!
""
~
~
m
m
:i
...
~
~
a
~
~
m
""
'"
a
'"
~
~
?:
'"
~
f;l
""
'"
V>
'"
g
,?i
'"
~
o
::'l
III
co
od"
N-
od"
...
<f>
~
~-
V>
'"
"
'"
,?i
'"
:l;
",-
V>
""
'"
'"
",-
V>
'"
""
OJ
sf
'"
'"
"
~
~
'"
'"
,,-
'"
V>
'"
""
'"
5
~
'"
E:
'"
...
'"
a
'"
""
"
t.
~
~
...
o
::'l
~
::'l
'"
o
'"
N-
'"
...
<f>
~
",-
V>
:'l
"
,?i
'"
'"
o
~
o
""
...
",-
<I>
'"
'"
'"
'"
~
V>
~
N
~
'"
~
~
~
o
:::f
V>
'"
~
o
~
OJ
'"
~
~
~
",-
V>
'"
~
OJ
,?i
OJ
o
~
~
co
o
III
rtS
od"
...
<f>
.....'"
0'"
N"!.
''''
\Do
od"\D
<f><f>
~
vf
;
Q
...
<f>
a
.....
\D
\D
Q
...
<f>
~
'"
,?i
III
co
'"
....
...
<f>
~
'"
""
",-
V>
\D
'"
...
rtS
...
<f>
~
:!l
~
\D
'"
'"
,.,;
od"
<f>
""
~
0-
3.
\D
'"
III
.;
od"
...
<f>
'"
'"
""
",-
'"
V>
o
o
od"
....
...
...
<f>
~
'"
o
~
.....
9~
~~
V> ...
<f>
'"
'"
""
a
~:!:
...0
m"' 0
~ .....
V><f>
'"
~
t.
o
'" od"
~"!.
",' od"
V> '"
<f>
'"
~
'"
~
o
'" \D
'" III
'" .
",- \D
V> ...
<f>
~
'"
,?i
'"
od"
"'Ill
"" -
",- '"
V> ...
<f>
'"
~
OJ
o
::'l
~ .:.;
::'l c:(
~b
::'l I-
.. '" '" 0 II> Oll' '"
.... '" '" DO II>
~ DO DO
0 .... 0 Oll' ... oll!.
..- .... ...' M rtJ <Ii 'II>
OVl Oll' 0 '" ....'"
Nt ~ Oll' DO .... Oll' "''''
, 0 '" 0 0 ....' '" .... ,
..- Co rtJ '....
:1i .... .... .... "I.,
~ Q) <I> <1><1>
.r;:O:: >- <I> <I> <I>
~lI:: 0
co.!9c:o I '" .... ~ '" 0
:2U)~ '" .... '" ....
U~'O 0 m " .. ,..:
<Xl- a m- :;;:' 0
<l:=~ <Xl ~ 0
u>~ :J, :J, ",'
<I>
'"
i ... :i1 .... ~ "I
'" ;; II>
'" '" '" rtJ
",- ~ ...- a '"
* .. Oll'
'"
'" '" N
<I>
0
.... .... " ~ "I
.. ~ .... "I
~ .. .. en
....- ....- :!l- ..- DO
.. .. <Xl
'" '" 1;> :J, Oll'
'" '" N
<I>
....
R ;;; ... m Oll'
~ g m "I
.... ... ...'
:g- gf * ...
,'jl ,'jl 0
M
<I>
" " <Xl '"
:;; ....
" ~ :!: ....
~I <Xl <Xl en
~' ~' 6 ~-
[;; ....
0 '"
v: v: v: v: .;
<I>
on ....
g ~ ~ ...
X m "I
!I .. '" ~~ <Xl
cl: :!:- ,,- 0- ...i'
I- ... ;; Oll'
... .... II>
l- v: ....- v: v: <Ii
V'l '"
a: <I>
::::l ....
0 w '"
.... '" '" m ;!; "I
I- 0 ~I .. ... 0 II>
'" .. on '"
~ 4= ~~ ,,- ~' ..- ...'
~ .. '"
z .... :l DO
W v: ....- v:
::::l .... '" '" ui
0 0 <I>
U :I:
a:: ~
LJJ II .... ~ <Xl :'l
:::; on " :::~
... .. '" '"
..... E' m- ~ 0' "I
0 :!: :'l' .... ....
u v: v: 8: ~, ~
",Oll'
<I>
"I
I on :;: <Xl ;!; " '"
.. 0 oDO
" 0 '" '" .... .
....- ..- ",- ..' ,,- '"
'" & ::: ~ ....0
... ...'"
'" '" '" .
"I
<I>
II "I
.. ~ ~ on Oll'
:::: " ~ '"
on .. .
~- m- m- ....- '"
* <Xl ....0
1;> ;R '" DO
'" '" .
'"
<I>
II ...
g 0 gJ ~ 0
'" ::l Oll'
.. 0 '" .. .
[;;- a 6 ....- ",- '"
0 :;; '" Oll'
.. '" .. ....
'" '" '" '" '
'"
<I>
0
I :;; .. :'l m <Xl ...
;!; :'; ....'"
0 '" ~'~
..- ....- ~- ~
~ a :J, m Oll'
'" .
....
<I>
I '" .... <Xl '" ~ .:.i
0 0 ~ 0
0 i s ~ c(
~ -....
... ~o
0 0 0
~ " ~ ~ ~ ....
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
ro,!gCO
:2U)~
U--O
<(=N
u>~
x
<(
l-
I-
III
ii:
:l
o
I-
>
I-
Z
:l
o
U
a:
...
::::;
.....
o
u
.....
c(
>
II:
LU
I-
~
C/
....
....
~
""
~
>
I
I
~
~
il
51
il
I
II
I
II
II
I
~
o
'"
cD
....
<I>
o
~
~
'"
....
....
~
o
....
...
:f.
N
~
.,
'"
'"
'"
r-
8i
o
'"
""
a
'"
'"
~
'"
'"
o
r--
'"
...
m
o
:f.
C;
'"
zi
~,
'"
'"
'"
~
'"
I
...
...
~
cD
~
...
<I>
'"
'"
o
~
....
N
N
N
....
'"
o
'"
N
",'
'"
m
""
o
8i
...
ill
~
o
;.';
~-
'"
....
~
~
~
~
N
l'l
*
'"
'"
'"
8i
....
'"
'"
zi
'"
g
N-
'"
...
o
Jl
'"
o
~
'"
....
'"
,..:
...
...
<I>
m
m
m
~
...
:e
~
'"
....
N
~
:';
'"
~
m
....
~
o
~
~
""
r-
o
~-
'"
'"
m
""
a
'"
....
r-
*
~
~
'"
'"
N
~
r-
~
~
'"
~
~
~
...
....
o
<Ii
~
...
<I>
"'....
",'"
",C2l.
'en
0....
....'"
<1><1>
...
~
a
'"
...
...
o
...
<I>
~
~-
'"
o
\D
~
o
~
<I>
'"
""
""
::1-
'"
~
\D
\D
en
N
<I>
o
'"
o
~
'"
....
'"
.;
...
<I>
...
'"
'"
....-
N
'"
N
\D
~
,.;
\D
<I>
'"
ll:
~-
'"
...
'"
\D
""
...
<I>
o
'"
'"
~
~
....
\D
.,;
\D
<I>
'"
o
'"
:';-
'"
~~
",,0
f" 0\
.... ....
"'<I>
~
..
*
~ ~
.... N
0'" ..n
~~
r-
:il
~
......
r- ...
Nen
tr)' ~...
~~
m
N
~
N
'" ....
~f'l'!.
zf~
<I>
r-
'"
'"
:f.
~ ~
.... '"
6';
.... N
"'<I>
'"
~
~
~ .:.i
~ c(
-I-
l'lo
~ I-
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
.0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
m.f!oo
:2cn..-
U~O
<C::M
u>~
x
Cl:
l-
I-
III
a:
:J
o
I-
>
I-
Z
:J
o
U
a:
w
:::;
.....
o
u
""
Ill:
<(
...
w
:::!
o
:I:
w
....
ai
o
:::!
<I
I-
o
I-
~
'"
:1i
>-
il
~
VI
~
~
~
il
~I
il
I
i
II
I
I
~
...
...
'"
<!r'
""
N
'"
::\
'"
ill
'"
~
"'
'"
"'
;;;
~
N-
'"
'"
...
:;;
'"
El
g
~
'"
N
~
m
'"
~
'"
i
~
...
<!r
'"
",'
...
""
o
~
o
~
m
a
'"
N
~
o
~
~
o
N-
'"
~
m
'"
,j[
~
;i
i
'"
o
~
N
oo
;;;
m
'"
o
z[
...
o
o
N
"'
o
o
N
co
co
<!r
<!r'
...
""
~
;;;
'"
~
~
'"
..
'"
'"
;;:
'"
g
'"
;;;
..-
'"
~
..
'"
;i
N
'"
..
z[
..
..
..
;i
'"
'"
:;;
'"
'"
N
'"
a
'"
o
~
...
o
~
'"
...
...
<!r'
...
""
..
:<:
'"
'"
~
'"
5l
N
o
:;;
"'
~
;i
~
o
..-
'"
~
",'
'"
N
'"
a
g:
N
;i
...
"'
o
~-
'"
N
'"
~
'"
m
~
'"
~
'"
o
~
",'"
",<!r
",,,!-
.'"
lD",
""""
lD
...
co
""
...
...
...
""
...
...
'"
""
'"
'"
...
....
""
...
...
<!r
N
""
...
...
...
N
...
""
o
'"
lD
00
""
",'"
,,-'"
.....
N' en
"'""
'" co
'" '"
'" <!r
......~ Lri'
"'""
'"
.. co
"- '"
~N
""
o
"''''
..'"
~ ..-4'
""
'"
~~
~t'I\
""
~..:..i
~ c(
-....
~o
~ ....
o
~
OVl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
CO~CXJ
:2U)~
U~O
<C=v
U>..-
x
<(
l-
I-
II'l
ii:
:J
o
I-
~
Z
:J
o
U
a:
u.I
::;
....
o
u
>
::!
~
<(
...
W
.....
Cl
Z
Vi
Of>
~
~
o
....
~
~
>
II
I
~I
~I
il
~I
il
I
~
~I
I
~
;
00
CO
CO
Q
....
....
<I>
'"
....
'"
'"
'"
'"
N
'"
~
on
on
'"
z:
on
""
'"
::f
o
o
""
a
N
g
~-
'"
to
o
a
'"
'"
'"
s:
i
'"
o
""
j;
~
;:
o
....
...
z:
'"
o
~
:<:
o
~
'"
,.,;
o
N
<I>
'"
on
;:
....
o
'"
",'
'"
'"
'"
'"
~.
'"
""
on
N
~
'"
;;
'"
...
o
N
~
on
on
'"
a
'"
'"
'"
~
~
~
'"
""
:;:,
'"
'"
;;;
j;
'"
on
on
a
...
~
g
N
....
'"
'"
III
'"
N
<I>
~
'"
&
...
'"
'"
~
N
o
on
~
....
N
....
....
....
'"
...
[;;
~
on
....
<Xl
~.
'"
'"
~
...
....
'"
~
on
g:
Ei
:;j
""
~
2
'"
'"
'"
~
<Xl
~
~
~
N
....
III
'"
N
<I>
N
",,,,
"'....
:..~
",0
<I> ....-
<I>
...
~
z:
00
00
N
N
'"
<I>
'"
~
~.
'"
o
o
o
III
'"
<I>
on
l;;
",'
N
'"
co
'"
....
.,;
'"
<I>
o
...
""
a
o
'"
....
..;
'"
<I>
'"
o
'"
~
'"
'"
~
,..:-
'"
<I>
~
",-
'"
'"
o
co
....
.,;
'"
N
<I>
....
'"
'"
a
'"
00
....
..;
o
....
<I>
'"
....
""
*
~;;::
...N
\D~ t-i'
~~
on
:<:
a
~
~
~""l
~f ~
'" ....
<I>
<Xl
'"
o
&
~~
'" '"
N' U;
~.a
'"
;!;
;:f
'"
....
'" ....
mrt
~~
<I>
'"
~
~
'" ....
N'"
N ~
~' N'"
~~
'"
~
<Xl
~
~ .:.i
~~
g)o
:<: I-
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
,0
'<""" Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
caSCO
:2(/)~
()~'O
<l:=Ll)
u>~
x
<(
I--
I--
In
ii:
~
o
I--
>
I--
Z
~
o
u
a::
w
:::i
.....
o
u
151
!:i
<
w
..:
VI
~
::;
~
..
II
~
~I
~I
~I
~I
~I
II
II
II
I
il
;
00
<t
III
'"
...
o
,..;
<I>
..
;l;
a
...
~
..:
'"
'"
~
",-
~
o
..
..
~
'"
:e
~
'"
"'
'"
"
0'
N
'"
'"
::;
'"
~'
~
~
a
N
..
en
",-
Et
~
"'
o
E:
'"
"'
'"
a
"'
N
en
E:
'"
o
S
o
~
III
III
III
,.;
III
o
,..;
<I>
'"
"'
~
a
..
;;!;
::;:'
'"
m
'"
",-
:::
...
...
o
a
'"
'"
...
9~
'"
~
::;:
a
~
..'
'"
~
en
..
i
'"
..
~,
Et
a
N'
j;;
"'
..
'"
",-
..
'"
"'
::;:
a
"
~
'"
o
~
....
'"
00
....
o
...
,..;
<I>
'"
N
en
...'
~
...
..
o
N'
j;;
~
en'
'"
'"
'"
'"
..
0'
j;;
~
~
~
o
",'
en
'"
'"
"'
'"
N
;{
~
"'
"
..
a
'"
..
"'
g
o
o
...
0'
~
N
"'
o
~'
'"
N
'"
'"
~-
'"
'"
o
o
~
~
~
o
....
....
<to
o
en
....
<I>
~~
en"!.
-<t
00 III
....en
00 .
<1>00
<I>
o
...
a
o
en
en
otf-
00
...
<I>
'"
~
en-
:::
'"
en
o
'"
III
N
<I>
~
..
a
N
III
....
N'
00
...
<I>
en
"'
'"
..'
~
en
....
00
,..:
en
...
<I>
"'
en
o
,..:
~
'"
....
en
otf'
....
otf
<I>
~
en
~
III
en
N
,..:
otf
....
....
<I>
en
o
~'
~
o
....
....
,..;
o
en
....
<I>
N
:!l
0'
~
....
N '"
o '"
~~ ~
~ '"
"',..;
<I>
...
"
en
~~
'"
N
en'"
..Ill
r.'t oci'
~~
'" -
...
<I>
~
:;;
",'
'"
'"
III
~~
~~ ~
'" ....
<I>
~
"'
'"
~
en
~~
~' en
.. ...
'" N
<I>
'"
:!J
~
...
~&
en' '"
~ ...
'" ...
<I>
en
o
f'!.
'"
o
~
~ .:.;
~ <
-I-
~ 0
~ I-
VI '" '" ... \D '" 00
~ III DO DO M III
0 " \D \D ... 0 '"
M
C; <Jl ~ .; 00 '" Ill' M '<Z'
Nt ~ M '" '" '<Z " 0
.0 M '" " M '<Z ".
~ Co '" M '<Z. '<Z. ",' '<Z. '<Z
...... Q) :1i ... ... ... ... ..".11I
.r;:O:: > ..". ..". ..". ..". ..".
~lI:: DO
ro~CX) '"
:2Ul~ w 00 '" ~ " 0
'" '" ~ 0 \D
O~O ~ '" '" ... M'
,,' N ",- ",'
<l:=<D .... " N :g '" '"
u>~ fl; ::; '" '" m
'" '" '" ",'
VI ..".
\D
0: II " '" N " M
~ ~ " '" '"
0 0 " ....
~ N ~. :;; ~ M
e( " 1;; 1;; '" 00
W '" '" ,..;
0: ..".
~ "
<( '" ... N ... III
u.. ;; 0 '" N III
~I 0 ::i- 0 '"
W .; ",' e
.... '" " 0 :g \D
c:J " 1;; ~ DO
Z '" '" ",'
Vi ..".
~ III
0: " N N " M
e( ~I ~ :i1 i'l 00 '<Z
... '" .D
w 'J,' ~ ",' a'- "
0 '" "
~ ~ '" ~ ... '<Z
0 '" '" M'
J: ..".
W
.... ...
iii " '" '" '" \D
'" N ~ " '<Z
0 ~I 00 '" 00
~ e .... .... ",' ""
~ 0 5 ~ 0
'" DO
X .... .... .... .... Ill'
e( '" '" '" '"
< > ..".
I- 0:
I- w \D
In I- '" 00 ... N 0
g: ~ 5 0 " '" '<Z
~I ... '" '"
<Xi ~. .... '"
:::l " 0 N DO
0 " '" ... 0 "
l- N N N N ""
'" '" '" '"
~ ..".
Z " ... N ... DO
:::l '"
~I '" 0 ~ ~ M
0 :'} 00
00' ~~ .n .D
u " '" " \D
a: N '" '" DO
N N- .... 00
UI '" '" '" '"
:::; ..".
.....
0 '" III
u II '" '" ~ 00 0
:;; '" 0 '" M
'" N '" '"
0 ",' ~. '" "J: 00' ""
::J '" N ... '"
0 ~ 00 '" ; '" ...
~ .... ~ ".
0: '" '"
c:J ..".
...
~ III
e( II ... N '" :;; 0 ...
... 0 '" 00
U N ... 00 " '" III
~ ~. vi o' ~ ~ M'
'" 3 ~~ '" DO
~, 0 ~
::J .... '<Z
Z '" '" '" '" '" '<Z.
~ ..".
0 ~I '<Z
0 '" ... N ~ " '"
z '" '" '" '" 0
" 0 '" '" 0 '"
0 ~. m- 0' <Xi ",'
U 0 '" " '"
:rl 00 00 00 " ... '"
III Q '" '" '" '" '" M'
I- ..".
Z
W
~ '" ...
l;: w " 00 '" '" 00 DO
'" 00 '" 00 " 00 '<Z
~ N '" N N '" ,,'
e( w ~ ",' 0> :ti' ",' M
... > 0 00 'J,
e( 0 '" ~ '" '<Z
Z '" '" '" '" ",'
..".
'"
~I '" ~ 00 '" '" M
~ '" '" " ...
" '" 00 '" 0
a <Xi ~- .n ",' ,,' 0
'" N ~ "
'" " '" " '<Z
0 '" '" '" '" ....
..".
'" '" " 00 '" 0
:1i 0 0 0 0 ... .:..i
> 0 ~ i'l 0 0 ~
5 ~ ;:::- !::!. !::!.
'" 00 '"
0 0 0 0 0 0
VI 0 i'l i'l 0 0 I-
.. N N N
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
.0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
ctI!9o:>
:2U)~
U~'O
<(=1"'-
u>~
{'..J L("; i,j'\
0' ~ ()
(,"5 '....." r"""j
0 th d': (f) ('('l
r""') W ill H ",""",.
('\1 ~ ~ "': "'"
(".), f'.;; C'\J t~. ~.:ti
c> e-
M bt
'-'l
~'~1 Ct" (.).f
ttJ rd
eJ... (j} U)
, ;~. (!) tj 0
0 f""l. ~ c>
fa.; t,:r; ii; r:t.;
';3 ~-'1 l><'1
P ::J
" f<<-) !')
to
';z Z Z
~, ::1 p
~ f.-::i ~?
"-
~ '" ;;..4 >~
~~ tJ; ~
c Z .j\: ;m
Z
(1:
M
-t: (Jj
n~
tj) ct, c" n:; a:;.
:; f:l.i H 0, ""
f~ ,.;1 (t ,<
cu ,"1
rS,; {)
:z; U
>t " -< i'
E-l "- et; ~ oc 1<: ;;r; ~ .;.: oc
4, ~ .x: .x: ;;; ~ <:
D :;'8 ~ ;s ~,-'> :t
:L ""
()
t)
c::
4J \0 to-
H Cl tD 0'1
H ~t .~ ",
",,) fY) L.. co
() r- r--
{j v \Q
.""'
~ \D .... 0
cr~ Z ~-t' l.f';r lUX 00
(''oj <: 0) ~ ,or:)
~1' >-0 '" t"') r--
0 ~~ It)
'" ('.I' a
rl
I'.'~ (,() ee, 'q'
,) f-_ U r,) t{i lj U 0',
ri1 N fL) ri1 if) i:il f.<l c)
C\ {'.J C\ p '-', C\ ~n
0 ""
f"~;: t""'
r,
~ ill M $
c; 8 E-< E-< 0:;' ~ E-< "'"
5 (J U ''-0 ,~ ~: g c~
C 0 '" v "'"
""
o
C; <Jl
Nt
.. 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
m2co
:2U)~
U~O
<(~CO
u>~
to if] () ~ 0\
',J:) 00 0
~ rl .., ~ i"Yi
CD ("". <;;' E4 tf'}
'" C,,; Q r....
H M E4 ~r
";',i-l
f'q (\, cw CL;. tl.!
~j:l i:il r;i'l E~'r;1 r..1
tn Ul iJ) th U)
t? (D
::> ::J
(J; <
WI
n,
>..~
fo'l
,-1 ~~
~:J
''') ~)
Z
., ~""'>
.....,/
.. r-)
1; 'H ~H :>-i
-li: t,( :E1 ;3
z
..
.,. :f.
;t'l
;;t:
4~
14;
;;t:
<
z:
?'~
z /-'.";.
b r-. ro
f; n:1 -~ ;-t ill ill d\
.", CY1 rl r:tl ," lJ'1
~ fl"} rl ~ "" OJ
".; 01
fIJ \.:0
h rl
~l a.,
0 0
8 ".7' Z 0:> Z ~ CD
a:: *~ ;,a ~ \D
r--:; ~ tr) ':J G r-
\Q if~
a
r-!
,- r""..! ''1" "'"
'"' '7' U W ~- t) U m
t5 0" [iJ cr. t" ti1
c: 0J C1 0
M
~Li r() \D 00
~_., ',0 :> I.,L) .", :> ro
C) !"""', 0 .", 0- 0'\
Z Z .", ~ ;..0
"'"
,...; ~
l,{'.
.... O} (Tl C)
8 \0 ~ cr; " ri 8 ~
U ;.r~ .... "" U ro U <'!\
C -t.-)'. 0 '" 0 ...
rl ~.
"'"
o
~
o <Jl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~lI::
'" '"
:2UJ
UN""
<(::to
U>~
t/)
...
(.)
Q)
'-
o
L.
D..
Q)
(.)
c:
n:s
c:
Q)
...
0.=
~ n:s
~:!:
-
m.c:
o (.)
o n:s
N Q)
>-aJ
u. :
~
-
o
....
o
!:::!
....
;;;
"CS
$
III
"CS
Q.
::l
~
o
0')
Q)
...
n:s
(J
(J
C
I-
C
.- ...
.. ..
... 01
C"O
.. ::l
Oim
m
.5
t: g> 0
C'- 0..
CD .50
~E5:
..
II:
_1:
.. ..
....E
.~ 'C -a;
LL. C en
1:. E -g
foCm
... ...
::l ..
o ..
>
w
w
...
...
.!!!,
0...
".CU
0..0
-"0
lG.::1
.5 m
.~
o
...
...
..
oe-
0..
10
C>>
....
o
~
OVl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
~~
"'-
:2CfJ
UNC'?
<(~b
U>N
en
~
o
z
'"
<.l
en
u:
-
<.l
..
"e
Q;,......,
"Om
Q)O
~O
!
en
W 617
N
.5 ""
- ex>
.. .. Lei
<.l '" C'?
C " ~
co :I
'" III
III
617
'"
en 0
.. ......
'" ~ '"
.a :s ""
<.l C
<( ..
Cl.
..
w
.!:
.. r~
<.l
c
co c-
.- 0
'" e5:
III
..
0::
-
CJ
..
"0" ...,
~ ..
11. '"
-"tl
co :I
.!: III
.!!'
o
-
<.l
..
"e
11.
-
<.l
.. .
._ 0
oz
rr.
"
C
::l
U.
617
Vl
Vl
tU C)
c.. .S:
rn"'Q)
C-o
'8l~
~
N
C'?
o
o
m
'"
m
......
o
O<Jl
Nt
_ 0
~ Co
~ Q)
.r;:O::
UlI::
~ '"
"'-
:2UJ""
UN_
<(:::0
U>""
..
~
o
Z
C;;
"
..
u:
C
'iit>>
~.g-.;
&,L.;C..Q
.l:.........~... ..-g.
f!<1II
... ...
~.CG
() ..
>-
...
"
..
.0'......
......<<g
a. '"
-"
CG<=
.5 III
.2'
(5
...
"
..
"e-
o.
...
.!. ci
oz
a:
C>>
N
'"
o
C>>
"
c:
"
ll..
'"
C>>
~
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-3 New Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Update the Coastal Advisory Committee on Revenue/Budget items scheduled for
the April 8, 2010 CAC meeting.
OBJECTIVE: Update the Coastal Advisory Committee on Revenue/Budget items
scheduled for the April 8, 2010 CAC meeting.
CONSIDERATIONS: In the April 8, 2010 CAC meeting, the following items will be
discussed:
. The FY 2011 revenue projections
· Fund 195 analysis including carry forward, revenues, expenses, reserves and
projected fund balance.
. FY 2011 grant applications
. FY 2011 expense summary
. 10 year forecasting projections
ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: For information only
FISCAL IMPACT: The Source of funds is from Category "A" Tourist Development Tax
fund.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management
Plan related to this action.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: For information only.
RECOMMENDATION: For information only.
PREPARED BY: J. Gary McAlpin, P.E., CZM Director
CAC March 11, 2010
VIIl-4 New Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FEMA Reimbursement Update and Status of our Mandatory Reserve Accounts
OBJECTIVE: Update the CAC on the FEMA reimbursement.
CONSIDERATIONS: Staff has been working with Florida Department of Emergency
Management (FDEM) and Florida's Regional FEMA office in Lake Mary, Florida to
resolve and finalize reimbursement due Collier County as a result of Tropical Storm
Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Wilma.
For Hurricane's Katrina and Wilma, PW-1609 has been rewritten to include additional
storm issues not previously identified. These losses include additional sand,
monitoring, intermediate renourishment from dredging project, project management and
additional engineering. The revised PW that is attached will add an additional
$9,486,000 in reimbursement and has been approved by FDEM and FEMA. It remains
to be approved by FEMA - Washington DC for disbursements over $1 million.
For Tropical Storm Gabrielle a revised PW for an additional $11,065,000 remains to be
written by FDEM and FEMA - Lake Mary. This will required that that the original PW,
which was incorrectly closed by FEMA, Region IV - Atlanta will be reopened. After
approved by Region IV, it will require approval by FEMA - Washington for PW's over $1
Million.
The $20.5 Million in FEMA disbursements will require Collier County to reimbursement
the State of Florida approximately $6,644,000 in cost sharing on this project netting
approximately $13 million if everything is goes perfectly.
The County will be hiring Lobbyist James Watt to help us resolve payment on this issue.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts
resulting from this study.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: N/A.
RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing only.
PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-5 New Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wiggins Pass Subcommittee Update/Status
OBJECTIVE: Update the CAC on the Wiggins Pass Subcommittee.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Wiggins Pass Subcommittee has met three (3) times since
the last CAC meeting/their inception to discuss and resolve the permit application,
erosion on Barefoot Beach and the Inlet Management Plan. Meeting minutes are
attached.
1. Permit Application
. The permit application has been reviewed extensively, and submitted to
FOEP and the USACE. Agency comments are expected within 30 days.
The Florida Park Service is not supporting the permit application at this
time and is in the process of outlining concerns that they believe must be
addressed. To date nothing has been revised.
. FOEP is now requiring that a complete rewrite to the Inlet Management
Plan be part of this permit application. A work team make up is being
proposed for the CAC and BCC consideration. Staff has applied for FOEP
cost sharing funding to help pay for this activity, which is expected to cost
$250,000. The Inlet Management Plan will proceed concurrent with the
permit application but the permit application will not be issued until the
Inlet Management Plan is accepted by the State.
. The State estimates that with the Inlet Management Plan and the permit
application it will require close to two (2) years to complete. This will
necessitate an intermediate dredge event of Wiggins Pass costing
approximately $750,000.
. A Critical Erosion Evaluation of Barefoot Beach has been completed and
submitted to FOEP to support the permit application and also the Cost
Share Application request to FOEP. A copy is attached.
. A meeting with COES was held to determine what was necessary for the
County to issue a consistency letter with the COC and GMP. Attached is
a summary from that meeting.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts
resulting from this study.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: N/A.
RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing only.
PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
1 of 35
cg~ County
~........ -
Public Services Division
Coastal Zone Management
February 17,2010
Mr. Martin Seeling
Environmental Administrator
Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems
Mail Station 310
3900 Commonwealth Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000
~
(\0
~~
4;'
Re: Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project
Joint Coastal Permit Application
Dear Mr. Seeling:
This is a Florida Department of Environmental Protection JCP permit application for continued
maintenance dredging of the Wiggins Pass channels. This permit includes improvements to the
maintenance dredging and adjacent disposal operations which should decrease annual dredging
amounts, frequency of dredging and impacts to adjacent shoreline. The permit CD includes a
modeling report (previously provides to FDEP BBCS and Florida Park Service), and an
engineering report (Attachment No. 33a) that describes improvements to the 1995 inlet
management plan. A new inlet management plan will completed at the request of BBCS staff in
parallel with the processing of this permit.. Enclosed are one original, two hardcopies and two
electronic copies of the JCP application and supporting documentation.
Wiggins Pass has been maintained on a continual basis under two previous maintenance
dredging permits since 1984. Sections of the navigation channel shoal rapidly to a depth of 3
feet or less making navigation dangerous, and erosion on Barefoot Beach Park has been a major
concern in recent years. Collier County desires the next dredging operation to occur during
2010-11 non-sea turtle nesting season. Please tell us what the permit fee will be, and the County
will provide it.
If you or other cooperating agencies should require additional copies of the application or
supporting information, or have any questions, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
t~ A/l&~
Gary McAlpin
cc:
Steve Keehn, CPE
<i)
Collier County Coastal Zone Management. W. Harmon Turner Building; Suite 103 · 3301 East Tamiami Trail' Naples, Florida 34112 . 239-252-2966 . FAX 239-252-2950
www.colliergov.ne~coastalzonemanagement
Co1K:r Count;y .
~ ~~ --
Public Services Division
Coastal Zone Management
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
2 of 35
February 17,2010
Mr. Paden Woodruff
Environmental Administrator
Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems
Mail Station 300
3900 Commonwealth Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000
(0COPY
Re: Wiggins Pass, Collier County, Florida Inlet Management Planning
Dear Mr. Paden Woodruff
This is a request for funding support for the preparation and implementation of an inlet
management plan for Wiggins Pass.
As part of securing a new IO-year maintenance dredging permit for the pass, the County has
undertaken numerical modeling to improve the pass's performance. During the modeling and a
complementary coastal process analysis, it was discover that the severe erosion on Barefoot
Beach was caused by the natural northward migration of the flood channel and an imbalance in
sand bypassing of the inlet. A plan was developed to improve navigation in the inlet and reduce
impact to the adjacent beaches. This plan was developed by a committee with a broad County
representation, to include representatives from the State Park system. During the process of
developing the engineering plan and permit application, a member of the BBCS staff informed
the County that a new Inlet Management Plan would be required, based in part by concerns from
the State Park System.
The engineering report (Attachment 33a) from the permit updates many of the required task per
paragraph 62B-41.008(i)(m)F AC within the frame work of the 1995 Wiggins Pass Inlet
Management Plan. This report provides a technical summary of pertinent coastal processes used
to design the new maintenance dredging plan in addition to identifying the. cause and magnitude
of the erosion at Barefoot Beach. Based on comments from BBCS staff and the State Park
system, considerable additional effort is required to arrive at a new Inlet Management Plan
suitable for maintaining Wiggins Pass and mitigating the erosion problems. We believe that the
preparation, public coordination and approval of an Inlet Management Plan will cost an
additional $250,000.
(i)
Collier CountyCoastal Zone Management. W. Harmon Turner Building, Suite 103' 3301 East Tamiami Trail' Naples, Florida 34112' 239-252-2966' FAX 239-252-2950
WW>N.colliergov.netlcoastalzonemanagement
~
CAC March 11 . 2010
VII-5-a New Business
3 of 35
Mr. Paden Woodruff
February 17,2010
Page 2 of2
We would like to meet with you to. discuss this matter and the potential of funding from the
State. By a separate letter to the bureau, we have requested that Barefoot Beach be designate a
Critical Erosion Area, so that it can be better supported by your team.
Thanks,
flk, ItA c,~
Gary McAlpin, P .E., CZM Director
cc Michael Barnett, PE
Steve Keehn, CPE
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
4of35
Co1N~~ County
'- ~~. .--
Public Services Division
Coastal Zone Management
February 17,2010
Mr. Robert Brantley, PE
Program Administrator
Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems
Mail Station 300
3900 Commonwealth Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000
Re: Critical Erosion Area Evaluation of Habitat and Recreation for Barefoot Beach,
Collier County
Dear Mr. Robert Brantly
This is a request to designate Barefoot Beach as Critically Eroded pursuant to Sections 161.101
and 161.161, Florida Statutes. There are losses and threats to habitat and recreational areas at
Barefoot Beach, which should justify a critical erosion area designation. The attached report
provides justification for making this designation.
Barefoot Beach is located north of Wiggins Pass, in Collier County, Florida. Barefoot Beach is
being severely eroded from the natural northward migration of the flood channel and an
imbalance in sediment bypassing. We are submitting an application for a 10 year maintenance
dredging permit for Wiggins Pass which should go a long way towards mitigating these
problems, but the designation should allow the inlet project to qualify for State support.
If you have any question, please call me or Steve Keehn from CPE.
Very truly yours,
7 Ai AM; M (!" fttt~
Gary McAlpin, P.E., CZM Director
CC: Vince George, FDEP
Steve Keehn, CPE
(i)
Collier County Coastal Zone Management. W. Harmon Turner Building, Suite 103' 3301 East Tamiami Trail' Naples, Florida 34112' 239-252-2966' FAX 239-252-2950
www.colliergov.neUcoastalzonemanagement
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
5 of 35
Critical Erosion Area Evaluation of Habitat and Recreation
for Barefoot Beach, Collier County
February 12, 2010
Introduction
There are losses and threats to habitat and recreational areas at Barefoot Beach, which should
justify a critical erosion area designation. This report provides the justification for making this
designation. Barefoot Beach is located north of Wiggins Pass (Figure 1). In 1986, pursuant to
Sections 161.101 and 161.161, Florida Statutes, the Department of Environmental Protection,
Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems is charged with the responsibility to identify those
beaches of the state which are "critically eroding" and to develop and maintain a comprehensive
long-term management plan for their restoration. In order for a segment of eroded coastline to
be eligible for State of Florida funding for beach management, it must be designated as
"critically eroded" by the State, which may affect adjacent inlets.
Figure 1. Project location map
The following definition has been adopted by the Bureau to identify critically eroded areas:
CAC March 11 , 2010
VII-5-a New Business
6of35
Critically eroded area is a segment of the shoreline where natural processes or
human activity have caused or contributed to erosion and recession of the beach or
dune system to such a degree that upland development, recreational interests,
wildlife habitat, or important cultural resources are threatened or lost. Critically
eroded areas may also include peripheral segments or gaps between identified
critically eroded areas which, although they may be stable or slightly erosional now,
their inclusion is necessary for continuity of management of the coastal system or for
the design integrity of adjacent beach management projects.
In order for an erosion problem to be critical, there must exist a threat to or loss of one of four
specific interests: upland development, recreation, wildlife habitat, or important cultural
resources. This evaluation will provide justification for a request for. Critical Erosion Area
(CEA) designation for the south end of Barefoot Beach County Park in Collier County.
PHYSICAL RECESSION AND EROSION
The conditions causing the critical erosion condition and its magnitude are described below.
Shoreline Change
The Mean High Water (MHW) elevation measured at each profile is used to represent the typical
shoreline location. In Collier County, the MHW elevation is +0.33 ft NA VD 88. The MHW
shoreline is approximated by the high-tide mark on the beach. The MHW shoreline changes
were calculated using historic beach profiles and historic shoreline data from the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Collier County's monitoring of the inlet and
adjacent beach, and from profile and cross-section surveys performed by CPE in 2009.
The north shoreline (RII to R16) and the south shoreline (Rl7 to R21) of Wiggins Pass was
evaluated in order to analyze shoreline changes to present. Table 1 presents shoreline changes
from 1957 through 2009 as well as during selected periods which coincide with milestone events
in the development of Wiggins Pass. These changes are shown on Figure 2.
It can be seen that in the timeframe before dredging (1957-1979), the shorelines surrounding
Wiggins Pass were relatively stable with an average erosion of -2.3 feet. The northern shoreline
was accretional before dredging activity took place, while the southern shoreline exhibited some
erosion. Since maintenance dredging began in 1984, it can be seen that overall erosion has
increased along with the magnitude of erosion experienced at beaches to the north. Since 1992,
the shoreline north of the inlet at Barefoot Beach has retreated on average approximately 87 feet
(Figure 2). The worst area of erosion is occurring at R16, where, since 1992, it has lost
approximately 437 feet of shoreline. R14 and R15 also have high rates of erosion since 1992.
o
~"'R
(l)o~
:JNVN lNIV
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
7 of 35
0 ..
! III
If) c; II:
W z ::>
Z ii1 (!)
::i>- III II:
1&1
w~ z
~t- 0 i;l
ow
~~ z ~
1&1
u:r ~g ~
-t-
t:~< z;l :>
U~ :>
~e~ 0
u
c~ffi ~ ~iiS~
CL :1 z;;,
fIl~ ..J 00;- ~
fIl~ ~'llif4='
<:::l ti laa ~
lI.U <(. -"
fIlC 8! f~
zz
5< el
Cl
.. ~
~ Ie
0
~
~ ;~ 1:
'"
~
.
~
u
c
UI 'H
ffi;t~d~~
2I:::E::::tU)~:g
f::!g:::"'....
~~zo~~g
~ ~s~~~~~
~ ...1<1=====
.. I I I I
~
~ i5
ii 0
~ci i
~Ii! :l'
w~ 0
..<< ~
~~ ~
Zfj ..
Si: >-
~~ ~
~g ~
~~ 5
()~ '"
~4! ~
Oir ~
~~ ~
5i ~
~O' 0
"'ItS ::!
i~~ ~
~~~ ~
~8~ ~
~~~ ~
~~it ~
~o Qffi~ ~
Q.ca m
'" ....
,:
~
F ui
:;J z
:J; 2 ~~
~ ~ M:E
UJ D.UI
'" 0UJ
~~ :a
~g w~
",,,, i!'0
~;. ~ffi
a.; ffi!
~i ~~
~~ u<C
~cs ~ti
~g UJ~
~lt' UJ~::l
C")W d
:> I-
-~ I~
~" '"
~~ n:g
~~ I!!ill .
uj!: ~Fw
ffi3 6~~
~~ zw~
i!'~ z4!CS
"'., ill",:!
~~ ih
!l:~ c~~
i~ ~oc
~: ~~~
O~ ...ULL..
c;; ;;r
d I M'$l:l.L "~:!l
CAC March 11 , 2010
VII-5-a New Business
8 of 35
Table 1
Historic Shoreline Changes
MHW Shoreline CIlan.-:es(ft)
Profile 1957 1973 1979 1984 1988 1992 2001 1957 1988 1992
1973 1979 1984 1988 1992 2001 2009 1979 1992 2009
R-lI 23 15 12 7.0 15.8 38 120 .22.8
R-12 27 21 -14 -9 4 29.7 56.3 48 4.0 85.9
R-13 -53 15 19 9.9 29.8 -38 19.0 39.7
R-14 -96 43 114 -83.5 .9.9 -53 1l4.0 -93.4
R-15 -59 60 -26 -57 63 -70.9 -71.0 1 63.0 -141.9
R-16 3 70 185 -264.1 -173.0 73 185.0 -437.0
Wiggins Pass
R-17 -5 22 -106 -2004 30.8 17 -106.0 10.5
R-18 -41 45 98 -54 -40 -17.4 23.2 4 -40.0 5.8
R-I9 -64 26 -14 38.2 -20.6 -38 -14.0 17.6
R-20 -38 23 10 37.1 -21.8 -IS 10.0 15.3
R-21 -88 26 -19 -20 12 13.8 2.5 -62 12.0 16.3
N. TOTAL -25.8 37.3 -20.0 -33.0 64.8 -62.0 -25.3 11.5 64.8 -87.3
S. Tar AL 47.2 28.4 39.5 -37.0 -27.6 10.3 2.8 -18.8 -27.6 13.1
TOTAL -35.5 33.3 9.8 -35.0 22.8 -29_1 -12.5 -2.3 228 -41.7
The higher losses that have occurred since 1992 can be attributed to the northern migration of the
channel meander and inlet management practices, which allowed for an approximate even
disposal of dredged material on the north and south shorelines. From analysis, it appears that in
order to alleviate the erosion to the north, approximately 2.65 times more dredged material needs
to be placed on the shorelines to the north than the south.
The greatest loss of Barefoot Beach shoreline since dredging began was during the 1992-2001
period, where the shoreline loss was 62 feet (Table I). During the next period 2001-09, the loss
declined to 25.3 feet. The pattern was similar, but accretional south of the inlet, advancing an
average of 10 feet between 1992 and 2001, and then 3 feet in the next 7 years. Delnor-Wiggins
Park was erosional prior to the start of inlet dredging. The change in disposal distribution may
have contributed to these decreases since 2002. Vegetation coverage has actually increased south
of the inlet.
The erosion has impacted the vegetation at Barefoot Beach, which is being pushed by the
northward migration of the flood channel, which has moved approximately 100 feet since the
1970's. The mangroves (Figure 3, Location 3) have retreated a total of 52 feet since 1973 and 13
feet since 2002, which is a loss of about 0.3 acres. On the Gulf, the vegetation has retreated 194
feet at Location I since 1973, and 123 feet in the last 8 years (Table 2). In Figure 3, both
shoreline and vegetation losses are illustrated. Overall, the increased erosion north of the inlet
on the Gulf beaches has caused 3.2 acres of vegetation to be lostsince 2002.
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
9of35
0 ...
:!!: w
~~J: l!i 0::
Z ::>
ii1 Cl
zza.. Ii:
::l:Ji2 w
w
o>(!) z
Ulli:o 1; i:l
lli:ql- z ~
w
!!:!li:i0 "'d 0
::l~if Cl> z
z~
oc-' z :.. "
"
uz< z ~~ 8
:~i<~ .5 C~N.
<(zo A. : ~~ ~
a.. 0... ~ :ig~i i
<ni=!!2 :;; i~ii
Z<J: ~
(51-J: ~ ig;~
ClUJ... U ...lDLa.;
!E~:: . ~
(ij
~
0
10
-;~ .
,!t
0
0
~ .. ..
,
~
u
c
"
!z
w
::; ~
=>
z
0 ~
::; '"
w .
" .
z .. . ..
~ ~ .
t c
u . 0
ill ~ ~ ~!
~ " > -< 1: ::l
.. ~ ~ . . 0 0
in
'"
w
Z '"
::l w
z z
0 ~"'M ::; U
\1 8O~ ~
om
t; 0101_ ~ 0101
:il I I I ~ I ;
>
o
w
U
~ ~
~ ~
w <<
5 2
N "
.... W Z
~ ~ g
~ ~ ~ ~
~ m :: ~ ti
~~~~~
z ~ C> ILl N
~ ~ ~ ~ ci
o C) J: In a:
3g~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ Z
~ ~ 0 0 ::s
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
;'i Gi ~ ~~~
~ ~ m ~~~
~ t ~ f:Pi~
~ ~ ~~~~~
o,.:.Si...=;~f30~
fiPJ~U:o~o:~;!
~~z~ff:2~O::~
~~~~~~ff:~~
~~Lt~E~o~~
LI._>.JCJC)~wo
ZU.:r:05~t=~w
UjO~~UJ Q~~
et:::::Eo:::ww~oUJ<
~~ 8~ ~,:q311l()
~~boz~z~~
~~s:~~g;~~
~. 50...tN<Za::~Z
: ~ffi~~~~~~~
o 8~~~~8~59
Z ...: N t"i ..; iii
j)XW_"lmBl~n-\SO:idfJ-" Sl'Nld~a3HQ-30NVN3.lNI'f'" SSY,J SNlnOIM v S~OlOOQ-o;googe.llt!lO:>'=D
I
CACMarch 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
10 of 35
Table 2
Barefoot Beach Vegetation Loss (feet)
Location 1973 to 2002 to 1973 to
2002 2009 2009
R16 71 123 194
Location 1
Location 2 70 0 70
.. .
Mangroves 39 13 52
Location 3
Volumetric Changes
The volumetric changes in this report represent the difference in the quantity of sand measured
along the beach between surveys (Table 3). All volumetric changes are given in cubic yards.
Volumetric changes were calculated between the dunes (upland) and the approximate depth of
closure using all profiles since 1973. Before 1973, the volumetric changes were estimated by
measuring shoreline changes and using a conversion factor of 0.67 cubic yards per foot of
shoreline change (ePE 1995). These volumes were based on typical berm heights of 4.7 feet
NA VD and a depth of closure of -13.3 feet NA VD. Since then, a depth of closure of -11.3 ft
NAVD has been used.
From 1957 to 1979, before maintenance dredging began, the area immediately north of Wiggins
Pass from R15 to R16 was accretional. After 1979, the area reversed from this trend and became
erosional, with 308,926 cubic yards lost. The area immediately south of Wiggins Pass from R17
to R18 was accretional during the time period prior to maintenance dredging (1957 to 1979), and
it remained accretional through 2009. Disposal south of the inlet contributes to accretion and
may be the major source for sand infilling the inlet. The 4,000 foot reach south of the inlet went
from a loss of 48,000 cy in the 1957-1979 period to a gain of 50,000 cy in the 1979-2009 period.
Nourishment of Vanderbilt Beach in 1996 and 2006 may have contributed to accretion south of
the inlet.
Overall, it appears that the current maintenance dredging practices are not properly addressing
the northern losses at Wiggins Pass. Historic reports indicated that sediment transport was from
north to south, but the volumetric data presented in Table 3 contrasts with that belief. From 1979
to 2009, the area north of Wiggins Pass (Rl1 to R16) eroded 252,926 cubic yards, while the area
south of the inlet has accreted 49,603 cubic yards. Prior to 1979, before maintenance dredging,
the erosion accretion pattern was reversed, with the north accretional. Using these values along
with the historic shoreline changes, it appears that more sand needs to be disposed of at the north
during maintenance dredging to reduce erosion on Barefoot Beach.
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
11 of 35
Table 3
Historic Volumetric Changes
Profile
Length
(Ff)
1957
1973
1973
1979
1979
1988
Volumetric Chao es (cy)
1988 1992 2001
1992 2001 2009
1957
1979
1979
2009
1992
2009
R-11 501 7,700 5.020 -12,428 -1,413 -1,314 ! 11,238 12,720 -3,917 9,924
R-12 987 17,867 13.854 -15,192 -11,275 5,046 52,660 31,722 .. .31,239. 57,706
R-13 971 -34,501 9!?~8 -3,918 478 966 37.697 ~~,753 35,222 38,663
R-14 997 -64,135 28,767 -18,029 31,821 4,415 -24,752 -35.368 -6,545 -20.337
R-15 1032 -40.763 41,459 -57,366 12,726 -32,854 -30, [(17 696 -107.601 -62,961
R-16 537 1,063 25,202 -68,693 21,586 ~81,447 -72,771 26,265 ,201,325 -154,218
'YigginsPass
R-17 523 -1.743 7,687 8,083 -23,693 17.832 18.090 5'<}43 20,311 35,922
..
R-18 1006 -27,677 30,327 29,640 -38,179 -14,538 55,841 2,650 32,764 41,303
R-19 1020 -43,784 17,769 -6,872 -3,829 18,208 10,721 -26,015 18,228 28,929
R-2O 1010 -25,691. 15,591 -25.005 2,353 12,289 414 -10,100 -9,948 12.703
R-21 504 -29,704 8,765 -13,148 -6.282 690 6.987 -20,939 -11,753 7,677
N. TOTAL 5,0"...5 -112,768 [24,050 -175,627 53,924 -105,188 -26,035 11,282 -252,926 ~131,223
S. TOTAL 4,063 -128,601 80,139 -7,302 -69,629 34,481 92,053 -48,461 49,603 126,534
TOTAL 9,088 -241,369 204,189 -182,928 -15,706 -70,7CJ7 66,019 -37,180 -203,323 -4,689
Summary of Changes
Barefoot Beach has been designated non-critical (Appendix A), but the County believes it
qualifies as critically eroded as described below. The shorelines near Wiggins Pass have been
eroding at an accelerated rate since 1992, which directly affects the amount of recreational area
available to the public. During the period from 1992 to 2009, the largest shoreline retreat was
observed at R16 with over 400 feet of shoreline lost. Approximately 10 acres has been lost from
the Gulf beaches since 1992. The shoreline recession on South Barefoot Beach has caused
vegetation, such as mangroves to be lost, and it has also created a dangerous scarp along the
shoreline that is hazardous to park users. During CPE's 2009 survey, a teen fell off the scarp and
was injured which clearly illustrates the hazards of a rapidly eroding shoreline. In Figure 3, it
can be seen that over 3.2 acres of vegetation has been lost since 2002 along the Gulf shoreline.
The figure also indicates that the mangroves have been affected by the northern migration of
Wiggins Pass by retreating farther north (Table 2, Location 3). Along with the loss of vegetation,
walking paths that were present in 1973 at Barefoot Beach have been eroded away and are no
longer present in several areas to the west and south. This affect's the public's accessibility to
the County Park and enjoyment of nature along the former loop path.
In comparison to the shoreline changes; the volumetric changes also indicate that the shoreline
north of Wiggins Pass is highly erosional. From 1885 to 1979, the shoreline north of Wiggins
Pass was overall accreational for approximately 100 years. After 1979 to present, the shoreline
shifted and is now in a state of erosion. The worst of the erosion is seen at Rl6 where
approximately 201,000 cubic yards have been lost. This erosion has caused the southern tip of
. South Barefoot Beach to nearly shear off (Figure 2), which in return has lost valuable
recreational area and habitat within the park. If no corrective action is planned, it is anticipated
CAC March 11,2010
VII-5-a New Business
12 of 35
that the erosion north of Wiggins Pass will continue resulting in more loss of county park
recreational area and habitat.
There are two likely causes for the erosion within the Wiggins Pass area. The first is due to the
northern inlet migration of the main flood channel (Figure 4). The northern migration of the
channel is due to the growing flood shoal which has pushed the meander channel farther north
and into the banks of Barefoot Beach. This is indicted by the dark red (erosion in the flood
channel) and dark green (accretion in the channel) on Figure 4. The second cause is the current
dredging disposal practices at Wiggins Pass. Historically, an even distribution of fill has been
placed on the northern and southern shorelines surrounding the pass. However, recent analysis
indicates that the beaches to the north need approximately 2.65 times the amount of fill that is
placed to the south to become balanced with the south.
THREATS TO VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
Photograph 1. Erosion near DNR monument
RlS.
Photograph 2. Vegetation loss at south end of
Barefoot Beach.
The majority of erosion at Barefoot Beach has occurred south of R14 (Tables 1 and 3) and on the
inlet shoreline. Between beach erosion at the southern end of the island and the northward
migration of Wiggins Pass main flood channel, significant loss of vegetation has occurred over
recent decades (Photographs 1 and 2). Figure 3 shows shoreline and vegetation changes along
the southern end of Barefoot Beach between the years 1973 to 2009.
The shoreline at R16 has lost 194 ft. of vegetation, primarily cabbage palms and maritime
hammock (Location 1 in Figure 3); 70 ft. of vegetation have been lost at the southern end of the
island (Location 2 in Figure 3); and 52 ft. of mangroves have been lost along the north border of
the main channel (Location. 3 in Figure 3 and Table 2). This loss is exacerbated by the fact that
the current vegetation line and shoreline are almost on top of each other (Figure 3), which means
vegetation loss will immediately accompany shoreline recession in these critical areas.
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
13 of 35
0 ...
!: w
Ii ..:
z :>
ll. i1 C)
0 ii:
:!: :;! w
~ 0 <'t ~ w
'" <0 ... '" z
, , w is :z
u z ~
Z w
~~ ~~. g
....~2 z.. '"
......0 zzij Ii
~i5... z eft
Cli)o :5:~a::
(1)'" IL 0( z.,"
<'" ~ 25i~ ~
ll.~ ..;, ,,-
II) ~ ::~!!!! >'
z 8 !:if2 ..
(5
Cl
~
ooozet
GOSIIE
.. 8
S~~
<> :;t
- .-~
ooo...t
- .--
'i
..
~~~ !
~ i
o
-'
w
z
z
w"
~ t3
.. 0
::; III
w 0
,. ..
851
Izw'" w
::; ;, ~ ~ i
::l X :::::! .....
~ ~ ::; ~ ffi
::> I'l !I ~ !!!
~~~~~
~ N ..... N 0
II ~IIID
,:
~
'" w
frl z
o 5i 2 ~
~ ~ t; t:
,; Q ili ~
~ '" i3. is
~ ~ ~iw ~
~ ~ igj! .~
~ ~ ~~~~~
<> 2; ~ie:~ffi
~ ... ~;faci~
5 >- ~~~~~
CL.~ ~i5~!3ia
~~Q :t::i~WO
"l\l~ 5'uwg~
~:Q5 ~~a:~1t
u",,,, :::!l!!!!!o~
~~~ ~ :!~~
o:!zoi:!~S:iii~
ww ->-=>> -a...J u:::
~~~~~ffiU)~a
"'..!l!"'C::>"'..0
oi~~~g~~~
~9;~ffi~~~j
8~:iz~zC)t:~
~~~~~~i~irl
Q~!<~~~:fi~~
!<>8~~~lli~8~
w,...>-wu.l!i~o
-JOFtoo:.>-~~O
~!~~:~~<J~
;w ",c<i~~~::>..lt'~
b ~~~~~~~~~
... N "" .. '"
NlYn S d N.9~M' 5~O.l lo:A
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
14 of 35
This loss of habitat may affect important native species such as the gopher tortoise (Gopherus
polyphemus) (Photograph 3), a state-listed Species of Special Concern. Barefoot Beach is one of
the remaining few natural barrier islands along the southwest coast of Florida and is important
habitat for the gopher tortoise: a total of 712 burrows were recorded from June 13 through
September 7 of 2009; 186 were recorded as Very Active; 277 were recorded as Active; 76 were
recorded as Inactive; 173 were abandoned (Table 4, Figure 3). Considering the substantial loss
of vegetation at the southern end of the island, it is likely that gopher tortoise burrows have been
lost to erosion in the past, and their habitat at the south end of Barefoot Beach will continue to
disappear without measures to mitigate for the erosion. Examining Figure 3 for the location of
burrows compared to shoreline and habitat changes through time, those along the edge of
vegetation between approximately R15+500 and R16 are threatened with imminent loss to
eroSiOn.
While Barefoot Beach is eroding on the north side of Wiggins Pass, the shore along the south
side of the pass in Delnor- Wiggins State Park has been continually accreting. A gain in
vegetation and habitat, in particular sea oats (Uniola paniculata) and other typical dune species
have established along the northern accretionary beach area of Delnor- Wiggins. This reach has
gained between 13 and 50 feet of vegetation since 1973, approximately an acre. In essence,
vegetation and habitat are being swapped from Barefoot Beach to Delnor- Wiggins as the flood
channel migrates north. There is a sand wave that moves across the north end of Delnor-
Wiggins, ultimately depositing sand into the flood shoal which pushes the flood shoal north and
encourages vegetation growth on Delnor- Wiggins Park shoreline and loss to Barefoot Beach.
Photograph 3. Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) observed at Barefoot Beach.
CAC March 11 , 2010
VII-5-a New Business
15 of 35
Table 4. Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 (data obtained
f M . H'I h . b. f, B B
rom areie amI ton, gopJ er tortOise IOlo!!ist or arefoot each).
Size Class: Verv Active Active Inactive
Adult 173 233 62
Sub Adult 6 34 13
Juvenile 6 9 1
HatchlinQ 1 1 0
Subtotals: 186 2n 76
Abandoned: 173
Total Burrows: 712
No trends in sea turtle nesting data were detected between R13 and R16 from 2005 to 2009
(Figure 5). However, only a single nest has been laid at R16, the most erosional area of Barefoot
Beach, since 2005. The mangroves have lost approximately 0.3 acres since 1913, which are a
habitat to fishes such as snook.
12
10
en
iii 8
CI)
z
-
0 6
...
CI)
.Q
E 4
~
z
2
0
2005 2006 2007 2008
[J R13
-R14
-R15
.R16
2009
Figure 5. Number of sea turtle nests laid between R13 and R16 within Barefoot Beach
Preserve from 2005 to 2009 (data obtained from Maura Kraus, sea turtle biologist for
Collier County).
THREATS TO RECREATION
Erosion has effectively cut off beachgoers between approximately R15+5oo and R16 and
portions of the inlet shoreline. The recreational beach on the Gulf has decreased by
approximately 10 acres since 1992 in the southern Y2 mile of Barefoot Beach (south ofR14.5)
This area has experienced severe erosion and the vegetation there, primarily cabbage palms, has
fallen from the scarp, creating a recreational barrier to beach combers and shore fishers
(Photographs 4 and 5). The existing loop trail within Barefoot Beach Preserve is currently
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
16 of 35
closed off at its southernmost portion due to erosion in this area. The closure renders that portion
of the park inaccessible to park patrons, thereby limiting the recreational usage of that portion of
the park as dictated by the Barefoot Beach Management Plan. In addition to impacting
recreational usage of the park, the erosion also presents a safety hazard. On July 14, 2009, while
conducting biological and vegetation boundary surveys within Wiggins Pass, CPE field
investigators witnessed a young boy fall from a high scarp at the southern end of the island. The
boy was punctured beneath the armpit by a dead tree snag and bleeding profusely. CPE staff
transported the boy to his family at the north end of the park to be taken to the nearest medical
facility.
Additionally, recreational navigation is limited due to the filling in and migration of the channel.
The intent of the project is to not only reduce the effects of erosion on beaches adjacent to
Wiggins Pass, but also to realign and dredge the channel to safe navigable conditions.
_;\t
.1
Photograph 4. Loss of vegetation blocking
access.
Photograph 5. Limited beach access beach
due to snags of dead trees.
CONCLUSIONS
The area surrounding Wiggins Pass is presently not identified as critically eroded, but from the
analysis performed, it can be seen that erosion is a threat and has created a loss of recreational
and habitat area. The Wiggins Pass area warrants consideration as critically eroded beach and
should be designated as such. This area qualifies under the State's Definition of Critical Erosion
due to threats to recreation and wildlife habitat. The proposed inlet improvement project will
help to stabilize the long term erosional trend, protect mangrove and beach habitat at the south
end of Barefoot Beach, and increase recreational shoreline and navigational usage within and
surrounding Wiggins Pass. The project warrants State financial support that can only be
provided with a critically erosion area designation.
P/Collier/8500.63/Critical Erosion../Critical Erosion Area Evaluation of Habitat and Recreation..
CAC March 11 , 2010
VII-5-a New Business
17 of 35
REFERENCE
CPE (Coastal Planning & Engineering), 1995. Coastal Planning & Engineering (CPE) 1995
Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners,
Collier County, FL by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Boca Raton, FL, 191 pp.
CPE (Coastal Planning & Engineering), 2009. Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL Numerical
Modeling of Wave Propagation, Currents and Morphology Changes Phase II: Numerical
Modeling of Alternatives Report. Report prepared for Collier County Wiggins Pass Modeling
Evaluation Working Group and Coastal Zone Management Department, Collier County, FL by
Coastal Planning & Engineering, Boca Raton, FL, 89 pp.
CPE (Coastal Planning, & Engineering), 2009 Wiggins and Doctors Passes Maintenance
Dredging Post-Construction Report. July 2009.
CEC (Coastal Engineering Consultants), 1982. Wiggins Pass Navigational Dredging and Beach
Nourishment Project: Inlet Hydraulics Report. Report prepared for Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Coastal Engineering Consultants, Naples, FL. 17 pp.
CEC (Coastal Engineering Consultants), 1989. Wiggins Pass Channel Design Evaluation.
Navigational Dredging and Beach Nourishment Project: Inlet Hydraulics Report. Report
prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Coastal Engineering
Consultants, Naples, FL, 14 pp.
CEC (Coastal Engineering Consultants), 1990. Plans for Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging,
February 1990.
H&M (Humiston & Moore Engineers), 2004. Wiggins Pass Feasibility Phase, Alternatives for
Modifying the Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging Permit to Address Erosion of Barefoot
Beach. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Humiston &
Moore, Naples, FL, 4 pp.
H&M (Humiston & Moore Engineers), Wiggins Pass Inlet Maintenance Dredging Construction
Plans, November 13, 2006.
H&M (Humiston & Moore Engineers), 2007. Wiggins Pass Study, Hydraulic and Sand
Transport Modeling. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL
by Humiston & Moore, Naples, FL, 47 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (US ACE) 1980. Improvements for Small Boat Navigation:
Detailed Project Report, Wiggins Pass, FL., 43 pp.
APPENDIX A
FDEP CRITICAL EROSION AREA ABSTRACT
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
18 of 35
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
19 of 35
CRITICALLY ERODED BEACHES
IN
FLORIDA
Updated, June 2009
BUREAU OF BEACHES AND COASTAL SYSTEMS
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
STATE OF FLORIDA
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
20 of 35
June, 2009
Collier County
There are seven critically eroded beach areas (13.3 miles), five noncritically eroded beach areas
(5.3 miles), and one critically eroded inlet shoreline area (0.8 mile) in Collier County.
In northern Collier County, a O.1-mile beach segment north of Wiggins Pass (R15.8-RI6.3) is
noncritically eroded. A 1.6-mile beach segment (R22.3-R30.5) is critically eroded threatening
development interests in Vanderbilt Beach. This area has a beach restoration project and
numerous bulkheads.
The City of Naples has two segments that are critically eroded threatening development interests
north and south of Doctors Pass. North of Doctors Pass (RSO.65-R57.5) is a 1.3-mile critically
eroded segment, and between Doctors Pass and Gordon Pass (R57.8-R89) is a 5.6-mile critically
eroded segment. These areas of Naples have a continuous beach restoration project. Numerous
bulkheads and revetments also exist throughout Naples. Groins exist north of Gordon Pass.
South of Gordon Pass (R90-Rll I) is a 3.9-mile stretch that is noncritically eroded along the
northern half of Keewaydin Island. Between Little Marco Pass and Capri Pass, Sea Oat Island
has 0.9 mile of beach that is noncritically eroded. Also, Coconut Island (MI-M2) has 0.1 mile
that is noncritically eroded off the north shore of Marco Island; however, little remains of this
island that was severely impacted by Hurricane Wilma (2005).
Marco Island has three areas that are critically eroded threatening development interests. Along
Hideaway Beach, the north shore of Marco Island (H3-Hll) fronting on Big Marco Pass has 0.8
mile of inlet shoreline that is critically eroded. The central gulf beach of Marco Island (R134.5-
R139) has 0.8 mile that is critically eroded and the southern stretch of beach (RI43-R148) has
0.9 mile that is critically eroded. All three critically eroded areas on Marco Island have beach
restoration projects, and the northern segment also has a rock groin field along Hideaway Beach.
Erosion on the two southern barrier islands in Collier County has progressed into the backshore
mangrove forest resulting in the loss of beach wildlife habitat. Following Hurricane Wilma
(2005), a 1.6-mile segment of Kice Island (V23- V31 A) is critically eroded. South of Morgan
Pass, Morgan Island has a 1.5-mile segment (V33.8-V41.8) that is critically eroded and a 0.3-
mile segment (V41.8-V43.5) that is noncritically eroded.
74
CoUlet'. County;
Location
R015.8 - R016.3
R022.3 - R030.5
R050.6 - R057.5
R057.5 - R089
R090-R111
Sea Oat Island
Coconut Island
H3-H11
R134.5 - R139
R143 -H148
V023 - V031.4
V033.8 - V041.8
V041.9 - V043.5
~
1
o 1.5 3
- -
- -
o 2 4
Classification
Noncritical
Critical
Critical
Critical
Noncritical
Noncritical
Noncritical
Critical Inlet
Critical
Critical
Critical
Critical
Noncritical
Gu If Of Mexico
6
8
12
9
Kilometers
16
GAG March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
21 of 35
June, 2009
Lee County
12
Miles
Wiggins Pass
Doctors Pass
Gordon Pass
Keewaydin Island
Little Marco Pass
Marco. Island
,
... ".;-,1..
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
22 of 35
McAlpinGary
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
mason s
Thursday, February 04, 2010 10: 11 AM
McAlpinGary; hambright-9
lorenz_w; MoscaMichele; GibsonLaura; SawyerMichael
Wiggins Pass permitting meeting summary
Hello all,
Here is a summary of what was discussed at the Friday Jan 22 meeting and what approvals are required by the Land
Development Code for the proposed dredging project.
At the meeting, Gary McAlpin and the consultant briefly outlined the scope of work for the dredge project and the
location of the work. The dredging will be to maintain the 3' draft restriction, no sea grass or hard bottom will be
affected and no shoreline hardening in proposed.
CDES staff outlined the following County requirements based on overlays and general LDC requirements. A link to the
LDC and relevant section numbers are included:
LDC - http://librarv.municode.com/index.aspx7c1ientld-13992&stateld-9&stateName-Florida .
~ Special Treatment Permit including an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and approval - (ST LDC
4.01.14 & EIS LDC 10.02.oi A) ~I'rc
~ Coastal Construction Setback permit for dune restoration - (LDC 10.02.06 H) ,
~ Vehicle on the Beach permit - (LDC 10.02.061)
Regarding the EIS, in the Growth Management Plan (GMP) consistency section, please pay special attention to
Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME) Goal 10 especially the Objectives and Policies in 10.3 and 10.5 in
addition to the other relevant areas ofthe CCME. http://www.colliergov.net/lndex.aspx?page=257
Additionally there are 2 other permits that may be required.
~ Vegetation Removal permit if any native vegetation will be removed or if any exotic vegetation will be
removed using machinery rather than hand held equipment. (LDC 3.05.05 and 10.02.06 L)
~ Temporary Use permit from the Zoning section if you are creating temporary staging areas above the
mean high water line. (LDC 10.02.06 G)
Here is a link to the environmental permits: http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=327
Here is a link to the zoning permit if needed: http://www.colliergov.net/lndex.aspx?page=819
At the meeting, Mr. McAlpin mentioned a GMP consistency determination will be required for the DEP permit. When
you need to obtain a determination, please contact Michele Mosca at (239) 252-2466 for instruction beyond that given
in the handout she provided at the meeting.
~ have copied other staff that attended that meeting or offered information. Please clarify or add anything necessary.
Thank you for your patience since it was longer than expected for me to send this out.
Please call or email if you have any questions.
Susan Mason, Principal Environmental Specialist
Collier County Community Development & Environmental Services Division
1
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
23 of 35
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - WIGGINS PASS
SUBCOMMITTEE
Naples, Florida, January 22,2010
LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Coastal Advisory Committee -
Wiggins Pass Subcommittee in and for the County of Collier, having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 10:30 A.M. at the Risk
Management Training Room, located at 3301 Tamiami Trail E., Building D,
Naples with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Joseph A. Moreland
Victor Rios
Robert Raymond
ALSO PRESENT: Gary McAlpin, Director, Coastal Zone Management
Gail Hambright, Accountant
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
24 of 35
I. Call to Order
Chairman Moreland called the meeting to order at 10:30 AM.
II. Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
III. Roll Call
Roll call was taken and a quorum was established.
Also were in attendance were: Doug Fee, Naples Resident; Robert Steiger, Park
Manager, Delnor- Wiggins State Park; Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest
Florida; Sally Braem, Florida Parks and Recreation; Dick Lydon, Estuary
Conservation Association; Jim Fox Island Marina; Kate Crosley, Conservancy of
Southwest Florida.
IV. Changes and Approval of Agenda
Mr. Raymond moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mr. Rios. Carried
unanimously 3-0.
V. Public Comments
Speakers
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, expressed concern on the
composition ofthe Subcommittee as it does not include the Stakeholders. The free
flow of information may be compromised by the 3 minute time limit for public
comment on an item. If the intention is to complete a major update of the Inlet
Management Plan, (as opposed to an update to satisfy the Joint Coastal Permit (JCP)
application submittal), the Subcommittee needs to be expanded to include the
Stakeholders.
VI. Approval of Minutes
None
VII. Staff Reports
None
VIII. New Business
1. How this Subcommittee will operate
Gary McAlpin, Director, Coastal Zone Management provided an overview on
the formation and operation of the Subcommittee noting:
. The Subcommittee was formed at the direction of the County Attorney's
Office to ensure it complies with County Policy.
. The Committee is a Subcommittee of the Coastal Advisory Committee.
. County policy does not allow Subcommittees of main Committees to be
comprised of Stakeholders or citizens.
. There will be public comments on individual Agenda items, limited by
the time deemed necessary by the Chairman.
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
25 of 35
. Individuals will be required to sign up to speak on Agenda items before
the item is heard by the Subcommittee.
. Any individuals not satisfied with the format should address the Coastal
Advisory Committee and/or the Board of County Commissioners.
. The meetings are intended to be an "information exchange" on the
Wiggins Pass Improvements.
. The Stakeholders notified were the Conservancy of Southwest Florida,
Estuary Conservation Association, Friends of Barefoot Beach, Delnor-
Wiggins State Park, Vanderbilt Beach Homeowners Association, and the
Boating Community.
. Any interested parties may request to be placed on the "meeting email
list" and receive the information relative to the Subcommittee
. At the discretion of the Chairman, the Subcommittee may allow
questioning by the interested parties.
Chairman Moreland noted the meeting would provide some flexibility in the
area of questioning by the public/Stakeholders.
He formally requested all involved in the process work together to make it as
successful as possible.
Speakers
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, noted the Subcommittee, if it
sees fit, could recommend to the Coastal Advisory Committee the inclusion of
Stakeholders on the Subcommittee.
Doug Fee, Naples Resident noted there have been other similar County processes
which have included the public and Stakeholders providing input in a roundtable
format, as opposed to a time limit to make comments on a particular agenda item
required herein. He expressed concern the format of the meetings may limit
public input.
Robert Steiger, Park Manager Delnor-Wiggins State Park read a copy of an
email from Jeff Raley, PE, Bureau of Natural andCulturalResources, Florida
Park Service to Gary McAlpin - Subject RE: "Wiggins Pass CAC Sub-Committee
meeting dated January 22, 2010."
The email requested a copy of any "Draft Inlet Management Plan" and" 1990
Inlet Management Study. "
He outlined 3 key elements of protection requested for the Wiggins Pass Project:
. The project's environmental and physical monitoring plans will be geared
to very timely surveys and documentation of adverse erosion or habitat loss
trends. Increased frequency of surveys is not as important as surveys or
studies that can be ordered quickly if species data or visual inspection
indicate an adverse trend.
. Permit conditions will clearly spell out timely and specific response if
erosion or habitat loss cross threshold levels.
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
26 of 35
. Commitment will be in place to circumvent adverse trends and/or to
mitigate for 10sses as may occur - in a reasonable time frame such as:
o Channel meandering toward park lands, threatening 10ss of land
and mangroves
o Exacerbated erosion of park beaches resulting from the pass
dredging, or
o Other unforeseen project impacts to protected wildlife vegetation
2. Review by Steve Keehn the information package to be submitted for Permit
Steve Keehn, Coastal Planning and Engineering provided a Slideshow
"Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project,
Preparedfor Collier County Coastal Zone Management and CAC Coastal-
Planning & Engineering - Steve Keehn, P.E. January 22,2010." The presentation
outlined the work completed to date by the Consultants and former "Wiggins Pass
Modeling Evaluation Work Group." A hard copy of the Slideshow was provided
as part of the meeting record. The following was highlighted:
. The County is requesting the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection designate Barefoot Beach as a "Critically Eroded Beach."
. If the designation is awarded, it allows for the FDEP to share in costs of
maintenance dredging.
. The new Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) application for dredging is designed to
provide for a "dynamic dredging channel" and "periodic minor dredging
maintenance. "
. The minor maintenance will be more cost effective than a major dredging
operation, assist in lengthening the major dredging cycle and be
environmentally friendly.
. The new JCP application is consistent with the existing Inlet Management
PIan providing navigation for a 3-foot draft vessel.
Speakers
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida - the following issues were
noted by Mr. McAlpin and Mr. Keehn in answer to several of Ms. Ryan's
questions:
. Mr. McAlpin stated the designation of a "Critically Eroded Beach" does
not require a specific Beach re-nourishment schedule or a prescribed
dredging cycle. The dredging will be the subject to the conditions of the
JCP.
. The meeting packets will be available on the County website.
. He also noted the minor dredging events may occur on the ebb shoal and
the flood shoal as necessary.
. Mr. Keehn mentioned the "sand dykes" constructed to assist in re-aligning
the channel will be "temporary" and consist of "piles of sand."
Doug Fee, Naples Resident - the following issues were noted by Mr. McAlpin
and Mr. Keehn in answer to Mr. Fee's questions:
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
27 of 35
. Mr. McAlpin stated the JCP application is available on line, as a CD, (or by
hard copy for a fee.)
. The designation of a "Critically Eroded Beach" and "JCP" are separate
processes, but both requests will be included in the submittal to FDEP
according to Mr. Keehn.
. Mr. McAlpin & Mr. Keehn both noted the construction process for
construction of the "dykes" is described in Section 5 of the JCP and the
project will require equipment on the beach.
. They both mentioned the proposed dredging channels are similar to the
existing permit, with some minor modifications as proposed in the new
JCP.
. The costs of the project have not yet been determined, however it will be
funded by the Tourist Development Council and funds are available.
Gary McAlpin stated the next meeting will focus on Agenda items 3, 4,5 6 listed
below.
Chairman Moreland requested, if possible, any questions on the items be
directed to Staff in advance, so Staff can address them at the meeting.
3. Review and discuss issues relative to FDEP's requirement that Wiggins Pass
Inlet Management Plan be updated with this permit application.
Continued
4. Discuss erosion on Barefoot Beach and rebuild and repair plan and preserve
designation.
Continued
5. Concerns over Letter of consistency for this work and resolution process.
Continued
6. Concerns about land lease requirements from the state system to do this
work.
Continued
7. Key Stakeholder Groups
a. Friends of Barefoot
b. Boating Community
c. Delnor Wiggins State Park (DWSP)
d. Conservancy of South West Florida
e. Vanderbilt Beach Borne Owners Association (VB BOA)
f. Estuary Conservation Association (ECA)
Continued
IX. Old Business
None
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
28 of 35
X. Announcements
None
XI. Committee Member Discussion
None
XII. Next Meeting Date/Location
February 8,2010, 9AM Risk Management Training Room, located at 3301
Tamiami Trail E., Building D, Naples
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was
adjourned by order ofthe chair at 11 :59 A.M.
Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee -
Wiggins Pass Subcommittee
Joseph A. Moreland, Chairman
These minutes approved by the Board/Committee on
as presented or as amended
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
29 of 35
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
WIGGINS PASS SUBCOMMITTEE
Naples, Florida, February 8, 2010
LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Coastal Advisory Committee - Wiggins Pass
Subcommittee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein,
met on this date at 9:00 A.M. at the Risk Management Training Room located at
3301 Tamiami Trail E, Building D, Naples, Florida, with the following members
present:
Chairman: Joseph A. Moreland
Robert Raymond
Victor Rios
ALSO PRESENT: Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management Director
Gail Hambright, Accountant
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
30 of 35
I. Call to Order
Chairman Moreland called the meeting to order at 9:05 AM.
II. Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
III. Roll Call
A quorum was established.
IV. Changes and Approval of Agenda
Add: VIII-lA. Questions Relative to VIII-I, Items 1-4.
Victor Rios moved to approve the Agenda as amended.
Second by Robert Raymond. Motion carried unanimously, 3-0.
V. Public Comments
Doug Fee, Wiggins Pass Resident asked the cost of the Project.
Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management responded that the cost will depend upon
the Final Scope. The cost for the development of the Model and Development of the
Engineering associated with procuring a permit is $132,000. The overalllO-year pIan
through construction costs have been estimated at 4.5 million.
Robert Stieger, Park Manager - Delnor/Wiggins Pass State Park reiterated that Jeff
Riley was unable to attend the meeting due to travel restrictions. He emailed Gary
McAlpin a request to be "conferenced" in for today's meeting. He stated Jeff Riley will
meet with his staff to formulate a list of questions directed at Gary McAlpin.
Chairman Moreland requested Robert Stieger find out what time line Jeff Riley would
meet with his staff and report to the Committee and Gary McAlpin.
VI. Approval of Minutes - January 22, 20 I 0
Victor Rios moved to approve the January 22,2010 Minutes as submitted.
Second by Robert Raymond. Motion carried unanimously, 3-0.
VII. Staff Reports
Gary McAlpin reported meeting with Mr. Robert Brantley and his concerns based
on conversation he had with intentions to move forward on the Project.
)0- Mr. Brantley stated Florida State Park and the Department of Parks and
Recreation are not on board with the Scope of the Project.
Gary McAlpin responded if the Florida State Park Services did not support the
Project it could slow the permit process down.
)0- Mr. Brantley expressed the possibility of going along with modifications to the
Inlet Management Plan. Since that conversation, DEP (Department of
Environmental Protection) has not decided their stance on the Inlet Management
Plan.
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
31 of 35
Gary McAlpin stated the County may need to modify the technique of the
permit application during the process. He expressed concern over a
wholesale re-write of the application.
~ Mr. Brantley stated DEP was looking at a 2-year process.
Gary McAlpin recommended moving forward on the permitting this year.
Steve Keehn, Engineer - Coastal Planning and Engineering stated Mr. Brantley was
unaware of the progress already made on the Project. The Project description was
provided to DEP and they have not reviewed it. He recommended submitting the
permit application to get the process started. He also stated according to the Florida
Fish & Wildlife Conservation, if sand was not put on the beach and included in the
permit, it would eliminate the need to consider turtles and would shorten the permit
process. All elements required have been covered in the Inlet Management PIan.
Gary McAlpin stated submitting the application would be a good vehicle to find out
what DEP's comments and oppositions are. He proposed not waiting and to submit the
permit application "as is" now. The permit application can be modified in the process.
VIII. New Business
1. Review and discuss issues relative to FDEP's requirement that Wiggins Pass
Inlet Management Plan be updated with this permit application.
Speakers
Doug Fee, Wiggins Pass Resident stated based on comments made by Gary
McAlpin regarding his conversation with Mr. Brantley, he would want the Florida
State Parks involved in the process, find out what DEP's issues are and what Jeff
Riley's questions are prior to submitting the permit application. He noted Wiggins
Pass is leased and alterations to the land are part of the Project. He suggested the
Subcommittee receive guidance from Coastal Advisory Committee and DEP and
voiced concern over the costs of a potential rewrite of the Inlet Management PIan.
He alluded the Subcommittee was putting the "cart before the horse."
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida expressed concern on non-
structural solutions and encouraged the County to work with the State Park
Services, DEP and Parks and Recreation to educate, answer questions and work on
issues related to the Wiggins Pass Inlet Management PIan. She stated the
Conservancy would like to see an open broad base of Stakeholders Group involved
to include scientists and environmental specialists. She stated it would be important
to get all the issues in writing. It would be hard to make decisions and not know all
the facts. She recommended requesting CAC to petition the BCC to move forward
rapidly to get the Inlet Management Plan updated.
Chairman Moreland summarized Nicole Ryan's concerns as is it appropriate for
the Subcommittee to recommend forwarding the request for a permit knowing it
mayor may not require a full review before any action is taken. The elements of the
supporting data to address that portion of the management pIan pertaining to a
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
32 of 35
particular area are not all there and continue with a heavy totality. Chairman
Moreland requested the minutes reflect Nicole Ryan nodded her head.
Gary McAlpin stated he would not want the process to take 2 years. He currently
has the authority to submit the application.
Speakers
Dick Lydon, Estuary Conservation Association stated he has experience with
Mr. Brantley. He further stated Gary McAlpin's recommendation to submit as
soon as possible makes sense. When the State receives the permit application they
will be forced to address their concerns and issues.
Doug Fee noted Collier County has a Land Development Code and cautioned the
Subcommittee it was inappropriate to take a vote for recommendation prior to
addressing the other items on the Agenda.
Victor Rios moved (the Subcommittee) recommend Gary McAlpin exercise his
current authority to go forward and submit the permit application. Second by
Robert Raymond. Motion carried unanimously, 3-0.
Steve Keehn, Engineer summarized he would submit an engineering report with
the permit application and a cover letter stating an Inlet Management Plan is being
developed.
It was noted the Inlet Management PIan and References would not be included.
DEP will note the deficiency. A permit would not be granted until documentation is
received. He will submit the Critical Eroded Area as a stand-alone document.
Gary McAlpin recommended forming a separate Work Group Committee to deal
with issues.
Victor Rios moved Mr. McAlpin petition the CAC petition the BCC to
approve a Work Group Committee to satisfY the needs of the Community and the
needs of the permit application. Second by Robert Raymond. Motion carried
unanimously, 3-0.
Gary McAlpin recommended the Committee move forward to petition DEP for
funding of a development contract for the engineering of the Inlet Management
Plan.
Victor Rios moved to have Mr. McAlpin petition the BCC to fund the development
contract for engineering associated with the Inlet Management Plan. Second by
Robert Raymond. Motion carried unanimously, 3-0.
2. Discuss erosion on Barefoot Beach and rebuild and repair plan and
preserve designation.
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
33 of 35
Steve Keehn presented a slide presentation with some of the following -
~ Flood Channel migration eroding Barefoot Beach.
~ Sand bypassing to the north was insufficient.
~ A 10ng shore transport is northward.
~ Inlet filling in significantly from the south
~ Since 1984, too much sand was placed to the south, then to the north.
~ Need more definitive structures to fill in sand.
~ Future position sand ratio should be 2.6 more sand to the north then south
based on historic documentation.
It was noted the US Corp of Army Engineers will also review application before a
permit will be granted.
The shoreline has changed over the last 30-40 years and the County loss
~ 10 Acres of Sandy Beach
~ 3 Acres of Shoreline Vegetation
~ 50' of Mangroves
~ Some Shoreline.
Steve Keehn made the following recommendations.
~ Placement of a near-shore disposal near shore
~ Placement of a near-shore and on-shore disposal a Barefoot Beach
~ Straighten up Inlet and create a new flood shoal on the other side of the inlet.
Speaker
Doug Fee commented the County has a 50-year lease on land north and south. The
lease states no alterations are allowed. He questioned if an Inlet Management Plan
had ever been approved and ifnot why would there be a need for are-write.
Recessed at 10:35 am
Reconvened at 10:40 am
3. Concerns over Letter of consistency for this work and resolution process.
Gary McAlpin distributed and reviewed a summary of the Wiggins Pass
Permitting Meeting held on January 22. (See attached)
Approvals required by the Land Development Code for the proposed dredging
proj ect are -
. Special Treatment Permit
. Coastal Construction Setback Permit
. Vehicle on the Beach Permit
. Plus 2 other Permits that may be required - Vegetation Removal
and/or Temporary Use Permit from Zoning
Speaker
Doug Fee commented he was happy that public meetings were going to be held and
noted Land Development Code has a rigorous review.
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
34 of 35
Staff responded they will meet all State requirements.
4. Concerns about land lease requirements from the state system to do this work.
Steve Keehn, Engineer stated the DEP Permit Process in Tallahassee will review
and identify if there are any issues. He will provide survey drawings and
anticipates changes will be required by the State. A Wiggins Pass survey will be
completed after permitting because changes may be made in the process.
Speaker
Doug Fee read a paragraph from the Land Lease on Deed Restrictions and asked if
the County would request an Upland Lease on the south side.
Gary McAlpin responded State Lands will tell the County what has to happen
before, and the County will meet State Requirements.
IX. Old Business - None.
X. Announcements
Gary McAlpin suggested the Staff work with the Stakeholders and report to the
Committee with questions. He suggested the Work Group Committee be made up of
the 3-Members of the Wiggins Pass Subcommittee and Representatives from the
following groups to be approved by the BCe.
~ Friends of Barefoot Beach
~ Boating Community
~ Delnor/Wiggins State Park (DWSP)
~ Conservancy of Southwest Florida
~ Vanderbilt Beach Home Owners Association (VB HOA)
~ Estuary Conservation Association (ECA)
Other suggestions made were -
~ Environmental Engineering Staff - Expertise
~ Friends of Wiggins Pass
~ FWC and FWS DEP from Fort Myers
Victor Rios expressed concern over having people from a regulatory agency as that
person may be bias.
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy responded regulatory people (an Ecologist) would bring
expertise and perspective to the table.
Gary McAlpin stated the Work Group Committee purpose would be to develop an
update or a new Inlet Management Plan to submit to the Subcommittee, DEP and the
BCe. He recommended the Stakeholder be independent and in support of the project.
Speaker
Jack Kindsvater, resident and boater stated there are Stakeholders in the boating
community and verbally listed; safety aspects - Fire and Police Departments, Sea Tours,
CAC March 11, 2010
VII-5-a New Business
35 of 35
Commercial Fisherman, Fishing Guides and individual boaters may be worth
considering.
It was decided Nicole Ryan and Gary McAlpin would work together as advisors and
make recommendations for legitimate Stakeholders. A list of individual
representative names will be submitted to the Wiggins Pass Subcommittee for approval
prior to submitting recommendations to the BCC.
The work group will tentatively hold their first meeting in May.
XI. Committee Member Discussion - None.
XII. Next Meeting Date - Location to be determined
The next meeting of the Wiggins Pass Subcommittee will be March 8th at 9:00 AM.
The only item on the agenda will be to address the membership on the Wiggins Pass
Work Group Committee.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned
by order of the Chair at 11:35 am.
Collier County Costal Advisory Committee -
Wiggins Pass Subcommittee
Joseph A. Moreland, Chairman
These Minutes were approved by the Board/Committee on
as presented , or as amended
CAC March 11, 2010
VIIl-6 New Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommend that the Coastal Advisory Committee approve the structure of the
proposed Inlet Management work team for Wiggins Pass as recommended by the
Wiggins Pass Subcommittee.
OBJECTIVE: Recommend that the Coastal Advisory Committee approve the
structure of the proposed Inlet Management work team for Wiggins Pass as
recommended by the Wiggins Pass Subcommittee.
CONSIDERATIONS: FDEP as a condition of the permit application for the
maintenance dredging and navigational improvement project is requiring an updated
Inlet Management Plan for Wiggins Pass.
Staff is recommending that a work team of community stakeholders be recommended
by the CAC and appointed by the BCC. This work group would be charged with the
development of the updated Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan. This work group
would report to the CAC and be active for one year while the plan was being developed
concurrent with the permit application.
Staff is recommending a composition as follows:
. Joe Moreland - Chairman of this committee and Collier County representative on
the CAC.
. Victor Rios - Marco Island representative on the CAC.
. Bob Raymond - Naples representative on the CAC.
. Nicole Ryan - Representative of the Conservancy of SW Florida
. Dick Lydon - Representative of the Vanderbilt Beach
. TBD - Representative of the Boating Community
. Tom Crowe - Representative of the Friends of Barefoot Beach
. Jeff Raley - Representative of the Florida Park Service (DWSP)
. Jack Kindsvater - Representative of the ECA
It is expected that this rework of this Inlet Management Plan may cost in excess of
$250,000 to accomplish. Staff will apply for FDEP cost share funding for this contract.
An application request is attached. Once a scope of work is developed, a cost estimate
will be developed for funding.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: On March 8, 2010 the Wiggins
Pass Subcommittee of the CAC recommended approval with the representative of the
Boating Community to be determined by Frank Donahue (3-0).
FISCAL IMPACT: The Source of funds is from Category "A" Tourist Development Tax
fund 195.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: the revised Inlet Management Plan will conform
to all growth management and land development code requirements.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: No legal review on this item has taken place.
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the Coastal Advisory Committee approve the
structure of the proposed Inlet Management work team for Wiggins Pass.
PREPARED BY: J. Gary McAlpin, P.E., CZM Director
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-7 New Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Clam Bay Subcommittee Update/Status
OBJECTIVE: Update the CAC on the Clam Bay Subcommittee.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Clam Bay Subcommittee has met once since the last CAC
meeting/their inception and decided not to meet again until the third subcommittee
member was seated. Meeting minutes are attached.
During the first meeting, the subcommittee defined the boundaries of the Clam Bay
Estuary to be, "That wetland area South of Vanderbilt Beach Road and North of
Seagate Drive". Additionally, the Mission Statement that was approved by the Clam
Bay Advisory Committee was adopted by this subcommittee without change.
A Scope of Work for a Biological Assessment of the Clam Bay Estuary was reviewed
and discussed. Action on this item was deferred until the third member is seated.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts
resulting from this study.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: N/A.
RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing only.
PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-7-a New Business
1 of?
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - CLAM BAY
SUBCOMMITTEE
Naples, Florida, February 1,2010
LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Coastal Advisory Committee - Clam
Bay Subcommittee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. at the North Collier Regional
Park in the Exhibit Hall, Naples, Florida, with the following members
present:
CHAIRMAN: Anthony Pires
Jim Burke
(Vacancy)
ALSO PRESENT: Gary McAlpin, Director, Coastal Zone Management
Gail Hambright, Tourist Tax Collector
GAG March 11, 2010
VIII-7-a New Business
2 of?
I. Call to Order
Chairman Pires called the meeting to order at 9:07 am.
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
The Agenda was approved subject to the following changes:
. Addition of item VIlLA - How the Subcommittee will Operate
. Deletion of item VIII.3 - Scope of Peer Review - Discussion
. Scope of Work for Biological Assessment to become item VIII.3
. Deletion of Item VIII.5 - Scope of Work - Circulation Modeling
. Addition of Item VIllA - Wanless Report - Discussion.
V. Public Comments
David Roellig, member of the previous Clam Bay Subcommittee noted this was
the third Group assembled to address the issues associated with the Management of
the Clam Bay System and expressed concern the Report prepared by PBS&J for the
County is unsatisfactory and should not be used as a foundation for the Subcommittee
to move forward in completing its tasks.
Chairman Pires noted there is a 3-minute time limit for public speaker comments,
however he will provide flexibility in the rule to ensure as much information as
possible is gathered by the Subcommittee.
Kathy Worley, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, agreed with Mr. Roellig and
expressed concern on the concept of speakers registering to speak on an item with a 3
limit time constraint. She recommended technical persons be allowed to sit at the
"round table" and be allowed to ask questions of the consultants, etc. during their
presentations.
John Domenie requested the Subcommittee clarify the areas of their responsibilities
including the parameters of the Studies. He outlined the differences between
Moorings Bay and Clam Bay. Moorings Bay is man made, dredged for navigation,
has artificial concrete walls and an artificial inlet (Doctors Pass). Clam Bay
incorporates a NRP A (Natural Resource Protection Area) designated for
environmental purposes, has a natural shoreline and shallow mangrove system. He
requested the County leave the management of the Clam Bay System with the Pelican
Bay Services Division who has maintained it for the past 10 years.
Chairman Pires requested persons with comments or questions on written reports
distributed for the meeting, provide them, in writing, to Staff for distribution 2 days in
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-7-a New Business
3of7
advance of the meeting. This will assist Staff, Subcommittee members and
Consultants in providing comments or answers at Subcommittee meetings.
VI. Approval of Minutes
None
VII. Staff Reports
None
VIII. New Business
A. How the Subcommittee will Operate
Gary McAlpin, Director, Coastal Zone Management noted:
. The Subcommittee will operate under the rules of the Coastal Advisory
Committee (CAe).
. There will be a 3 minute time limit for public speakers with additional
time granted at the discretion of the Chairman.
. Staff intends to schedule the meetings on a regular basis for the 3rd
Thursday of each month and be held at the CDES (Community
Development and Environmental Services) building (if possible).
. The Subcommittee is comprised of 3 members with a current vacancy.
1. Boundary of Clam Bay - Discussion
Gary McAlpin provided the following documents for the record:
. "Publication Series NR-SP-94-01, Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection
Area (NRPA), August 1994" prepared for Collier County Environmental
Services Division.
He reviewed (page iv) of the document which describes the boundaries of
the NRP A as "located next to the Gulf of Mexico, north by Vanderbilt
Beach Road, east to the remaining natural areas next to the berm and
Pelican Bay Development and South to Seagate Drive. "
. "Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area Annual Report October
1997. "
The document describes the NRP A area as the area from Vanderbilt
Beach Road, south to Seagate Drive, on the west by the Gulf of Mexico
and on the east by the berm of the Pelican Bay Development.
. "Collier County Ordinance 2008-48" which created the previous Clam
Bay Advisory Group.
The Ordinance states "the Clam Bay Estuary System is a designated
Natural Resources Protection Area (NRP A). "
GAG March 11. 2010
VIII-7-a New Business
4 of?
Sneakers
Bob Naegele, Pelican Bay noted the original Tomasko Report defined the
Estuary from Wiggins Pass to 5th Avenue, which identified the watershed as
opposed to the Estuary. This definition is too broad to define the "Clam Bay
Estuary System (CBES)." He recommended defining the CBES as the "NRP A."
He expressed concern Pelican Bay is not represented on the Coastal Advisory
Committee or this Subcommittee.
Mr. Burke noted the compilation of the CAC is prescribed in the Ordinance
governing the CAe.
Mary Johnson, Pelican Bay Resident supports the definition provided in the
record documents (the NRPA) for the CBES.
Sarah Wu, Seagate Resident recognized Pelican Bay's concern for protecting the
boundaries of the CBES as the NRP A. She expressed concern areas outside of
the NRP A affect the activities within the system and requested the Subcommittee
continue to study these areas outside the NRP A and how they affect the overall
quality of the CBES.
Gary McAlpin provided page 1 of the "Collier County Clam Bay Advisory
Committee" Mission, Functions, Powers, Duties & Work Plan", (Coastal
Advisory Committee meeting document, March 12,2009, Item VII-8 New
Business 7 of 10).
Under Recommended Boundaries, it states "The Clam Bay Advisory Committee
(hereafter the Committee'') has defined the boundaries of the Clam Bay Estuary
(hereafter the "Estuary'') as generally, that wetland area south of Vanderbilt
Beach Road and north of the Seagate Community.
The Subcommittee recommended the following changes to the above wording:
. Deletion of the word "generally"
. Revise the term Seagate Community to "Seagate Drive."
Mr. Burke moved to define limits of the Clam Bay Estuary System from
Vanderbilt Beach Drive south to Seagate Drive, the Gulf of Mexico on the West,
on the East by the berm adjacent to the west side of Pelican Bay Development.
Second by Chairman Pires. Carried unanimously 2-0.
Chairman Pires noted the Subcommittee should consider defining the limits of the
Clam Bay Estuary's Systems watershed at afuture meeting.
2. Mission of the Clam Bay Subcommittee - Discussion
Gary McAlpin provided page 1 of the document. "Collier County "Clam Bay
Advisory Committee" Mission, Functions, Powers, Duties & Work Plan", (Coastal
Advisory Committee meeting document, March 12,2009, Item VII-8 New
Business 7 of 10).
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-7-a New Business
5 of 7
Under Committee Mission it states "The Committees mission is to advise, assist
and make joint recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners ("BCC'')
and the Coastal Advisory Committee ("CAC'') with all major issues affecting the
management, use, direction, health and long term viability of the Clam Bay
Estuary in accordance with the protection afforded Clam Pass and Clam Bay's
NRP A and conservation designations as delineated in the Future Land Use
Element of the Collier County Growth Plan and Coastal Zone Management Plan.
In doing so, the Committee will formulate recommendations for review and
recommend possible funding sources that may be required by such
recommendations. "
Speakers
Marcia Cravens, Mangrove Action Group noted the original approval of the
NRP A by the BCC was defined as the Pelican Bay Conservation Area. She
expressed concern a legal order issued in 1999 which required "meaningful
protection" of wildlife in the NRP A is being violated given the activities proposed
in the CBES by the County. She submitted meeting minutes and related backup
information for the February 28, 1995 and May 18, 1999 BCC meetings for
consideration by the Subcommittee
Gary McAlpin stated any concerns identified in the Court Order referenced in
Ms. Cravens's statement may be included in the biological assessment of the
CBES.
Mary Johnson, Pelican Bay Resident expressed concern the focus of the item
has shifted from development of a long-term Management Plan for the CBES to
the issues associated with Outer Clam Bay. She would like a better understanding
on the sources of pollution from the Seagate Community, how it can be better
controlled, and why is only "flushing" considered as a solution, etc.
Chairman Pires noted the Mission Statement outlined above is consistent with
the issues Ms. Johnson raised as it incorporates "all major issues affecting the
management use, direction, health and long term viability of the Clam Bay
Estuary. "
Linda Roth, Pelican Bay Resident expressed the BCC directive references the
term the "entire Clam Bay Estuary System," and requested clarification if the
CBES boundary incorporates the NRP A or goes all the way to Doctors Pass.
Chairman Pires noted the boundaries were defined under item VIlLI
Rick Dykman, Seagate Resident clarified the CBES being described as "a
natural system" as inaccurate. The area of the Ritz Carlton and Bay Colony was
altered during periods of construction. He expressed concern the public's
perception on the issues is the Seagate Community vs. the Pelican Bay
Community. Seagate is concerned with the water quality and if there any issues
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-7-a New Business
6of7
within the Seagate development negatively affecting the CBES, the community
would like to know and address it. His understanding regarding jurisdictions is
the area is owned by the State of Florida and managed by Collier County.
Mr. Burke moved to approve the Subcommittee Mission Statement as provided
in the Coastal Advisory Committee meeting document, March 12, 2009, Item
VII-8 New Business 7 of 1 0 (referenced above).
Second by Chairman Pires. Carried unanimously 2-0.
3. Scope of Work for Biological Assessment - Discussion
Gary McAlpin provided the document "Additional Work Request WO# Contract
#07-4153 Upper, Inner and Lower Clam Bay Biological Study" prepared by Jeff
Tabar ofPBS&J dated January 22,2010. He provided an overview of the
proposal noting some data collection may be completed by other organizations or
firms, but analyzed by PBS&J.
Speakers
Marcia Cravens, Mangrove Action Group noted there are numerous studies
and surveys that have already been completed which indicate there are significant
wildlife species in the area. She submitted a document "Clam Bay/Clam Pass
Estuary Preserve: A Natural Resources Protection Area (NRP A) for Wildlife"
which outlined a list of species identified in the NRP A. She stated the scope of
work should follow the model consistent with the Everglade Restoration Plans
and the South West Florida Feasibility studies. Also, be subject to a competitive
bidding process.
Kathy Worley, Conservancy of Southwest Florida recommended a decision on
the item be postponed for a vote, as many individuals just received the document.
The Conservancy will complete an 11 year Report on the System in late summer
which includes significant data throughout the entire system. She can provide the
Subcommittee a summary of the procedures and methods utilized in the Report.
Linda Roth, Pelican Bay Resident agrees with Ms. Worley on postponing any
decision on the item. She noted there are recommendations in previous Studies
which should be analyzed before proceeding.
Mary Johnson, Pelican Bay Resident agreed with postponing the item, so all
involved have a chance to review the documents.
Gary McAlpin noted the item was placed on the Agenda for informational
purposes only. A cost estimate for the work has not been developed.
Chairman Pires recommended the item be placed on the next Agenda and
include a discussion on whether or not the Subcommittee will recommend
utilizing the CCNA (Competitive Consultants Negotiations Act) process for
awarding the scope of work.
4. Wanless Report
Continued
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-7-a New Business
7of7
Chairman Pires re-iterated his request any persons submitting documents
relating to Subcommittee meetings provide them to Staff at least 2 days in
advance of the meeting.
Speaker
Mary Johnson provided a document "Comments to the Clam Bay Subcommittee
Meeting of February 1,2010" for consideration by the Subcommittee.
IX. Old Business
None
X. Announcements
None
XI. Committee Member Discussion
None
XII. Next Meeting Date/Location
The next meeting will be held on March 18,2010 at 1:00 PM Location to be
announced. .
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was
adjourned by order of the chair at 10:34 A.M.
Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee -
Clam Bay Subcommittee
Anthony Pires, Chairman
These minutes approved by the Board/Committee on
as presented or as amended
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8 New Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BVO Payment Issues with the Clerk of Courts
OBJECTIVE: Update the CAC on recent issues with the Collier County Best Value
Offer (BVO) Process and its impact on coastal projects.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Collier County Clerk is concerned that the BVe process for
contracting consulting services is illegal and violates State statutes. He has refused to
pay invoices from consultants contracted under this process. All work contracted under
the BVO process is currently suspended. This affects two (2) consultants doing work
for the CAC.
PBS&J is owed $200,000 for work associated with Clam Bay; all activity under this
contract is stopped. It does not affect the existing Clam Bay Permit Application which
was contracted before the BVe process was approved by the BCC.
The second consultant affected is Coastal Planning & Engineering which is owed
$100,000 for the physical beach monitoring. All field work has been completed but the
analysis and report for the Marco and Hideaway Beaches has not been completed.
The County is working diligently to resolve this issue with the Clerk. More information
will be forwarded as it becomes available.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts
resulting from this study.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: N/A.
RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing only.
PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director
February 22, 2010
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
1 of 14
Dwigbt E. Brock
Clerk of Courts
Clerk of Courts
Accountant
Auditor
Custodian of County Funds
Fred W. Coyle, Chairman
Collier County Board of County Commissioners
3301 E. Tamiami Trail
Naples, FL 34112
Dear Commissioner Coyle:
This is to advise you that our office is unable to process payments for services under the
County's Best Value Offer (BVO) Process. Our office is reviewing the legality of payments
under this process. I have received three letters from attorneys representing professional
organizations, questioning the validity of the County's BVO process. I have also reviewed
additional information which raises additional questions as to the validity of the BVO process.
Until we are able to validate the legality of the BVO process, we are unable to make
payments on agreements under this process. We had previously questioned this concept,
however, we relied on the County Attorney's issued opinion for legal sufficiency, and separately
issued legal letter to process payments in accordance with their opinion. Subsequently, based
upon the above correspondence and a further review of available information, we again must
question the validity of the BVO process, forcing us to cease payments until legality can be
determined.
Any input or materials that you may think pertinent are appreciated. Mr. Carnell has
indicated there may be other counties that are running similar programs, i.e. St. Johns or Palm
Beach; we would appreciate any and all information related to similar programs of which you are
aware. Time is of the essence to avoid further delays in vendor payments.
DEB/mab
Cc: Donna Fiala, Commissioner
Frank Halas, Commissioner
Tom Henning, Commissioner
Jim Colletta, Commissioner
Jeff Klatzkow, County Attorney
Steve Carnell, Purchasing Director
Phone (239) 252-2646
Website: www.coJlierclerk.com
Fax (239) 252-2755
Email: collierclerk@collierclerk.com
._:. s
~~
CAe Ma,,,1, 11, ~818
VIII-8-a New Business
2 of 14
~, "
~
YOUNG VANAssENDERP. EA.
,;
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
.
"
ATTORNEYS:
'1l\sHA O. BUP"OAO
DAVIO S. Do:
RoNALD A. ~ICY
.JOHN T. LAVI4. III
PH...," S. Ar.RsoNs
llMOTHY R. 0uALL5
KENv. VANAssIENDEftP
RoeERT ScHUI"EL WtaOHT
ROY C. '!buNa
GAUJE'S HAu.
22lS SouTH Al:w4s STRUT
SUITE 200
PosT OP"P"ICIE BOx I 833
(lIP 32302- I 833)
"llIi..LAHAue:. FLORIDA 3230 I
.
}
~LlEPHOHIE: (8S0) 222-7200
"1nI:CO"'ER: (8150) !5e 1-6834
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frank Rudd, Executive Director
Florida Engineering Society
FROM: RoyC. Young
DATE: January 8,2010
SUBJECT: Collier County's Best Value Offer (BVO)
'. .
You have asked that'I give' you my legal opInion regarding the legality of Collier
County's procurement procedure for obtaining services of professional engineer firms. I will
assume for brevity that any reader of this memo is aware of the state law' - CCNA - and the
procedure cWTently in effect in Collier County, which uses a process they call Best Value Offer
(BVO) to choose among competitively selected consultants for available projects.
The process used in Collier County can be contusing because it is really a two-step
process. First, they obtain services of engineering fino via continuing contract using CCNA and
when they need such services for a specific project they use BVO to choose among those that
have continuing contracts.
It is my opinion that the so called BVO policy used by Collier County is flawed and
violates the intent and spirit of the CCNA.
The CCNA was adopted by Florida legislation to require that the services of professional
engineering firms be selected by government agencies based on their qualifications not the price
of their services. The BVO policy includes price as one of its components. This is the CCNA
violation.
It appears'that Collier County follows the' CCNA in selecti~g eng~eering firms for
continuing contraets at an agreed-upon fixed-rate of compensation: 'Note at this stage in process
~M~.
GAG March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
3 of 14
~
Memo to Frank Rudd
Page #2
January 8, 2010
there is no project and the County says the fixed rate will not change if finn selected for future
project. The County has an "engineering firm in waiting" for when they are needed for a future
project. Problem arises when they engage more than one firm that is available to provide
services for future project. How to choose which one gets project?
The County maintains that there is no guidance in CCNA to tell them how to choose
between fmns that they have continuing contracts with who are prequalified to do a particular
future project. There is the guidance that the CCNA prohibits the County from asking the firms
with continuing contracts to bid against each other. The County maintains they are not bidding
when they ask for price in BVO process as price is actually a reference to the methoc;l and means
required to complete the project, because the rate of compensation is already fixed. Since the
County already knows the fixed compensation, why ask for more info on price except to be used
to compare. Surely this is violation at this point and it is splitting hairs to say that this is not
bidding.
RCY:swp
.
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
4 of 14
....
~
.
Florida Attorney General
Advisory Legll Opinion
Number: AGO 2007-49
Date: November 7, 2007
Subject: Airport Authoriti.., continuing contractll, bidding
Hr. Robez't S. S.aine
Attorney for ~e Sebring Aizport Au~ority
S.aine, Barris , ShHhan, P.A.
425 South CcaIII.8rce Avenue
Sebring', Florida 33870-3702
U: CONSULTANTS COIIPB'1'ITIVB RBGOTD.TION ACT - SOCIAL DISTlUCTS
- SPECIAL ACTS - AIRPORT AUTHORITY - bidding' proced.ures for
air.port authority. s. 287.055, rla. stat.; Ch. 2005-300, La.s of
Fla.
Dear Hz:. S.aiDe:
On behalf of ~e Sebring Aizport Authority Boara, you have asked.
for my opinion on substantially ~ following' questions:
1. Is the Sebring' Aizport Authority authorized to enter into
multiple continuing' contracts for profe.sional services pursuant
to section 287.055, Florida Statutes?
2. To ccmply with the purchasing and bidding requirements of ~e
Authority's 8peCial act, can the Sebring Airport Authority
request those ._ service providers to bid on .ach subsequent
project that would qualify .. a "continuing contract" pursuant
to. section 287.055 (2) (9), rlorida Statutes, the "Con81Jltants'
C~titive Negotiation Act?"
Que.tion One
Section 287.055, I'lorida Statu'tell, the Conaultanta' C~titiv.
Negotiation Act (CCRA), Hts forth requi~ta for procuring
....
...
GAG March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
5 of 14
..
~
ane! conuactiDg' ~or pro!'e..ional architecmral, eDgiDMrin9,
lancUcape architectural, or lane! .urveying ane! mapping ..rvice..
Under 1:he act, aD agency, inclucling a special clis'trict, mu.t
ccaplUUvely .elect and negotiate .ith 'the moat cpali!'iecl ~izm
to provide the.e pro!'e..ional ..rvices !'or a project. [1] The
Sebring Aizport Authority is listecl a. a dependent special
clis'trict by the I'lorida Depart:aeDt o!' C~unity A!'~irs. [2]
In opinions applying the Consult:aDt's Competitive Negotiation
Act, this office has notecl that 'the CCRA ... de.ignecl to provide
procecSure. for state ane! local governmental agencie. to follow
in the -.plopaent of prof.ssional service con.ultants to make
the contracting !'or pro!'..sional s.rvice. more cClllllpetiUve and
to require the -.pl~t o~ the mo.t cpa1ifiecl ane! ccmpeteAt
iDdivicluals and ~izma at ~air, ccape'tiUve, ane! rea.onable
compen.ation. [3] The CCHA appli.s to any agency subject to the
act .i th the power or cluty to conuact for pro~.ssional s.rvices
as .et forth in section 287.055, I'lorida Statutes. This o!'~ice
has detezainec:l that the CCRA applies to various goverDmeDtal
enti ties, inclucling a municipality in acc~lishin9 the puzpos..
for .hich a grant is received; [4] the state fair authority; [5] a
county civic faciliti.. authority: [6] a ho~ital 'tu:ing
cli.'trict; [7] a multi-county ai:r:port authority; [8] ane! a COUDty
housing authority. [I] The CCRA .a. enacted. for the public
beD.fit anci .houle! be int:.ezpretecl most favorably to the
public. [10]
~ original legislation creating the CCHA, Chapter 73-11, La..
o!' I'lorida, splaks clirec'tly to probl... o~ conflict with other
la... '1'he act .pecifically provid8JI that II [a] ny la.s, or part.
of la. in conflict .ith the provi.ion. of this act are h.reby
repealed." Thu., to the extent that any provision o!' 'the Sebrin9
Ai:r:port Authority legislation conflicts .ith the ceRA, tho..
Hction. were repealed, ef'~.ctive July 1, 1173. (8_ s.ction I,
Chapter 73-11, La.. of I'lorida, provicling 'the .~!'.ctive date o~
the act.)
The CCRA provides 'that "[n] othing in this act shall be construecl
to prohibit a continuiDg' con'tract between a !'ina ane! an
agency. n [11] A "continuing contract"
is def~ in the statute a.:
,..
.
!.;<.<-\ ~< ,
~o 1.1,.....1, II, ~u 1:-
VIII-8-a New Business
6 of 14
,
..
"a conuaot ~o%: p%:o~es.ional .e&'Vice. eA~%:ed in1:o in accoz:daDce
with all the p%:ocedUZ'e. o~ this act bet_n an ageDCJ'and a ~iJ:a
whe%:8by the ~iza p%:ovicl8a p%:o~essional serviCMts to 1:he agency
~oz: pz:ojeata in which construction cosu do not exceecl $1
million, ~o%: study ac1:i vi t.y wheD the f_ ~o%: auch pZ'O~es.ional
..&'Vice doe. not exceed $50,000, o%: ~or: wor:k o~ a specified
na1:u%:e .. ou1:lined in the cont%:act ~r:ed. by t;he &geAcy, with
no t:iJ18 l:1mi1:&1:ion except that the con1:&'act .st pZ'Ovid8 a
wzaination olause. I'iz:aa pZ'OvicliDg pr:o:fe..ional .eJ:Vice. uncle%:
continuing contr:act. .hall not be r:eqai%:ed 1:0 bid again.t one
another." [12]
Nothing in MOt:ion 281.055, I'lo%:ida S1:&tut.e., l;1mi ts 'the number:
o~ continuinq conuacu
into which an agency "1" eAw%: at: ODe ~. In ~act, the s1:&tuw
appea:. to :NCogni.e that aul1:iple con1:&'act:a "1" be in e~fect
.:iJmlt:aneousl1"; other:wi.e, 1:he .1:&tu1:ozy language p%:8Cluding
fizma f%:ca being r:equir:ed. to bid again.t: 0Dtl anot;he%: would be
.upe%:~luou... [13] Ther:efo%:e, I am of the opinion that the Seb%:ing
A:i.r:por:t: Autho%:ity "1" ente%: into mulUple continuing cont:%:act:.
~or: p%:o~e..iona1 .eJ:Vice. pu:.uant 1:0 .ecUon 281.055, I'lo%:ida
81:&tll1:8. .
I would no~ that t;hi. o~~ice, in Atto:mey GeDe%:al'. Opinion 93-
56, conclws.d that: the CCRA doe. not p%:ovide c%:i~%:ia ~o%:
negoUating an eDgag..-nt to conuact fo%: p%:ofe..ioDal .ervices
UDder: a conUnuing contr:act:, and a JIlunicipalit.y "1" develop it.
own pz:ooeclur:e. fo%: evaluaUng .uch a conuact. Thu., a. that
opinion and.ub.eqaent opinion. o~ thi. office have %:ecogni.ed,
i~ . JIlunicipality c:l81:8zaiDe. that: it i. app%:op%:ia~ to develop
O%:i1:8%:ia :fo%: det:e-~Ding which f'iza v.nde%: continuing cont%:act
wi th the city will be seleot:ed to p8%:foza a pZ'Oject, it..1" do
.0. [14] Bo_Y'8Z', the opinion S1J9Pst:a that it "1" be advi.able
foz: gover:maan1:&l enUUe. to adopt adaini.uaUve J:Ule. o~
pr:ocedur:e 1:0 in.u%:e that the.. cr:i1:8%:ia are applied uni~or:ml1" to
all cont:inuing conuact. in1:o which the enUty i. a pa%:t.y. [15]
Que.UOD Two
In 2005, the de:finiUon o~ "cont:inuing conuact" in .ection
.
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
7 of 14
i'
28'7.055, I'lorida Sub~s, vaa IUll8ndad = provide tha1: fiZ'IU
p~vidin9 prof...ional .ezovice. undeZ' cont:inuing conaac1:.
C&IID01: be Z8qaired. 1:0 bid aqain.1: one anothezo. [16] '!'he lanquage
of the .1:a1:u1:e i. 01.&Z' and unequivocal. [1'7]
Bowever, the special ac1: oOD1:~lling the operaUon of the
Sebring Aizpor1: Authori'ty cont:ains Z'8qUir~1:a for ocmpeUUve
bidding on ceZ't:ain projeci:a. SecUOD 8, Chap1:er
2005-300, Lav. of I'lorida (originally codified a1: .ecUon 8,
Cbap1:er 6'7-2070, Lavs of I'lorida), provide.:
"Ho cODaac1: for t:h. ooll81:Z'ucUon, repair, or alteraUon of any
facili'ty or par1: of t;h. ...., or the puZ'Cha.. of equipaen1:,
_Z'Yioes, or .upp1ie. involving an expendi1:UZ'. of IDOr. t;han
$10,000, shall be aw&Z'ded by the authori'ty unl... the au1:hori'ty
adverUs.. for s_led bids at l.ast once a v_k for 2
cons.cuUve week. and .uch conaac1: is aw&Z'ded = the 10v.a1:
responaible bidder. However, the au1:hori'ty may zoej.c1: all bids."
.As di.cu..ed above, the Legisla1:UZ'tI, in enac1:ing 1:I1e CCHA, has
declared tha1: any proviaion in lav tha1: oonf1ic1:s vith 1:11.
CCHA's nquiZ'8lllellu, is repealed. In t:his case, the lanquaqe
conuined in COlA' s .nab1ing 1egi.1a1:ioD would cODao1 = repeal
II [a] ny 1avs, or parts of 1av in ooDf1i= with the provision of
[the CCRA]." Thus, 1:0 the exten1: .ectioD 8, Chap~r 2005-300,
Law. of 1'10rida, oonf1ic1:. vi 1:h 1:11. provisions of secUon
287.055, I'lorida St:a1:utes, the CeRA vi1l oonaol. (I vould nobl
that t;he special ac1: cnaUng' and reguJ.a1:iDg the Sabri.Dg' Airport
Authori'ty, ChapteZ' 2005-300, Lav. of 1'10rida, vas reenacted
pursuant 1:0 legislative dinotive as pZ'ovi~ iD SecUOD
189.429, norida St:a1:u~s.) This p~vision required each
disaict, by O'.....b9..: 1, 2004, = aulai1: = the Legi.1a1:uzoe a
cIZ'~1: codified chaZ'ter of all i1:8 special ac1:s for reenact:llleDt
by the Legiala1:UZ'e as a sing1. ao1:. Th. SabriDg Aizport
Authori'ty omaplied vith 1:I1is directive and 1:I1e Legialabre
reenacted the authori'ty'a chazoter in Chapter 2005-3000, Laws of
Florida. S.CUOD 189.429 (2), Florida St:ab~s, provide.:
"The reenactaeDt of existing lav UDder this .ec1:ion shall not be
oonstzoued as a graD1: of additioDal authori'ty Dor to supers"
1:11. authori'ty of any enti'ty puzosuan1: 1:0 laVe BxCepUODS to 1av
r
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
8 of 14
aontained in any apec:ial aat: t:hat: are reeDaat:ed pur.uant: t:o t:hi.
seat:ion .ba1l eont:inue t:o apply."
The CCRA ~ed 'the aon~liet:iDg provi.ion. o~ .eat:ion 8,
Chapter 2005-300, Law. of Florida, with ~ard t:o profe..ional
service. conuaa'ta. The E'88Dact:llaDt: of 'the special aat: clid not:
revive 'thi. provi.ion. Thu., 'the au'thorit:y should employ seat:ion
287.055, Florida stat:ut:es, for any cont:ract:s for 'the aaqui.it:ion
of prof...ional aezovice. covereel by 'the COlA and continuing
conuaa'ta ~or 'the.e ..rvicea.
Sect::Lon 8, Chapter 2005-300, Law. of Florida, e.t:abli.hea suiet:
10. bid criteria for 'the a.ard of aonuaat:. .i'th the s.bring
Aizoport: Au'thorit:y. For t:bose ait:uat:iona involving' aonuae'ta for
prof...ional .ervicea, t:hia provi.ion would alearly aonfliat:
.i'th 'the CeRA I. requirement: that. an agenOJ' compet:i t::L vely .elect:
and negotiate wit:h 'the moat: qualified fiDl t:o provide
profe..ional .ervices "at: aampenaat:ion which 'the .ag'8Day
cla1:eDdne. i. fair, aompet:i t:ive, and reasonable." The COlA
repealed 'the confliat:ing provisions of seat:ion 8, Chap1:er 2005,
Law. of Florida, wit:h revarcl t:o profe..ional .ervice. aonuact:..
The reenactaeDt: of t:he apeaial act: clid not: revive 'thi.
provision. TbU8, the aut:horit:y .hould ~loy .ect.ion 287.055,
Florida St:at:ut:es, for any cont:raat:s for 'the aaqaiait:ion of
profe..ional .ervice. aoveZ'8cl by the COlA and aont:inuing
cont:raat:s for 'the.e ..rvice..
Therefore, in respon.e t:o your .eaond qae.t:ion, .ect:ion
287.055 (2) (g), Florida Stat:ute., would eont:rol any cont:inuiDg'
conuaat:. for profe..ional .ervice. int:o which 'the Sebring
Aizoport: Au'thorit:y aay en1:er and would prohibit: 'the au'thorit:y
from a.king fiZIU provicliDg' profe..iemal .ervice. UDder
aont:inuing aont:raat:. t:o bid again.t: ODe anot:her.
Sincerely,
Bill IfcCollua
At:t:oZ'D.y General
BII/t:gb
r
,
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
9 of 14
----------------------------------------------------------
[1] S.... 287.055(2) (b), rla. Stat.., which ~ine. "[a]gency"
a. "t.he .tate, [o~] a .tate agency, a JDUIlicipality, [o~] a
polit.ical .=cI1vi.ion, [o~] a school di.uict, o~ a .chool
board[;]" and.. 1.01(8), rla. Stat., defining "polit.iaal
.abd.:l.vi.ion" to include "all othtu: di.uict.. in this .tate." ADd
... aa. 287.055(4) and (5), rla. Stat..
[2] S.. 1'10~ida DepartmeDt. of C~UDit.y Af'fai~a, Official Liat.
of Special Diauic1:8 Online, "Seb~iDg A:LzpoR Aut.ho~it.y, II at.
....flo~ida_.pecia1diauict.s.o~g/Officia1Liat./repo~t..c~.
[3] s.., ..g., Opa. At.t.'y GaD. rla. 73-216 (1973), 74-308
(1974), and 75-56 (1975); and... "Whe~eaa" claus.., Ch. 73-19,
La"a of rla.
[4] S.. Op. Att'y GaD. rla. 91-34 (1991) .
[5] S..Op. At.t.'y Gen. I'la. 83-20 (1983) .
[6] S..Op. At.t.'y Gen. rla. 74-308 (1974) .
[7] See Op. At.t.'y Gen. rla. 74-89 (1974) .
[8] See Op. At.t.'y Gen. rla. 75-56 (1975) .
[9] See Op. At.t.'y GaD. rla. 78-19 (1978) .
[10] C~. Calmey v. Soarc:f o~ Ptz.b~:Lc ImrtI:'Uc't:LoD o~ Alachua
CauDty, 278 So. 2d. 260, 263 (rla. 1973); AGO 74-308.
[11] S.. a. 8(4), Ch. 73-19, La"a of I'la., specifically
p~ohibit.ing a govermumtal ent.it.y conduct.ing compeUtive bidding
f~oa aaking ftau pZ'Oviding p~ofeaaional aervicea unc:I8~
cont.inuing con tract.a to bid againat. on. &ZlOth.~.
[12] Sect.ioa 287.055(4) (d), rla. stat..
[13] Section 287.055(2) (g), rla. Stat..
r
lo
. II) I I .
VIII-8-a New Business
10 of 14
;. -~'
.
[14] PtlHllla. COUDty 'V. Woolley, 189 So. 2d 217 (l'la. 2d DCA
1966), ciUD9' 82 C.J.S. Statute. .. 343: s-.rrtAom 'V. W'..twud
Bol, 418 So. 2d 1143 (l'la. lat; DCA 1982): ctty o~ PCIlIIlIMDo Beach
'V. C~, 455 So. 2d 468 (l'la. 4th DCA 1984) (worda iD a
.tat;ut;e .hou1d Dot; be cODat;ruecl aa auzp1u.q. i~ r...onab1e
con.t:rv.cUon whic:h will give ~_ acae force and _anin9' i.
poa.ib1e) .
[15] C~. Jlarr.:Lott Cozporat:Lo.a 'V. Jfetro,polttaa Dade Couaty, 383
So. 2d 662, 663 (l'la. 3d DCA 1980), whic:h recogni.e. that; even
und8r c:ompet;iUve bidding requi~t;a conuact;. mu.t; be awaJ:d.ed.
a. a funct;ion o~ 1:he rea.onab1e exerei.e of po_r by municipal
goverzuaent:al au~oriti.. .. a mat;tez: o~ public policy and
fidalit;y to the public tru.t: W'tll.:Laa A. Berbu..., Jr.,
Iucozporatacl 'V. Borth Brcnrard Bo~.:L t&1 Dt.tr.:Lct, 117 So. 2d 550
(l'la. 2d DCA 1960) (where .tatute require. that public body
award conuact;. to low bidder, proper auDici~ au~oritie. have
wide di.cretion in detezmi.nation of lowe.t re.ponsible bidder) .
[16] S_ .. 1, Ch. 2005-224, Law. of I'lorida, emending ..
287.055(2)(9'), 1'1a. stat;.
[17] S_ l'allaha.._ X-Or.:Lal RegiOD&1 Jled:Lcal C.uter, IDc. 'V.
1'allalaa..- Jledtcal Ceuter, Iuc., 681 So. 2d 826, 830 (I'la. 1.t
DCA 1996): Bolly 'V. Auld, 450 So. 2d 217,218 (l'la. 1984): and
Be.iDo'V. State, 352 So. 2d 853, 860 (l'la. 1977).
~... - . 'i:.
~.
GAG March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
11 of 14
,c.
..
CLAIRE A. DUCHEMIN, P.A.
ATTORNEY AT LAW
1615 VUla&e Square Blvd., Suite 7
. TaIlaIaallee, FL 32309
TelepbeDe: 850.270.98'70 · Fax: 850.270.9873
Emd: cadachemln@UYe.com
January 19, 2010
. n
~ I Q
n ,...
,...
P- i m;:o
,..
>>
~ Mf11
0 ~ 00
... - i~
n . -.<
0 :<,;1
c:
aJ .. ;'JO
...
en N Q
:0
P CiO oN
):o.CJ
Mr. Dwight E. Brock
Clerk of the Court
P.O. Box 413044
Naples, FL 34101
Re: Collier County procurement practices for professional engineers, architects,
surveyors and mappers, and landscape architects under section 287.055, Florida
Statutes
Dear Mr. Brock:
lam writing on behalf of one of my clients, the Florida Surveying and Mapping Society, (FSMS),
the voluntary association for Florida professional surveyors and mappers. I am writing to you, as
the Collier County comptroller or chieftinancial officer, to express FSMS's concerns about the
legality of the purchasing practices being implemented in your county for the procurement of
services from the professionals governed by section 287.055, Florida's Consultants' Competitive
Negotiations Act (CCNA). The statute codifies a quality-based selection process for the named
professionals and prohibits the use of cost or price as a factor until the selection process is
completed, the most qualified firms are ranked, and the parties are engaged in contract negotiations.
The statute also expressly prohibits public entities from requiring professionals to bid against one
IU\Other.
According to our understanding of the "best value" (BV) approach your county is using, cost and
price will become factors during the process in which professionals, who are already under
continuing contracts, will be awarded projects and work. We understand Collier County's chief
purchasing officer is of the belief that professionals under fixed term contracts are not under
"continuing contracts" and thus, the process of requiring the professionals to quote prices to
detennine which ones will receive actual work is perfectly legal. This untenable position is in direct
contravention ofCCNA. To make that point even more clearly and emphatically, the 2009 Florida
Legislature enacted 8B2666, which, in part, added language to section 287.055(2)(g), to emphasize
that "fixed term contracts" are "continuing contracts" and are subject to the requirements of the
quality-based selection process adopted in CCNA.
>MI.. -:
." .-.
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
12 of 14
a'
11"-
..
Mr. Dwight E. Brock
January 19,2010
Page 2
The procurement policy also is not legal merely because the price considerations are occurring after
the selection phase of the process bas concluded. The whole basis for quality-based selection is that
the most qualified firms are selected, raDked, and then contracts are negotiated. If the agency is
unable to reach an agreement with the fll'st ranked firm, then it moves to the second one. Putting all
professionals under contract and then requiring them to compete on the basis of price makes a
mockery of the system, emasculates the CCNA process, and ensures that compensation or price
becomes a primary consideration. When the legislature enacted CCNA, it did not want
. ~peDSBtioJ;t or pri" to 'be (I. 'primary co~tio,n for prof~!onal servic.escontraC1S. This
overriding legislative intent has been reaffirmed each time the statute has been amended.
For example, several years ago, some government agencies began including in their selection
criteria, during phase one of the selection process, such things as hourly rates and estimated numbers
of hours for particular projects. Although the agencies were not asking for price outright, they were
asking for information from which price easily could be calculated. The legislature made quite clear
that this was not an acceptable practice when it amended the definitions section of the statute to
eliminate the use of any information. from which compensation.could be calculated. See, section
287.0SS(2)(d).
It is inconceivable that Collier County would continue to circumvent the CCNA process by placing
professionals under continuing contract and then, in essence, requiring them to bid against one
anothec. Doing indirectly what is not allowed directly is not permitted in the purchasing process and
has been condemned by the Florida courts. See e g., City ofLynn Haven '\I. Bay CounJy Council of
Registered Architects, Inc., 528 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. ]6' DCA 1988). We hope this matter will be
reconsidered by Collier County on a voluntary basis, particularly in view of the clear mandate from
the Florida Legislature. We also hope that you, as county officer with authority to oversee purchases,
will not allow the public's money to be spent on contracts procured through a flawed process that
is, as FSMS sees it, illegal.
Please feel ftee to contact me if you have any more questions.
.
Sincerely.
~
CAD/cd
cc: Client
January 21, 2010
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
13of14
SUITE 600
301 SOUTH BaONOUGH ST. (32301)
POST OFFICE Box 11 189 FOIT l.J,UDIRDALE
TALLAHASSEE. FL 32302.3189 ]ACI:WVILLE
TEL 850-211.7717. rB{ Jl'. ST
TEL 850-5 -9090 . i
PAX 850-2 2'-_4 IAI: . D
'AX 850.S 7:<<1.. .it ri~
gray-roblD D.. IAMgn
~ qfA;i~
g .LA~
i tLA;Jlll1
... Mg
~ . -...~
.:>> . 01'.
~ :;-{!~
.
G.tt-h-; ~ 6 BIN SON
ATTOR.NEYS AT LAW
Mr. Dwight E. Brock
Clerk of the Circuit Court, Collier County
Collier County Courthouse
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, Florida 34112
RE: Collier County's Work Order Best Value Offer Procedure
Dear Mr. Brock:
Our finn represents the Florida Association of the American Institute of Architects (AIA
Florida). I address this Jetter to you as it is my understanding that one of your duties is to assure
that County payments for professional services are in accordance with Florida law. Since the
early 1970's, Florida's ConsUltants' Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) (See section 287.055,
Florida Statutes) has provided the legal road'map for public (state and local) procurement of
professional services -- specifically architects, engineers, landscape architects and surveyors.
lbis procurement system is a fom-part system including public announcement of the work,
qualifications-based selection of the professional finn, arms-length negotiations with the best
qualified finn and, ultimately, execution of a contract. This announcement, selection.
negotiation and contracting process, via section 287.0SS, Florida Statutes. is required to be
followed by Collier County for professional services contracts for County projects exceeding
$250,000.00 in construction costs and for "continuing contracts" for professional services
contracts where a finn is hired to take on smaller projects (less than $1 million in construction
costs) during the term of the contract.
We have been made aware of Collier County's Work Order Best Value Offer (BVO)
Procedure which was apparently implemented last year. This procedure is causing considerable
consternation among the affected professionals in your community and AlA Florida has asked us
to detennine whether the BVO process violates the CCNA.
Even a cursory reading of the CCNA clearly indicates that public procurement of the
specified professional services involves selection of firms toperfonn the work based entirely
upon qualifications -- without consideration of prices or compensation. This precept has been
reinforced by the Legislature on more than one occasion since the adoption of the CCNA.
Specifically; section 287.0SS(4)(b) was amended, effective July 1, 1988, to read:
. The Agency may request, accept, and consider proposals for the
cori1pensation to be paid under the' contract only during
comPetitive neaotiations under subsection (5). (Emphasis added.)
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-8-a New Business
14 of 14
..
9
Mr. Dwight E. Brock
Clerk of the Court, Collier County
January 21, 2010
Page -2-
Competitive negotiations (negotiation of the contract) occur only after the public body has
selected the best qualified firm. Further, section 287.055(2)(g), pertaining to continuing
contracts, was amended, effective July 1, 2005, to read:
Firms providing professional services under continuing contracts
shall not be required to bid against one another.
The County's BVO Procedure directly violates section 287.055(4) by requiring firms to
submit a compensation proposal before the finn has selected the firm for the work. Only after
the provider is selected may the County "accept" or "consider" a price/compensation proposal -
and only from the selected firm. Fwther, the County is violating section 287.055(2)(g) by
imposing a "bidding" procedure on the firms which hold continuing contracts.
We understand that there may be differences of opinion regarding the merits of the
CCNA methodology. But, until this law is changed, it is the selection/negotiation process that
must be followed by all counties. We would ask. that you take all necessary steps to prevent
further violation of the law by the County. We would be more than happy to meet with you,
County officials or others in an effort to amicably resolve this matter.
s~ .
~ichBd Huey
JMH:eeh
cc: Mr. Rick Logan, AlA, President
Ms. Vicki Lon& Executive Vice President
Florida Association of the American
Institute of Architects
1/ 199517 vI
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-10 New Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation for the CAC and TDC to approve funding in the amount of
$25,000 with James Lee Witt Associates, to provide consultant support to
facilitate the resolution of FEMA payments for beach damages during Tropical
Storm Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Wilma.
OBJECTIVE: To obtain consulting services to facilitate the resolution of FEMA
payments for beach damages during Tropical Storm Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and
Hurricane Wilma.
CONSIDERATIONS: Staff has been working with Florida Department of Emergency
Management (FDEM) and Florida's Regional FEMA office in Lake Mary, Florida to
resolve and finalize reimbursement due Collier County as a result of Tropical Storm
Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Wilma.
For Hurricane's Katrina and Wilma, PW-1609 has been rewritten to include additional
storm issues not previously identified. These losses include additional sand,
monitoring, intermediate renourishment from dredging project, project management and
additional engineering. The revised PW that is attached will add an additional
$9,486,000 in reimbursement and has been approved by FDEM and FEMA. It remains
to be approved by FEMA - Washington DC for disbursements over $1 million.
For Tropical Storm Gabrielle a revised PW for an additional $11,065,000 remains to be
written by FDEM and FEMA - Lake Mary. This will required that that the original PW,
which was incorrectly closed by FEMA, Region IV - Atlanta will be reopened. After
approved by Region IV, it will require approval by FEMA - Washington for PW's over $1
Million.
The $20.5 Million in FEMA disbursements will require Collier County to reimbursement
the State of Florida approximately $6,644,000 in cost sharing on this project netting
approximately $13 million if everything is goes perfectly.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: This item will be presented to the
CAC on March 11, 2010 and TDC on March 15, 2010 for approval. Staff is
recommending approval of this item.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Source of funds is from Category "A" Tourist Development Tax
Fund 195.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management
Plan related to this action.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the
County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG
RECOMMENDATION: To approve funding in the amount of $25,000 with James Lee
Witt Associates, to provide consultant support to Collier County.
PREPARED BY: J. Gary McAlpin, P.E., CZM Director
CAC March 11. 2010
VIII-10-a New Business
1of2
JAMES
LE E
WITT
ASSOCIATES
Part of GlobolOptions Group
Febmal)' 11, 2010
'fl\sk Order No. 064056.1
Statement of Work for PW Facilitation andCloslIl'e
Authorizing Contract
This Task Order is govemed by the terms and co.nditions set fo.rth in the Disaster Reco.veryAssistance contract
#06-4056, dated February 13, 2007 between Co.Ilier County, Flo.rida,and Ja.mes Lee WittAssociates, a part o.f
Global Options, Inc., ("JL W N') which was renewed February. 13, 2010 through February 2, 20 II.
Task Order Name: PW FllciUtation and Closure
1.0 DescriptIoD()fTask
In accordance withtne DisaSter Recovery Assistanee contraet, A,ppendi~ B, JLWA perso.nnel will support
Co.llier Co.unty's needfo.r PW resolution by faCilitating the c011lpletion anqobligation ofr'\Vsdocumenting
beach resto.ratio.n tor damages incurred during hurricane GabrieUa{DR 1393), humcane Katrina (DR 1602), and
hurricane Wilma (DR 1609). JL WA willprovide Co.llier Co.unty witha.skiUed team ofprofessio.nals pro.viding
technical and professional services to. assist and implement FEMA'sPuhlicAssistance(PA) Grant Program.
The COl1nty will issl1ca letter to the.$tate of Florida and FBMA stating that JLWArepresents Callier County,
and will tMU~stthatth~Stateand r'EMA accept JL W A' sacti vitics o.n behalfqf t~l:Co.unty. JL WA will initiate
contact with the State and FEMAotlce, the County has issued the aforementioned Letter of Representation.
The submittal timing and status of obligation afthe PW versions will dictate JLWA's PWreso.lutiol1 process.
2.0 Task Activities
A list of the possible tasks to accomplish the scape af work may include, but are not limited to. the following.
. Canducting research and pro.viding briefings on the extent and limitations of Federal disaster relief
programs
. Providing impact analysis o.n federal and State actions,. and assist With developing 'lnd ifilplementiflg
strategy for response byCoUier COUnty
. Meeting with key stakeholder groups onbehalfo.ftheCoutlty to. discussdisa$ter~related issues and
policy
. Prepare talking paints. information sheets,and white papers for County otTtcials on key disaster issues
. Investigate and provide guidance to County staff related to specific prograOllllatic i:ssuesassociated with
the delivery of Federal aidlfundingand the interface ofthatdelivery withCdunty progralTIS, people,and
activities
. Drafting executive correspondence fartbe County related to. disaster issues
. Attend meetings associated withdi~$tl::r reSpo.nse and recovcfYactivitiesas required.
. Preparing and reviewing Public Assistanceptogralll docuinentatio.n
. Providing quality assurance and cOlltrol for Public Assi:stancegrantptogram activities and assessments
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-10-a New Business
2 of 2
. Developing recommendations and tro!1bleshooting on Public Assistanceprosrnmmatic issu~sand.policy
interpretation
. Developing and implementingprocectures for quality control of Public Assistance project worksheets
. Develop recommendations to Client on Appeals
. Submit to FEMA ami State, the (:ounty's requests for timeextetisions
. Review andmakerecoml11endations toFEMA on the County's requesrforcost overruns
3.0 Timcline
The ContractQr sh(lllbegil) workllPon issuance of II Purchase Order, and otherreqgired documents from Section
1.0 above. The Contractorshallcontinue work within the Task Orderfunding limits specified in Section 4.0, or
until problem resolution is achieved, whichever comes first.
4.0 Cost:
4.1 Rates - Task Order cost is based on the hourly biIlingrates as agreed upon in the Contract,
Appendix C,.RateSchedule. The number of staff and duration of work effort may vary depending
on need and resources. The County authorizes up to $25,000 forthis Task Order. Additional
funding.ifrequired, willbe authorized under a purchase order modificlltion.
4.2 Travel - Trll.vcl shall be reimbursed in accordance with Section 112.06\, Florida Statute expense
reimbursement poticy. Specifically,.traveltatesshall he teimburscdas follows:
Mileage: $.0445 per mile
Breakfast: $6,00
Lunch: $11.00
Dinner: $19.00
Airfare: Actual ticket cost limited to tourist or coach cJass fare
RentalCar: Actllalrental cost limited to compactor standard-size vehicle
Lodging: ACtual cost of lodsing atsingleoccupanc)'ratewith a cap of no more
than $150,90 per night atsil:).sle occupancy Ilite
Parking: Actual cost of parking
The County wIll approve an travel requests in writing prior to the contractor initiating travel.
Travel time will be paid at Yz of the hourly labonate.
4.3 Materials-incidental costS such as copying, faxing;. printing,. binding, postage, etc. shall be
reimbursed to the contractor .at actual cost.
l:nlo~,qJ
President
James Lee Witt Associates,a Part of Global Options, Inc.
[},(,
CAC March 11, 2010
VIII-11 New Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vanderbilt Beach - Beach Park Facilities for Sharing and Discussion
OBJECTIVE: Update the CAC on the Vanderbilt Beach - Beach Park Facilities.
CONSIDERATIONS: Please see attached for discussion.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts
resulting from this study.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: N/A.
RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing and discussion only.
PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director
o <Jl
..- <Jl
o Q)
C'\I .5
, <Jl
~ OJ
~lll
.r;: ;:
~ Q)
"'Z
:2~M
U~~
<l:---
u>~
!!
11.
If!
~
~
1\ <1l
m~
<1l ~
C 0
~~
Q)3'
.. c 3
o ~ Q
'- _ u
~ ~ ~
ftJ q)=
- Q Q
lL u u
L-
o
-
(/) en
Z e U
<( 'i:
.-J CtJ.J::. ..Q
0... 8 u LL
Z 0 aj
o .b Q)
t;mm
:::>a:+"",
a:+='=
~CI)..Q
Z c ~
o .0 Q)
u~1J
w Q) C
0... 0 aj
<( 5 > :i::'
~ () 8
o ~
Z ~
<( (5
.-J ()
o
s
U
.!!
l'
o
~
II
\1.'"
",1\
~H
QZ
~L
"'~
[~
8
;;;
o
c
"
s;: II) ~ tl
[~~ ~~
~g v ~ v
,;;~a~+~
ij~~Hl<c~
I I[ Iii i' ~ Jlll
~~[ ~ ~ ~
x~~1l.~~8
w, tl! 11 <fI ~ ~ :;
of ~ Q} fi: .!! Q) 01 ~
z ill II: '" () "' .- -
_. ...Jz",~t
.?II ~ --
...J {) '"7 '":" rf\ "'t 1.0 .Q
0... u-J...J-4...J~~
~
CI)
CJ
z
5;
<(
a:
o
w
I-
W
...J
a..
~
o
o
f
I
/
I
!
'"
o
x
o
LO
't F ~
t~til!lF
,I ct 1 t' t l
d 1'i I II f ~
I~ G" , · i'
ri n. ~ f I~ r
'l ~'f- 11 !, ,E J
~ Ifl rj H llJH
i.H I~, if II ~ i
!f! W n i~ ~r I
~ .. z ~~ t i JI S
... .; iii ..
.
~
I
I
I
.
o...~
<(
1:
6
;::
~
Q
...J
I-
U
~
f-
o ~
..- Q)
o C
N .-
<Jl
- :>
~aJ
.r;: ;;:
o Q)
itiz
:2~C')
U~::
<l::::O
U>N
~-J :
i!;
III
I
[J
\'"''
''',
\,
===J
(~:f2)
~1'
'~~
ClJ1p~
~
7
.------
Q
ff
3:
U
'<
lJJ
aJ
f-
o:!
f!i
ilJ
~
~
ti -'~ N'Vld ONIIN'Vld
~f II ^8'VNI~ll38d
~~ I I I
I \ ~
(;~ ~. ""'
'~\\r,"'-' Y
~\\\ !!(. '-I....
=-.' ~ ~~" 'V"
~fJ.~ 11::$'"
~&~
C\
njUno:) JSl!IO:)
pl?O<!l I..pE'QlQ lllqJSpUI?A
~UlOOJI9S~ ::>!lClf1cj t 9I.1Oj99S::>1.I0;)
4~l?s9 +llqJSPUl?A
~
Iii ~
.. >
Q .
I~
ILL:J
<;'iO:> oL6\.
SNO:J 'V 1-
0':1 NOI1'J{'\tU. 1
3Nn lO~l-N
~-@
-1Q
~~
&li
Il!<{
I-:r
~
t
t
~
i
:
1:
l'
@)
:!i
j
~
~
.
"i
~
:;> ~
~:;>
\P~
~ ~
F~
~~
~~
tt
.9~
.!1Ql
.0 ..
l~
ll.!!
~ "
:~j
~ 1i t
~ ~ fj
8 ~,~
! !
~ i
~ !
.
I
!
I
L-----
,
g
i
H..
~ 2' ~
~ i ~
HI.
~ &. ; cD
uu
~
"
~ j
~
i j
, ~
i i
~ or
~~
-~
---
~-----
----
--- ~---_._._..---_.
.
I
!.
" ~~
2 II
~ 01.
~ ~:
~ . I
I!! "~.
i ! j ~
~ ~ ~ ~
i ~ ~ i
r
. r (',i
GULl v'
N\["\CO
ill
Z
o
>=
3 ~ II
G 1; ~~
<t~~Ia-
o ~H'
~ -.loC;
,,~l-~
a; ~"~j
o ~ ~
~ ~
-'
----
~\a!,\\.\(lg
60"..0"""
~ pla^l\llg
Ffonl 0
.
1 .
1i.
;, ~
~ ~
~ 2 . ~
~ ~ " ~
I 01
! ~ i
:, ~ I
u ~
~ . ~ ~
~ " j i
~ u "
~
~ J
~
I J
~ i H.
i it
~ ~ _ np
~ 3 B : n!i
~ ~ ~ ~~I~
.
~ ~ ~ ~HP
u , t
~ ~ .. j HH
0 g ~
. u J
>-
l/l
::J ~ . ~ ~ !'.l ~ ~ 2
>- ij
z
" @ 80 e a a B
[
. ~
J
o <Jl
<Jl
~ Q)
Oc:
N --
<Jl
. '"
::1Il
.r;: :;:
~~
:2~'"
()~::
<l:::O
U>'"
!J
II,
I,:
D j!!~
dH
~~ ~
SNOll V' ^3l3
3dV'OSGNV'l
0\
II
!
,I
.~
,
\
!
\~;
.1
\'\:" ,
",'........~
fiwno::) J~!IIO::)
pE'~ 4:?E'~9 II!qJ~PUE'^
SUJOOJ1SS;S ::l!IClnd t SIJO!SSS::lUO:J
y::)!?~g 11!qJetPU!?A
e
o
'"
!l!
.9l
LU
i
w
;
n
[i]C\1
I- I
~ ....J
e
o
'"
..
ili
Uj
I
j
~
/
~ __.~_._.._._..-._.....- f
~ !
C I
..'~ ;
m j
~ !
Z j
~~ I
----.-~.~..-.----...........~::.,. lJ
. ~~ 10
~~ i!
~ ff
rr-=--=~-..~......)l ii
II ~ Ii,..
o ~ ';_,
! ~ ~!
~ 9>' J
-')) l'
l (~.".,,-,,-~.j
/! ii
If \\
l ii
# ~
q II
.f" \1
:;7
/ \,
o i'
l \\
,1' ,
r .",_:::;:::::_.~~~~.~, I
:. .~'..~ f,i!
,[.' ,/;,/ "~'"
I 1
,i ~ 0).1 }j
,u ~ <I "
11/ ~'~..;:-/ 11
, '''''''=~'''' "
I ;
If P
I t
1: II
~ P
~\'" [f :
i/ ·
\ /I
\~ l/
~. /1
"'l~. .07
.~~... :-
'>""-...."".....=~.=".,,',.r./-'" J
o ~
~ Q)
o C
N ,-
<Jl
- :>
;:m
.r;: ~
U Q)
~Z
:2~M
()~::
<l::::O
u>v
I !
III I
. II.! 1;111 II
----- i
!
I
i
i
j
i
,
!
i
i
i
/
i
i
,
I
I
I
i
i
o
.
).1 d
II III
> luu
~ l61ll;~
il~
{~
,
,
I
,
i
,
,
I
,
i
,
,
I
,
,
I
I
,
I
,
i
,
I
j
~
~
o
o
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
I
,
II to " " .
"'II
IlIlu
o <Jl
(; ~
N .-
, <Jl
~ :>
~Ill
.r;: :=
~~
:2~C')
U~~
<(:;'0
U>1O
II
S . Jill
. -11~hllll
loll) 'II ll'l:
.I- I ~ .(
JI~lfU j ,EO I
I,
I.
<Jl
III
Ql
C
'iij
, :>
III
:l:
Ql
Z
~C')
~~
='0
511)
- .- ~
~
~
;1 IT]
~._ _ i ,___,_'___'_'_'_'__'_'_'__
II II
I -; II I
I, '111mll I
I 11'1 1 I
I. ~I Ii ! I 11-.--.-.---.----t--.
I I III Iii II I! i
I I 11,1 III III Ii ill i
" : 1:1 j: I
I
I
I
i
I
II 1"1 Iii I'I! I
Li, III III III -- t.-.-------.-.-.
Ii---Yil' I
1 III II
'I i lITlllil-ITflTf! b
I 1.L__Jl llW I
------- i
i
~
~
I
I I ]~j II m~
o ::l PII i IJ~11l1 i
~ Q) . tlll;lk I
Oc
i N"u:; i!
i ~- ~
I ~OJ
.r;: :;: <Jl
~~ <Jl
Q)
:2~C') c
'iii II tl tl
u'7:: - :::J
<l::::O OJ ~ ~ T
u><O I :it i i
Q)
2
~.... i i
~~
So i i
><0 i i
i i
i
w
I
o <Jl
o~
N .-
<Jl
~~
.r;: ;:
o Q)
~Z
:2~C')
U~~
, .....
<(::0
U>r--
I,
1111
. 11~1il111
,
I
II
~!
all
t
I I
~ ..
I f I
i I i I I
il i i f j I i I t I ,
II 1 1 'I I , ! I t I i II
1 i I J I J I ~ I I
I~ ~ ~ Ii I I' I 1
II I I II I I I i I I I I
I 'Itl I
j I I i f i i I I I I I i
1:01 !pI
iii' liI'
a1! al!
1-.
1
!
1.1 d
Jhlllll
~I! ~! ,,!
N :t1::1
al~ al+ al+
1 I 1
i i i
!
I
I
~i
iiI'
..
i
i
-
ll;~
2'
i:i
ai
i
.
I
I
Z
:!i!
ai
I I '\- J
I 'I
I I i
I I
w
z:.z i
~ .......
....11.:
i
!f! ~! ~! Hil
101 _I :tl - "I
~ al. 01+ D1~#
i i i i i
! II! i i i
Iud
I
~I ,
iiI! ~
ti!
i
i
o <Jl
c; ~
N .5
<Jl
~c3
.r;: :;:
~~
:2~C'")
()~:::
<l:::o
U>ex>
I 11111
. "11111hll
II
~ I I
''0 Jl 11
IX) t! !
I I ! s I
II I I i I I I I tit
II I I II i I I I I I I 1
Ii ! ! I) I I t I i I I I
It I I II I I Iii I I I
j dll I
i I I I f I f I J J J I i
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
.
I~I it
Ihlllll
tr III; L
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
~i
~'
al!
.
I
i
i
i I I I
!rj ~,~, ~I'
~i al!~! m'
+ ~ ~ ~
!l
a
aI
I
i
i
;i
;;;j
m'
~
i
I
~ ! J
al i ~
z
I I
j j
b' ,
i! ~!
all all
+ t
&
_'lMI__ INII
k.
_I
m~
z
;i
ciI
I
.
i
I
o <Jl .lllw: I I 1.1 d i m~
c; ~ I1I11
N .~ iI hlu
_ <Jl
..... :l
~Cll
.r;: ;;: III
~~ <Jl
II)
:2.....(") '"
u~~ 'iii
, :l
c:{~'O Cll
U>e> ;;:
II)
z
.....<">
..... .....
~o
><>>
i
w
~
z
o <Jl
c;~
N .il!> ::l
. In" ~
~ ~ 'in
"5 ~ ffi
~:OSci
~ ~:.z
U..:!:1i.... ~
<l:-C!r"-
u ~':!: 0
o5~
I,
~ I JlD
. IlIlMh I
i
l!
II
~
II II
~ ~
I i
i i
II
hid
JhllU i
I!
r
III
~111
I
i
i
i II
i
i
i
I i
! i I I j
i i i
I i i i
I Ii Ii II ~
~ ;;
i ,. ,. ,. '5
t ID
I
I
llS ...
. . .
~
II
i Ii
o (/) .il!M~ I 1.1 d m~
o ~ I 111111I1
N .-
- (/) i!
~ :>
~OJ
.c ;;::
~ Q) '"
",Z", '"
~~~ <Il
<::
U~..... "ijj II II tl
, 0
<{=~ - :3
OJ ~ 0' r
u>~ ~
~ i i
z.., i i
~-
~.....
::!:;O i i
5::: i i
i i
i
I
o (/) .II!M~ I 1.1 il mf
c;~ I Ihlllll
N .-
- (/)
~ :3 II
~OJ
.c ;;::
~ Q) '"
"'z'" '" ,I
~~~ :g
U~..... .'
<{dO - .~ ~
u5;::! aJ i
;;::
Q)
z..,
~-
~-
,.!.O
=N
>~
I
!
I
i
I
I
.
i
,I ~
~ cS
o ~ .11!ld~ I 1.1 d m~
~ Q) i 11~11ll1
o c:
N .-
(/)
::- ~ II
.c ;;::
U Q) '"
<aZ("') '"
~~~ Q)
U~..... c:
, 0 'iij
<{::'" - :3
u>~ aJ
~
Z..,
-~
~.....
...!.O
=..,
>....
1 I
i i
i i i
i i
i i t
I t. t ~
I ,I -I 'I
~
I
I
i
I
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-1 Old Business
1 of 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Naples Outfall Pipes Permit Compliance - Update
OBJECTIVE: Naples Outfall Pipe Permit Compliance update
CONSIDERATIONS: The existing FDEP permit requires the adoption of a
Management Plan addressing the outfall pipes on the Naples beach. These pipes need
to be addressed to FDEP's satisfaction before FDEP will issue a Notice to Proceed for
additional renourishment activities.
The attached plan has been jointly developed by the City of Naples and the County to
address this issue and has been submitted to FDEP for approval. FDEP has 30 days to
review and comment.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts
resulting from this study.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: N/A.
RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing only.
PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-a Old Business
1 of 5
From: goldandrose@mac.com
To: arcmi@comcast.net, tforcht@cityofmarcoisland.com, murrp2h@aol.com, larryhideaway@aol.com,
rightperson71@comcast.net, apires@wpl-Legal.com, vnrios@marcocable.com, soreysan@comcast.net,
J morel2409@aol.com
Sent: 3/9/2010 2:04:48 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: 1 of 2 emaHs on the Wanless Review Agenda Item
Greetings,
In your backup material for your Agenda item, on the Dr. Wanless Review,is a nasty and insulting email by Michael Bauer, the Director
of Natural Resources for the city of Naples who opined the review is nothing mere than my direction to Dr. Wanless of what to write. It
is shocking to see such an opinion from a public official to be included in your agenda.
As regards Mr. Bauer's emaH, I ask "What dispute?". The Mangrove Action Group is not engaged in a
dispute. We advocate for conservation, preservation and protection of the Clam Bay / Clam Pass
preserve. We advocate for responsible management of what we consider a highly productive and
valuable wetlands estuary that is a designated Conservation Area and Natural Resource Protection Area.
Environmental Advocacy is not considered by the Mangrove Action Group to be a dispute.
A further response to the insulting Bauer em ail is in my preface to Dr. Wanless' reply.
Under Mike Bauer's watch, politics trumps science with his misleading WQ program in Moorings Bay that only samples four sites,
directly in its dredged main channel. This WQ sampling of the dredged main channel is repeatedly misleadingly identified in the
October 2009 PBSJ Clam Bay report and again in their response to Dr. Wanless Review, as WQ for ALL of Moorings Bay.
Why does Naples WQ program for Moorings Bay studiously avoid taking samples anywhere even remotely near the 74+ pipes sticking
out of Moorings Bay seawalls? Is it because the results of such sampling would give quite different results to factor in for ALL of
Moorings Bay due to the untreated stormwater those pipes dump into Moorings Bay's dead end canals where it stagnates? Apparently,
the Director of Natural Resources for Naples, has a lot at stake ifFDEP were to take a real close look at Moorings Bay again.
A public agenda is no place for Mike Bauer's emailed baseless attack on the integrity of Dr. Wanless, his Independent Peer Review
ofthe PBSJ report, and the Mangrove Action Group. However, Dr. Wanless' reply to the PBS&J Response to his review absolutely
should
be included along with Dr. Wanless' Review of the PBS&J report and the PBS&J response to his review.
Accordingly, I am providing Dr. Wanless'
reply to the PBS&J Response along with this email.
I am requesting that Dr. Wanless' Response be included in with the other backup items. I had already
supplied this to the CAC in January,
but you delayed this agenda item until February. Your February meeting was cancelled.
My original submission of Dr Wanless's Reply to the January agenda item has been available to this
committee with ample time
to include it with the backup to this agenda item. I am again providing Dr. Wanless' reply to the PBS&J
Response to his review and
his reply to Mike Bauer's email on this subject. I have preceded his reply with my own preface rebutting
Mike Bauer's baseless
and outrageous attack on the integrity of Dr. Wanless, his Independent Peer Review, and the long-
standing and respected Mangrove
Action Group, of which I am current president.
Dr Wanless' Reply to the PBSJ Response and the Bauer email is being sent to you as a second emaH
today.
It includes a preface by me to refute Mr. Bauer's email as yet another misrepresentative item County Staff
has placed on the public record. The public deserves to have the Wanless reply and the Mangrove
Action Group reply.
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-a Old Business
2 of 5
Cordially Yours,
Marcia Cravens
Mangrove Action Group, President
Qoldandrose@mac.com
Marcia Cravens
=
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-a Old Business
3of5
From: goldandrose@mac.com
To: tforcht@cityofmarcoisland.com, murrp2h@aol.com, larryhideaway@aol.com,
rightperson71@comcast.net, apires@wpl-Legal.com, vnrios@marcocable.com, soreysan@comcast.net,
JmoreI2409@aol.com, arcmi@comcast.net
CC: garymcalpin@colliergov.net
Sent: 3/9/2010 2:06:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: 2 of 2 em ails on Wanless Review agenda item; Release of Dr. Wanless reply to
The Mangrove Action Group (MAG) obtained an Independent Peer Review of the Post, Buckley, Shuh and Jernigan's
"Clam Bay Data Collection and Analysis" report because earlier reviews by the two technical specialists on the Clam
Bay Advisory Committee, were marginalized and then ignored by the County. The 17 page review by Kathy Worley,
Sr. Biologist for the Conservancy was an objective and thorough review, as was the 5 page review done by retired
Corps geologist David Roellig. Yet their incisive reviews were disregarded and shoved aside by the County
As MAG's president, with full confidence of MAG's board, I selected Dr. Harold Wanless to do the PBSJ review. I had initially
identified Dr. Orrin Pilkey for the review, due to his nearly half century of studying, teaching and writing about sediment, coastal
systems, and anthropogenic impacts to coastal areas. However, when I contacted him, he strongly recommended Dr Wanless to
do the review instead of himself. I placed great weight on Dr. Pilkey's recommendation and also that of Kathy Worley, whose
objective research for the Conservancy warranted respect for her recommendation.
Yet. the maior and decive factor for my choice of Dr. Wanless to do the Independent Peer Review on PBSJ's "Clam Bay Data
Collection and Analysis" report for the Mangrove Action Group was his familiarity with Clam Bay from the 1970's and again in
the late 1980"s. The only "direction" Dr. Wanless needed was to give an independent peer reyiew ofPBSJ's "Clam Bay Data
Collection and Analysis report. Dr. Wanless' work soars on its own merit.
Attached is Dr. Wanless' CV. His body of work is impressive. Among the highlights of his knowledge and experience that make
Dr. Wanless an outstanding reviewer:
*Scientific Advisor to the City of Naples on beach, lagoons, and wetland systems in 1978 and again from 1989-1990. He was
and is familiar with Collier County's coastal systems, including Clam Bay.
*Technical advisor to SFWMD from 1997 to present.
*Contributed to RECOVER, an arm of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan for four years.
* Advised on (successful) restoration of Biscayne Bay natural resources,
* Advised Everglades National Park on their SW coast instability.
*Has written extensively on sediments, mudbanks, sea level rise, and impacts to mangroves..
Additionally, Dr. Harold Wanless is uniquely qualified to review reports on Clam Bay because he has
knowledge and experience of the Clam Bay system pre-development in the 1970's. He also analyzed and wrote an unbiased
opinion on causes for Clam Bay's large black mangrove die-off in the 1990's.
I sent Mike Bauer's comments to Dr. Wanless. His reply was thoughtful and direct. He astutely pointed out that certain
statements in Mike Bauer's email, (unwittingly) indicated one reason why the PBSJ study is inappropriate to be used as the basis
ofa "modeling", the PBSJ study is too limited. We echo Dr. Wanless quiry, Where is the data?
What data does Bauer use for his astounding mention of Outer Clam Bay being affected by Doctor's Pass? To my knowledge
none of the numerous studies of Clam Bay indicate any influence on it from Doctor's Pass. Instead, they indicate little flow
through the culverts at Seagate Drive which "sloshes" back and forth. A dye test, performed in the 1980s by the Department of
Environmental Regulation, showed flow disappeared not far from the culverts.
Dr. Wanless' gave his permission to circulate his reply to PBSJ's response and Bauer's comments.
Attached are items for your consideration (seyeral items are within the pdf).
1) Dr. Wanless Reply to Mike Bauer's email and the PBSJ Response to his review.
2) Mike Bauer's email commenting on Dr. Wanless Review and the PBSJreport(pdf,pg 8).
3) PBSJ response to Dr. Wanless Review (pdf, pgs 10-12)
4) Dr. Wanless Review of the PBSJ Report (pdf, pgs 1-7)
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-a Old Business
4of5
It is entirely unacceptable that local government attempts to discredit or silence all reviews of the PBSJ report that expose its
poor methodology and inadequacy to be used for modeling.
The Mangrove Action Group has earned the respect of our community. MAG networks and shares common concerns and efforts
for improving conservation, preservation and protection of what little remains of our coastal natural resources with other more
well-known environmental organizations. Weare offended and refute the false allegation by Mike Bauer that our organization
"directied" Dr. Wanless what to write in his review. Rather than discrediting Dr. Wanless or the Mangrove Action Group, Mike
Bauer has effectively diminished his own stature.
Marcia Cravens
Mangrove Action Group
Attachment (1)
From: "Wanless, Harold" <hwanless(a)mail.as.miami.edu>
Date: January 15, 2010 12:59:42 PM EST
To: Marcia Cravens <qoldandrose(a)mac.com>
Subject: RE: see responses to review on pg 6 and 10-12 in attached pdf, XI Wanless Review-6.pdf
Actually Bauer's comments are important because they state the the JBS&J study was limited. Bauer states: "It is not
a comparison of Moorings Bay and Outer Clam Bay as he states. It is not a biological study. It is not a year-long flow
study. It is a study, limited by time and money, to determine basic water quality and hydrologic flow conditions in
Outer Clam Bay and how it is affected by its connections to the Gulf of Mexico - through Clam Pass and Doctors
Pass."
Well, the PBS&J study certainly did a lot of comparisons of Clam Bay and Moorings Bay. And in doing so, the study
evaluated the ecology and biological health of the two systems. Neither of which was justified because of the limited
scope of the study. That was an important thrust of my review.
It is impossible to further evaluate the worth of the JBS&J report's discussion on sea grasses until the exact methods
used are given and a comparison of how they compared with earlier studies. The earlier studies talked about non-
ephemeral sea grasses in a number of locations.
In PBS&J's response to my report, they seem to keep doing what I found inappropriate - taking pot shots art the water
quality of Clam Bay. They are using more disguised phrasing now. I do agree with their comment that "Existing
water quality standards from FDEP are problematic." I have been saying that since the Marco-Rookery Bay days of
the early 1970s.
Their comments 4 and 5 miss the point.
Hal
Dr. Harold R. Wanless
Professor and Chair
Department of Geological Sciences
College of Arts and Sciences
University of Miami
P.O. Box 249176
Coral Gables, FL 33124
or
43 Cox Science Building
1301 Memorial Drive
Coral Gables, FL 33124
305-284-4253
Attachment (2)
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-a Old Business
5 of 5
=
From:
Sent:
To.:
Cc:
Subject:
Mike Bauer [mbauer@naptesgov.comJ
Thursday, January 07,20108:24 AM
McAlpinGary
ochs_1
RE: ~'i - f\t,J: Dr. VJanless's review of PHSl report
Unfortl1n;!iteIy, me repCift by Dr. 'Nanfess is a good example of 'llhm happens when a scientist is employed D)' one side of
a dispute tosupj:lOrt meir position. Responding only to what he Vias told by hJse!!!'"lplo't'er, he makes basic, critical
assumptions aboo! the report that are just flat wrong. He did not talk to thepeopie. '1m carried out the study,oor did he
ttl:lk 10 the Count~, to see what they were looking for when they hIred P8S&J. These are fatal flaws. It is not a
romparioon of Moorings Bay-and Oliter Clam Bay as he stal€S. !tis OO! a bioklgical study. It is not a yeaf-iong fIDw
stud}!'. It IS a study, Nmfied by time and. !noney, to determine basic water quality and hydlOklgic !loVlcondiOOns in Outer
Clam Bay and how it is affected by lIS COllnections to the Gul! of Mexico- through Clam Pass andDoc1ors Pass. It !fiOuld
be fantastic to obtain information on all the matters Dr. Wanless mentions; is he willing to gather thatclattl: fO!! tree?
O! particutm import to me are the comments onseaQ!asses.. PrcbabJy unintenticnally;he compares disparate
geograp!1tca! areas. Yes, seaQrasses are mOle abundant in a. ooHilil area outside Outer Clam Bay, but in thritbay, they
have continued 10 decline. Yes,an initial report done bjo' Dr. Tomaskoloond reagr_, but it was a cflfferent, highly
ephemeral species that was lesponding tcdrought conditions and is here today, gone tomorrow. Or. Tomasko did nol
find the .important, pJoneerin41 seagrass species that has been monitored tor the last ten years and is in serious decline.
When Dr. Tomasko came back anddld this study, he did ootfind the ephemeral' seagra3S he found previousl!l', and he
rej)OrtedlhaL
MichaelR. Bauer, Ph.D.
Natural Resources Manager
City of Naples
239213-1031
Attachments (3) and (4)
=
=
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
1 of 12
Review of Clam Bay System Data Collection and Analysis by PBS&J, October,
2009, and Response to Comments RE: Clam Bay System Data Collection &
Analysis Report (October 2009) by PBS&J on November 17, 2009.
Harold R. Wanless, Ph.D., Registered Florida Professional Geologist #985.
Coral Gables, Florida 33134
Submitted January 4, 2010
Having reviewed the report and response, I find the efforts misleading and
many of the conclusions unwarranted.
Sand versus mud; high versus low oxygen
Although the 'response' says it is not so, the executive summary paints a
picture of Clam Bay being bad and Moorings Bay as being better.
Sand and gravel may have better pore water oxygen levels and have less oxygen
demand on the overlying water, but they provide little to eat for deposit
feeders. Sand and gravel, having much less surface area, will always have less
pollutants, less contaminants, less organic matter, and less food value than
mud. Grainier, cleaner and more oxygenated does not make it better. This was
well established back in the Marco/Rookery Bay years and should be restudied
now. Dr. Bernard Yokel pointed out that the black mangroves were a
fermenting ground for organic decay and high spring and seasonal tides would
reach into the black mangrove forests and release this rich nutrient soup to the
coastal waters. These releases would trigger blooms and a dispersing food
pyramid bonanza that a hierarchy from fish to mammals would time their
reproduction around. What is to us this black, rotting disgusting muck is, to
many other organisms, the essence of life. These benefitting organisms may
not be living-right there, but in adjacent waters waiting for the dispersal.
In evaluating the water and bottom nutrients, texture, redox and such, there is
no assessment of the role of nutrient drainage input from the adjacent
developed upland. It is also important to know the amount of historical erosion
(or growth) of mangrove swamps and release (or uptake) of organic detritus and
sediment as the result of the accelerated rise in sea level since 1930 or in
response to recent hurricanes or recent human activity (such as dredging).
The report implies it is bad when muddy sediment has come in to an area that
was artificially dredged to deeper depth. This is a severely poor conclusion.
CAC March 11 , 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
2 of 12
There is lots of fine grained particulate material in the natural system and it will
fill in any area where there is insufficient energy to move it on. This results in
shallowing and usually an improvement in desirable ecological functionality.
The whole section on redox and anoxia in the sediment seems most
meaningless. The muddy sediment beneath the clear, well-oxygenated waters
of Biscayne Bay and Florida Bay is normally anoxic within a centimeter of the
surface. This will always be the case for muds which contain organic matter
which produce significant oxygen demand.
And most striking are the mud deltas forming in Lake Ingraham, in Cape Sable.
They are building at as much as 15 centimeters a year, contain as much as 35
per cent organic matter, have only a few millimeters of oxidized sediment at
the top - and are intensely burrowed by an abundant benthic community,
covered by a dense algal mat, and used by a great diversity of wading and water
birds for feeding and resting (Wanless and Vlaswinkel, 2005).
Mangroves and Seagrasses
The fundamental value of the Clam Bay systems is the abundant mangrove
wetland community and the seagrass and algal mat estuarine community and
the immense service that these provide to the benthic and bird communities
within the system and in the adjacent nearshore marine.
A pre-development report by Lugo (1976) stressed the need to preserve
majority of Clam Pass system in its natural state, highlighting the mature and
valuable black mangrove basin forest of this system. Even in a setting with
ephemeral connection with the sea through Clam Pass, the mangrove forest had
found a way to thrive using groundwater flow through the barrier island to
maintain flushing and drainage of elevated flood waters. There is no
comparison between a bulkheaded sea wall and a mangrove wetland with
respect to environmental value, yet this report seems to ignore the uselessness
of seawalls, and fails to mention that there have been ongoing attempts to rim
or replace them with rip rap as an improvement.
I should point out that the mangrove systems on the Vanderbilt Bay area was
doing fine until the flow through the sandy island barrier was cut off. The
mangrove die off then produced accelerating decay products that overwhelmed
the system forcing a need for stronger flushing via surface flow.
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
3 of 12
In my occasional visits to the Clam Bay system, I recall much more sea grass
than described in this report. In fact I there is a 2007 PBSj report of "Clam Bay
Seagrass Assessment" which found 43 per cent occurrence of seagrass in
random sample sites in Outer Clam Bay (probably the same report that is
referenced as PBS&j, 2008, in the 'report'. Since that report, there was further
documentation of more species and coverage of seagrass in the Clam Pass
estuarine system along transects done in 2007 for the annual biologic
monitoring done by Turrell, Hall & Assoc. The apparent resurgence of
seagrasses continued to be reported in the 2008 Biologic Monitoring Report of
the Clam Pass System by Turrell, Hall & Assoc. Why are these recent results not
mentioned in this report, and why is the amount of seagrass observed in this
report so diminished? The report notes that the sea grass cover is even
diminished over observations in a '2008' PBS&j report (Is this the same as the
2007 draft report of observations made in 2007?). It is irresponsible science to
ignore important literature results such as these. The current report paints a
very different picture of the Clam Bay system than is documented in previous
reports. That difference is cursorily dismissed as something to do with the
ephemeral nature or reproductive problems of the main species (Halophila).
Other reports document a fairly widespread occurrence of Halidule and a
persistence of Thalassia in some areas. It is wrong to so casually dismiss these
other more rigorous reports.
If these changes are real, then it is critical to assess the timing of loss so as to
determine the causes (I am aware that there have been recent dredging events).
If these changes are not real but the result of too 'general' field observations,
then the quality of this research project should be called into question.
Ecology
This report presents data on aspects of the environment (the physical and
chemical characteristics of the coastal bay system). It provides no information
of substance on the organisms in these environments and no information of
substance on the ecology (the relation of the organisms to the environment).
Yet the report is constantly evaluating what is good and bad for the organism
communities. All of this undocumented speculation should be deleted. It
would be better to do a responsible literature evaluation of the ecological
relationships that have been established and published from the abundance of
research that has been done over the years in The Rookery Bay - Marco area.
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
4 of 12
The vibrance of the Clam Bay system is the rich mangrove-seagrass-algal base
which feeds a variety of small organisms which nurture a great abundance and
diversity of juvenile to adult fish. These relations were not recognized or
addressed in this report. The authors of this report have no business making
value comments on the ecology of the system as they have not documented the
biological components or the important relationships.
Circulation and Models
A report in Collier County's files by this author in the early 1990s documents
that the mangrove die off in northern Clam/Vanderbilt Bay was caused by the
road into the houses which cutoff an active drainage, flushing, and water
exchange through the pore waters in sand of the narrow beach. This was well
established with monitoring wells in which tidal fluctuation would move
through the island with a time lag but nearly undampened in amplitude (except
where blocked by the road structure which extended down through the sand
and into the underlying less permeable mangrove soil). It is impossible to
recreate a healthy environment when the causes for historical problems are not
properly identified
Additionally, as a major portion of the drainage, flushing, exchange and water
exchange of the coastal bays along this stretch of coast is through the narrow
barrier islands, any present or future modeling will be useless unless this
important component of coastal circulation is accurately empirically
documented so it can be properly incorporated into the models. This concern
also applies to the sandy landward margin to the bays and to the underlying
limestone (where its groundwater interfaces with surface flow of the bays).
Adequate Associated Information of Sampling Period
Only in the 'response' was some information provided as to the nature of the
condition during the 2 day and 8 day sampling period in August, 2009. What
was the weather and hydrographic conditions (rainfall, winds, tides, air and
water temperatures, etc) for the several weeks prior to the sampling as well as
during sampling? This is critical for evaluating water levels, flow, circulation,
nutrient levels, and such. The 'response' that certain things are not important
or were essentially normal is not for those writing the report to decide. Provide
all the information so those using the report can fully evaluate the study.
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
5 of 12
August can be a time of high temperatures, intense local rainfall, unique winds,
and higher than normal seasonal tides that do not represent conditions at other
times of the year. It is important for the reports sampling to be put in proper
perspective. For example, as mentioned earlier, the higher high tides of the
year reach into the black mangrove wetland soil and withdraw intensely rich
organic suspensions which circulate through the coastal bays and into the
nearshore marine waters. How do the tide elevations and ranges of the
sampling period compare with the rest of the year? A NOAA report documents
exceptional tides along a portion of the Atlantic coast during the summer of
2009 (as much as 60 centimeters above projected levels because of slowing of
Gulf Stream flow) and southeast Florida had tide levels running over 30
centimeters above projected levels into October. Was any of this elevated tide
occurring along the Collier County coast prior to or during the sampling
interval? These kinds of information are critical to put this study's data
collection interval into a meaningful perspective.
Description of Field Observations
The bottom of page 7 of the report says: "At each site, observations were made
of the general biological community structure and health." Exactly what does
this mean? Was some type of quadrants or profile lines used? How extensive
an area was surveyed? How did the methods in this report compare with that in
the reports mentioned in the mangrove and seagrasses section above? How
was 'health' measured? How was 'community structure' measured? My copy of
the report did not have anything but an algae map and sea grass map in terms
of data? Where is the data? I am concerned that there is not much that is real
biological information here, just fancy words.
Water Quality Locations and Implications
The report suggests that Moorings Bay is better than the natural Clam Bay
system (Page V of Executive Summary). The logic of the report is ridiculous.
The writing implies that this problem is because of a variety of things in the
natural system including the decline in tidal amplitude and increased tidal lag
because of 'channel meandering, constrictions and friction losses in the
system.' Ridiculous logic. Then the Executive Summary states that 'Moorings
Bay, although subjected to extensive urban stormwater runoff, appears to have
water ecology conditions better than those found in Clam bay; this is supported
by the results of the Redox layer investigation.' What are those better water
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
6 of 12
ecologic conditions? Explain how Moorings Bay is better in providing a
functional habitat, environment, and nutrient release of this mangrove fringed
estuary system?
It looks as though the sampling sites in Moorings Bay are primarily channel
sites with strong flow. Why are there no sample sites in the more stagnant
backwater corners of the Moorings Bay maze? What is the water depth of
Moorings Bay?
Summary
I find that this report is at best a weak data set that is surrounded by too much
environmental and ecological speculation that is not tied to the pertinent and
thorough literature of southwest Florida estuarine dynamics and, ecology. At
worst, it has the tone that it was written for developers to give the green light
to have more sand and concrete. Since the early 1970s, southwest Florida has
seen too many reports like this that attempt to diminish the value of the natural
environment and put dramatically modified dredge and fill environments on an
equal footing.
Is it possible that this report is trying to set the stage for expanded future
dredging activities to 'improve' the natural areas? It reads that way. I would
recommend that the County take a reverse approach. Moorings Bay is an
artificially deepened system to provide fill for bordering lots. The bottom is
too deep over most of the dredged area for sea grasses to live. The quality of
that Bay could be dramatically improved if those deeper areas not necessary for
navigation were shallowed either with blanket fill or with localized artificial
reefs. Shallowing the bays would provide conditions for increased sea grass
cover (more light to the bottom and higher oxygen levels); the artificial reefs
would provide habitat for oysters, sponges and such which further filter the
water and improve water clarity and light penetration. Complement that with
rip rap in front of seawalls, including some intertidal areas for re-establishment
of mangroves and you will have greatly enhanced the desired ecological
functionality of Moorings Bay. In the early 1980s, I did a study on the causes
for elevated turbidity in northern Biscayne Bay in Miami-Dade County. This bay
had been similarly modified by dredging and bulkheading. The
recommendations were as described above (Wanless et aI., 1984). Since that
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
7 of 12
time the County has been persistently following a program of installing rip rap
and mangrove intertidal areas in front of sea walls and fill shorelines,
shallowing up deep dredge areas so seagrass can recolonize and, installing
numerous artificial reefs from clean construction debris. The Bay has
persistently improved in water clarity and ecological functionality, and the
artificial reefs have proved great fishing sites.
Many of these recommendations were put forth in a 1981 Diagnostic/Feasibility
Study for Moorings Bay which I believe was included as an appendix of the 1991
Coastal Zone Management Plan. Why is this not acknowledged and discussed
here?
In fact, there is a serious disregard for earlier research and recommendations
on this Vanderbilt/Clam Bay/ Moorings Bay system and on similar systems of
southwest Florida. The failure of this report to do a thorough literature review
would save the County from redundant studies or erroneous conclusions due to
missed historic data and missed scientific documentation and evaluation of
ecosystem dynamics. This absence further suggests that this report is not a
scientific report but more of a political-economic positioning paper.
References (not cited in 'Report')
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, 1981. Diagnostic/feasibility
study for Moorings Bay, Collier County, Florida, 12 p.
Lugo, A.E., 1976. Role and productivity of black mangroves, 31p in Southwest
Florida
Regional Planning Council Report: p. 74-103 in provided
'General_20080826083149.pdf' .
Wanless, H.R., Cottrell, D., Parkinson, R., and Burton, E., 1984. Sources and
Circulation of Turbidity, Biscayne Bay, Florida. Final report to Sea Grant and
Dade County, 499 p.
Wanless, H.R., and Vlaswinkel, B.M., 2005. Coastal Landscape and
Channel Evolution Affecting Critical Habitats at Cape Sable, Everglades National
Park, Florida. Final Report of Research Project to Everglades National Park, 197
p. (available online: http://www.nps.gov/ever/naturescience/cesires02-1.htm )
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
8 of 12
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mike Bauer [mbauer@naplesgov.com]
Thursday, January 07, 20108:24 AM
McAlpinGary
ochsJ
RE: fyi - FW: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report
Unfortunately, the report by Dr. Wanless is a good example of what happens when a scientist is employed by one side of
a dispute to support their position. Responding only to what he was told by his employer, he makes basic, critical
assumptions about the report that are just flat wrong. He did not talk to the people who carried out the study, nor did he
talk to the County to see what they were looking for when they hired PBS&J. These are fatal flaws. It is not a
comparison of Moorings Bay and Outer Clam Bay as he states. It is not a biological study. It is not a year-long flow
study. It is a study, limited by time and money, to determine basic water quality and hydrologic flow conditions in Outer
Clam Bay and how it is affected by its connections to the Gulf of Mexico - through Clam Pass and Doctors Pass. It would
be fantastic to obtain information on all the matters Dr. Wanless mentions; is he willing to gather that data for free?
Of particular import to me are the comments on seagrasses. Probably unintentionally, he compares disparate
geographical areas. Yes, seagrasses are more abundant in a small area outside Outer Clam Bay, but in that bay, they
have continued to decline. Yes, an initial report done by Dr. Tomasko found seagrasses, but it was a different, highly
ephemeral species that was responding to drought conditions and is here today, gone tomorrow. Dr. Tomasko did not
find the important, pioneering seagrass species that has been monitored for the last ten years and is in serious decline.
When Dr. Tomasko came back and did this study, he did not find the ephemeral seagrass he found previously, and he
reported that.
Michael R. Bauer, Ph.D.
Natural Resources Manager
City of Naples
239213-1031
From: McAlpinGary [mailto:GaryMcAlpin@colliergov.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06,2010 1:52 PM
To: Mike Bauer
Subject: FW: fyi - FW: Dr. Wanless's review of PBsJ report
From: ochsJ
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 12:55 PM
To: McAlpinGary; ramseLm
Subject: FW: fyi - FW: Dr. Wanless's review of PBsJ report
???????
From: ResnickL
Sent: Wednesday, January 06,2010 12:18 PM
To: ochsJ; Sheffield Michael; brock_m
Subject: fyi - FW: Dr. Wanless's review of PBsJ report
fyi re: independent peer review of PBSJ Clam Bay Analysis
Lisa Resnick
Administrative Assistant
Pelican Bay Services Division
A Municipal Service Taxing & Benefit Unit
801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 605
Naples, FL 34108
239.597.1749 Tel.
239.597-4502 Fax
lisaresnick@colliergov.net
http://pelkanbavservicesdivision.net
From: teedup1@aol.com [mailto:teedup1@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:43 AM
To: ResnickL
Subject: Fwd: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report
-----Original Message-----
From: Marcia Cravens <goldandrose@mac.com>
To: Teedup1@aol.com
Sent: Wed, Jan 6,201010:38 am
Subject: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report
Mary Anne,
Here is the review commissioned by the Mangrove Action Group by Dr. Wanless of the University of Miami.
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
9 of 12
a
net send
in
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
10 of 12
4030 West Boy Scout Blvd
Suite 700
Tampa, FL 33607
800.477.7275
January 11, 2010
PBS&J Response to Criticisms by Dr. Harold Wanless, commissioned by Pelican Bay's Mangrove
Action Group, dated January 2010.
To:
Gary McAlpin - Director, Collier County Coastal Zone Management
From:
Jeff Tabar, PE
Dave Tomasko, PhD
Bryan Flynn, PE
Todd DeMunda, EI
As in other reviews of our report, most of the comments on the PBS&J report were related to water quality
and the natural systems characteristics of both Moorings Bay and Clam Bay. In particular, most
comments related to the perception that the two systems were being compared to each other, particularly
in terms that were unfavorable toward Clam Bay's water quality, without due consideration of its broader
ecological health. The report clearly refers to the loss of natural shoreline features in Moorings Bay, and
in fact includes two aerial photographs to highlight that impact. We believe that the text is very clear in
noting that Clam Bay has retained most of its natural shoreline features, while Moorings Bay has not.
However, the scope of work (reviewed and approved by the Clam Bay Advisory Committee) did not
include an assessment of the ecology of either system. This project was focused on water quality,
specifically as it relates to the Impaired Waters Rule (IWR) and the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL)
program. The following text will attempt to address concerns that appear to underlie the majority of
comments received. Summary points and comments are as follows:
1. Moorings Bay and Clam Bay are different systems, and their ecological values are different.
It is noted in the report that Moorings Bay has none of the natural shoreline features of Clam Bay. But the
focus of this report, based on a scope of work reviewed and approved by the Clam Bay Advisory
Committee, did not include assessments of shellfish and finfish or bird abundance.
The wording used in Section 4.0 in the PBS&J report does not suggest that Clam Bay's ecoloav is
"impaired", only that existing state guidance would likely result in its water aualitv being determined to be
impaired.
2. The shallow Redox layer and fine-grained sediments noted in Outer Clam Bay are to be expected
from a "natural" mangrove-lined system.
The authors agree that the organic-rich sediments and shallow Redox layer found throughout Upper,
Inner and Outer Clam Bay could in fact be a completely natural feature, as most mangrove-lined, semi-
PBS]
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
11 of 12
isolated systems have thick organic layers that are associated with low levels of DO and a heterotrophy-
dominated food web (note language used in Section 4.0, and bullet points in the Executive Summary).
However, the fine layer of silt and silty clay found in Outer Clam Bay, in particular, may or may not be
related to human activity. The fine-grained sediments in the Seagate Canals certainly do not appear to
be an entirely natural feature. The authors do not agree with anyone's characterization that Outer Clam
Bay's sediments are "natural" as that conclusion cannot be reached with the available information. As the
authors have stated at numerous presentations, a sediment aging and toxics assessment study are
appropriate. If no elevated toxins are found in Clam Bay, and sediments have accumulated in a natural
(or near natural) rate for the past few decades, then no concerns are warranted. But if elevated levels of
toxins are found, and sediment accumulation rates have been dramatically increased in recent years,
then these sediments are in fact problematic.
Until these questions are answered, no conclusion as to their "natural" condition can be made one way or
the other; not by the authors of this report, and not by reviewers of this report.
Interestingly, the 1975 EPA study on Clam Bay and Moorings Bay (called Parkshore in that study)
concluded that reduced numbers of taxa (Le., species of benthic organisms) were likely associated with
the increased amount of fine-grained sediments (Le., silt) in those same locations. If such sediments
have unnaturally accumulated, there 12 an ecological problem with these sediments.
3. Water quality in Moorings Bay must be adverse / why wasn't the 1981 study by FDER used?
This reviewer and others have made multiple references to the lack of inclusion of data from a 1981 study
on Moorings Bay. That study characterized the water quality within Moorings Bay during the period of
1977 to 1980, nearly 30 years ago. That report also included references to a trend of improving water
quality, suggesting that the poor water quality in Moorings Bay in the 1970s might not be relevant today.
The following table summarizes the water quality data set used in the PBS&J report (as provided by the
PBSD over the period of record from non-berm and non-pond locations) with Moorings Bay water quality
data from 2008 to 2009 (provided by the City of Naples).
These results are not meant to indicate that Moorings Bay is "healthier" than Clam Bay, but from a
regulatory perspective, multiple locations in Clam Bay do not meet existing water quality
standards, while most of Moorings Bay does. This is a central conclusion of the PBS&J report - it is
highly recommended that Collier County work with FDEP to develop locally-appropriate water quality
standards for its estuaries; this should not be a controversial conclusion. Existing water quality standards
from FDEP are problematic, as was pointed out in several locations in the report.
Staff from FDEP has confirmed that it is likely, based on data collected by the Pelican Bay
Services Division, that Clam Bay would be declared "impaired" for DO. This impairment status
decision could be problematic, as the report clearly states. In particular, the report cites the example
2
CAC March 11, 2010
IX-2-b Old Business
12 of 12
of Rookery Bay, which has been listed by FDEP as "Verified Impaired" despite the fact that the authors of
this report (and at least one reviewer) regard Rookery Bay as mostly an unimpaired system. An
additional specific example of the unrealistic nature of IWR's default DO targets for the western
Everglades is outlined in the report.
While wildlife utilization by birds, fish, etc. may in fact be higher in Clam Bay, compared to
Moorings Bay, the IWR and the TMDL programs do not allow for the luxury of claiming systems to
be "pristine" due to an abundance of wildlife alone. Somewhat paradoxically, one of the most
impacted lakes in Florida (Lake Hancock), which has incredibly poor water quality and a TMDL calling for
more than 70 percent reductions in TN and TP loads, is also home to thousands of alligators, and has a
significant number of bald eagles along its shoreline. Wildlife utilization and water quality do not always
"match" and it would thus behoove the County to develop its own site-specific water quality standards.
4. Flow through the barrier island is a major factor in the exchange between Clam Bay and the Gulf, and
must be accounted for to make any realistic assessment of circulation.
In the number of reports and previous studies reviewed by PBS&J, no reference was found
suggesting that flow through the barrier island was a major factor in the exchange of water
between the Gulf of Mexico and Clam Bay. Tide and current data from the PBS&J effort as well as
others (USEPA 1976, Tackney 1996, Humiston & Moore 2003, etc.) suggest that the meandering
channels within the system account for the majority of the tidal exchange. Further, when evaluating
changes to the system to increase tidal exchange (if warranted), the culprits of any inhibition of
groundwater flow are fixed (roads, infrastructure, etc.), so modifications to these elements are likely not
practical.
5. The August 2009 period of data collection is only representative of that time period, and cannot be
used to infer circulation characteristics of the system for any other time.
When conducting field studies with limited durations, there is always the concern of capturing transient or
specific conditions. Several other factors are taken into consideration before deployment, including
instrument access and sampling ranges. Comparing the results of the PBS&J data collection with several
other studies as well as anecdotal reports shows similar circulation trends. Figure 7.14 in the report
illustrates the predicted tide vs. measured tide at Doctor's Pass during the field data collection; there is
no evidence of an elevated water level condition that would have caused abnormal flow within the
estuary during the study period.
3