Loading...
BCC Minutes 01/29/2003 W (Sign Ordinance) January 29,2003 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMISSION AND CODE ENFORCEMENT SIGN ORDINANCE WORKSHOP Naples, Florida, January 29, 2003 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Commission and Code Enforcement Sign Ordinance Workshop in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in WORKSHOP SESSION in Building "F of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Commissioner Tom Henning Commissioner Frank Halas Commissioner Jim Coletta Commissioner Donna Fiala Commissioner Fred Coyle (Speaker Phone) ALSO PRESENT: Joe Schmitt, Adm. Comm. Dev. & Environmental Servo Michelle Arnold, Code Enforcement Sharon Dentini, Code Enforcement Marjorie Student, Assistant County Attorney Jim Mudd, County Manager Patrick White, Assistant County Attorney David Weigel, County Attorney Mary Ann Williams, Janet Starnes, SFWMD Page 1 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ~ SIGN ORDINANCE WORKSHOP AGENDA January 29, 2003 9:00 a.m. NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. 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), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS". ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. 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 TRAll., NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. 1 January 29, 2003 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. SIGN ORDINANCE 3. JANET STARNES - SFWMD 4. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT n4-8383. 2 January 29, 2003 January 29,2003 1. Commissioner Tom Henning welcomed everyone to the meeting at 9:05 AM. Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 2. Sign Ordinance - Jim Mudd, County Manager, gave an overview of the agenda for the meeting. He addressed the Sign Ordinance in stating it is a bit complicated and has been in the news lately. It is not a new ordinance, nor had it been devised by County staff nor given to the Board of County Commissioners without community input. It had a lot of community input with a Citizens Committee that came forward with the sign Ordinance in detail. It will be understood after the presentation in which they need to decide whether they are going to enforce it or not. It goes into effect on February 1, 2003 with enforcement. Joe Schmitt- Administrator of Community Development & Environmental Services - introduced Michelle Arnold, Code Enforcement who will do a power point presentation. Michelle Arnold gave her presentation: A brief overview of the presentation is as follows: Purpose & Intent for Signs - to Direct, Identify, and Communicate messages - Can improve or enhance the community's character. History - Streetscape Committee Formed prior to 1999 - Reviewed other community sign Codes - Re-wrote the Sign Code - Held several Public Hearings in 1999 & 2000 - Major Regulatory Changes such as Heights, Setbacks, Size, Logos, wall signs, window areas, unified sign plans, neon lights, interior illuminated signs, and amortization schedule for non-conforming signs were submitted. - Adopted Code and grace period for non-conforming signs - Existing before Jan 1, 1991 - compliance date Feb. 1,2003 - Permitted between Jan. 2, 1991 & Jan. 5,2000 - vested until change in copy, ownership, or business. - Signs permitted after Jan. 5,2000 - Must comply with current code. - Signs that have complied and signs vested and illegal signs were shown - Number of Sign Permits Issued was displayed. - Contractors Estimated Value of Sign Permits was displayed. - Results were shown of pre-existing signs and the new signs. - Many different "results" were shown such as sign removals, signs under the current code and those in compliance were shown. Mary Ann Devantis from Redevelopment Dept. - presented: - Proposed Enhancements that will be brought to the Board in the near future with Amendments during the current cycle. Page 2 January 29,2003 -Addressing Issues-Cluttered Directories-Landscape Obscuring Signs- Inconsistent Requirements and Ordinance Format that is not User Friendly - Problems Found -User Friendliness - Nighttime Visibility - Improving Signage and Recommendations - Place addresses on upper most portion of signs - Expand directional signage controls to improve internal traffic circulation. - Commence enforcement on signs subject to the amortization schedule beginning February 1, 2003 - Draft standards to allow limited open/closed signage display at businesses. - Continue review of sign code. Joe Schmitt - Community Development and Environmental Services - addressed the Board of Commissions in looking for their guidance. The Ordinance has been in effect for 3 years and the public has had many opportunities to amend the Land Development Code Amendment process and will look to the County Attorney for Code Enforcement. The Code cannot be changed unless going through the Land Development Code Amendment process. They will continue to enforce the Code. He stated they realize they need to make some adjustments and integrate landscaping plans with uniformity to come into compliance. Can discuss alternatives and go back to the BCC with Amendments such as allowing illuminated window sign limitations. Commissioner Coletta has no problem with the sign ordinance itself but does have a problem with the neon and illuminated signs in windows. His problem is with the signs in the window that would not exceed 25% ofthe total volume. He also stated he will have to leave for a previous appointment at 10:30 AM. Commissioner Coyle (speaker phone) stated the sign ordinance was put together after a lot of public input and deliberating and study by people who understood what Community Character is. He would be reluctant to scrap major portions of the Ordinance. He would support lighted and of reasonable size of "open and closed" signs for businesses. Neon signs are very unsightly and feel the businesses can accommodate the Code without a lot of expense. He is not in favor of the Neon signs. Many persons are in compliance and they would be doing a disservice to those that have made every effort to come into compliance ifmany changes were made. Logos are permitted as long as incorporated into a sign that meets the basic requirements. He felt they can tweak the Ordinance a bit and resolve some of the issues. He would not want to cite those immediately on the Neon sign issue until a conclusion is reached on the appropriate "open & closed" status. He feels the intent of the Ordinance is a good one and would not support suspending enforcement. Page 3 January 29, 2003 Commissioner Fiala also wants to give the small business man a chance with an "open & closed" sign. She agrees with the rest of the Ordinance and reflects the Community Character. She feels they should rethink the portion of Neon lights in the windows. Commissioner Halas also feels it is a good sign Ordinance. His concern is with the small business man not being able to advertise whether he is open or closed. He stated it should be a soft lit sign for "open or closed". He would like to see a study from other communities on their results of this issue. David Weigel- County Attorney - stated his staff has researched this issue closely. He is hearing there is a potential or desire for the question of "opening and closed" signage to be taken into account, studied and brought back by staff with proposals for Amendment in the next Land Development Amendment Code cycle. Suggestions are whether they are open tube, exposed tube or enclosed neon tubing. Another issue is the total surface area of window space and whether the 25% may include illuminated signage. The Board can direct staff to come back with a proposaVs for standards in regards to the size ofthe "open/closed" sign, and the relationship to the total exposed and covered area of the glass window area of establishments. He mentioned Joe Schmitt had spoke about the allocation ofthe County Managers use of resource, meaning the Land Development Code, the Development Services Staff and the prosecutorial element of Code Enforcement. Code Enforcement and the Attorney assistance always have an element of prosecutorial discretion. If the Board of County Commissioners directs to staff with enough specificity, then both the normal allocation of County Manager resource as well as the direction of the Board for staff to come back will allow and provide the legal parameters to not actively enforce that specific area of the sign code that the Board is looking to have addressed. Commissioner Halas felt they should include the luminance of the signs and a standardization of colors. Commissioner Henning felt they would have to measure candle power of lighting and it may take more Code Enforcement staff to enforce Commissioner Halas' idea of the luminance of the signs. A lengthy discussion was held on the neon lights being in closed tubing, types of illuminating signs, brilliance, the logos, and what does and does not conform to Code. Commissioner Henning stated under the 25% rule the businesses are allowed to put a sign designated if "open or closed" - the issue is whether it is lit or not. Commissioner Coletta commented that the public needs to find the businesses in busy traffic and at night. Lot of residents are elderly and need the assistance ofthe lighted devices to find the businesses and the businesses need them to attract customers. If there is too much criteria on the types and encasements etc. the businesses won't be able to find that type of product. They need to be realistic. Need something that is on the open market without a lot of restrictions in order to meet the needs of what is within code. Page 4 January 29,2003 SPEAKERS: Jim Blewett - small business owner - has been in business for 11 years. He sent a packet to all the Commissioners. Most of the public and the business community felt the lit sign ordinance didn't warrant what was taking place. He felt his sign in his window was safe. He stated the only way the public can see what his establishment does is with the light in the window. Too many lights would take away from the services he provides, so has come up with a specific light for his business. Ifthere were no lights, it would be completely dark with the darkened windows. There are no excessive neon lights in his area and does feel some may have to be addressed, but don't take away everything for the small business owner. Darlene Koontz - small business owner - her concern is there was no provision for signs that have been in existence. The signs she has to remove are signs that didn't require a permit when put in. She has two small neon "open" signs. Theirs were not issued permits and understand due to that they will have to come down. She feels it is unfair. The signs on the building were legal and they had gone through the process at the time. They have tried to conform and very active in the community. She stated in running a small business she does not have time to attend LDC Amendment meetings and Planning Board meetings. She feels the ordinance is great and needs to be addressed, but didn't think it was fair to make changes when it was legal at one time. She will try to conform and make it work. Jim McTague - he built a building in 1976. The communications he has had with staff have been very courteous and cooperative. But he feels there is a lack of common sense in the Ordinance. When he had his sign put in it was designed by the zoning director at the time - his interpretation was not what you owned but what you advertised. He has a different zoning site and talked about the 100 feet of ownership. Many of the stop signs facing out on US 41 is ridiculous. The subject of barber shops he felt the lights and signs are needed. Finding an address is very important for traffic safety. He feels more staff will have to be hired to enforce all the ordinances. He addressed the legality of real estate signs showing "sold" properties. He would like to keep his sign, been there for 25 years, has had no complaints and is setback properly. Michelle stated there has to be 150 feet to have a ground pole or directory sign. All the Codes including the sign Code has a variance process, if someone had a hardship they can request it. Michael Vinyarey is the sign review specialist for Collier County. He reviews all the sign permits and inspects them. He has had 6 occasions of persons not meeting the 150 foot code. One was approved for the swamp buggies. They have always been denied otherwise. The option is to apply for a variance, but he would not issue a permit for a pole, ground or directory sign. The cost for a variance is $1,000 for the application fee _ $25 processing fee - or $2,000 if the sign is up already and did not apply for a permit. Page 5 January 29, 2003 Nick Hale - Scientist in the field of Color & Appearance - he has written standards in the past. When specifying the appearance of something you specify what you see not how the sign was made. He covered how "neon" is defined and the different colors as an element and how it emits light. He stated it always emits an orange light only. When talking about lighting, it needs to be understood exactly what is being said about the lighting issues. It could get into a legal problem. He discussed the issue of gases being mixed, the brightness oflighted signs, the types, and the technical language of the overhead lighting in Collier County. He stated there are ways of specifying the appearance, but not to specify how to get there. Nicholas Giannone - representing the owner of a barbershop - he feels if the barber pole (red/white & blue) is illegal and not in the code, people will not recognize it as a barber shop or find it. He doesn't feel the barber pole should be taken away since it has been there since 1960 and the new code is hurting the small businessman. Michael Boyd - President of S&T Holding Inc. - doing business in Collier County since 1978. (Signs & Things and Neon Shop) He enjoys working under the present conditions with sign codes so he knows what he can and cannot do. The attitude with the County employees is excellent, and is very professional and helpful. He feels the Code is very workable. He sees a problem with the neon sign issue. He has signs that he had permits for and felt getting the permit, even though it had exposed neon, that it could stay. He was never required to secure a permit for exposed neon on the building of Spankys. He is now wondering if the sign needs to come down. Michelle responded that it depends upon when the permit was issued, if after1991 and before the Code was adopted, it can stay- but if permitted before January 1991, then it has to come down. If it is exposed neon without a permit it has to be removed. Discussion followed on the time frame of receiving the permits and date code was adopted. Commissioner Henning asked about the compliance issue in which Joe Schmitt responded to come into compliance it has to have a change in ownership or change in copy. The difficult side of enforcing the code is doing research on the approved permits and whether they are approved etc. Mr. Boyd also brought up the issue of conflicting response on the issuance of permits and could possibly be from the County changing computers several times in the past years. David Zimmerman - Owner of Royal Scoop Homemade Ice Cream - he stated his business has a neon sign in his window. He feels he needs a neon sign to alert people of the hours his business is open. He wondered ifthere was any assistance for persons in Collier County due to competing with Lee County. Lee County is more relaxed with their code. He also feels a lot of aspects of the sign code will take away from the Character of the Community. What draws people is its uniqueness and Collier County is eliminating this. Will they start to tell people what to do with the inside also? He hopes they will consider that the small business owner has to be able to communicate to people letting them know they are open and the hours. Page 6 January 29, 2003 Fred Alander - Owner of Spankys - he has owned the business for 19 years. He wants to comply with the code but to make sure he gets a permit. He feels the neon around the building is okay - many people have them. He has always tried to comply, but is also trying to make a living. He feels the neon should be left on the building. Sharon Reardon - a small business owner & owns a sign shop - her concerns are the rules need to be current, accurate and in black and white if the County expects her to abide by the rules. When the rules change, the County should let the public know if they have changed. The rules are interrupted differently not getting the same answer from two people. The rules and interpretation seem to be made up as they go along. Some rules aren't in place because they have not been addressed. Code Enforcement shouldn't make up rules to intimidate people and not base their opinion on how the public responds to the County. She had questions on the electrical, adding a name on a pole or ground sign, and footers. She has the LDC for 1991 which it states neon signs are not allowed but they have been allowing them. Code Enforcement can't and doesn't enforce the rules now, why make new rules, they should enforce the ones they have today. Jim Carter - the first four years as a Commissioner he initiated the sign ordinance. Many businesses were upset, but ended up with a quality code. He sees there are some administrative areas that need to be dealt with. The reason was Community Character. Dover Cole was being discussed at that time to look at all the Community Character. One group in the process of changing the code had a premier sign code in place when Dove Cole arrived. It saved the County approx. $75,000 due to them not looking at it because Collier County was already doing what the other upscale communities in other states are doing. Since in place, numerous signs have come down and have improved the community. They did not focus on the color of the neon; just the fact of being in the windows is what was objectionable. He feels neon is alright inside but not in the parking lots areas. The time of notification started a year ago. When getting down to persons having to conform, that is where the concerns start. Codes need to be enforced without discriminating. Issues are to keep what businesses want as long as they own the business, but if ever sold, neon will go. He is the initiator ofthe sign code and will answer anyone's questions. Tom Clifton - Bail Bond Business - there are 9 bail bond businesses in Collier County. He is not allowed to put signs outside his condo through the Condo Association. Much of his business is done in the evening hours with his employees meeting with the clients. He needs his business lit so people can find him and also for safety. He states the police like the neon signs in order to see where a business is. He suggests the BCC speak to the police department. He can't move his signs around and wonders how he gets rid of the signs that do not conform. He stated there many other neon signs in the County. Commissioner Henning stated the Community Character spent a lot of years on the sign code and the majority of the Commissioners had to pass it. The esthetics is in the eye of the beholder and need to keep the Character ofthe Community. If they are going to enforce the new ordinance he is wondering how they will address the new SIgnS. Page 7 January 29, 2003 Michelle responded they are addressing it now and will be discussing the enforcement issues with four investigators. Commissioner Henning felt putting addresses on the signs is very important. Commissioner Coletta stated from his car phone he feels they should give staff direction to work towards the ordinance. He would like to have seen a change in the 25% rule. Commissioner Henning stated they are deviating from the Code Ordinance if they allow open or closed lit signs and is reminding the rest of the Commissioners that the County Attorney said they must enforce the Land Development Code. Not enforcing it would be a violation of the State Statutes. Commissioner Halas feels they need to eliminate the "open & closed" signs until there are adjustments made to the Ordinance. At this time there would be no "open & closed" signs. They need to enforce the "open & closed" unlit signs now. He feels the staff should research what other communities are doing. Michelle stated to enforce the neon issue is to have the businesses unplug their lit signs or turn them off - not removing them until staff researches this issue further. Joe Schmitt stated they are in the midst of starting the Land Development Code process Amendments going through the Community Character group and two public hearings through the Planning Commission and two subsequent hearings through the Board of County Commissions. It would be mid-June when the final amendments can be ratified. Commissioner Fiala wondered what they are going to do for the small business owner now that have the tourist here and dark windows - with only a paper sign it will not be seen. Joe again stated his guidance from the County Manager in using his assets in enforcing the code. He would not like to see the Commissioners get into a situation of directing staff not to enforce an Ordinance that was passed by the Board of County Commissioners. This would need legal guidance. The Code says we need to enforce it and staff can not take a "selective" position. Commissioner Fiala wanted to know if there was another way of helping that small business man allow the public to know, right now without waiting until June. Mr. Weigel again mentioned what he said previously is that ifthe Board gives such specific direction today as to what they are looking to be "brought back" in the LDC Amendment cycle, would provide an adjunct to what the County Manager already has which is the responsibility to allocate the resources to Code Enforcement as he already does. This adds to the ability of prosecutorial discretion of enforcement if staff is told specifically that the staff is to bring back an Ordinance change or changes that are perhaps a variety of things to look at regarding that sign code element that is in question Page 8 January 29, 2003 at the present time. This is called "zoning in progress" and the process would be started today to look at the code and bring back something in the next LDC Amendment cycle. Commissioner Coletta would like to proceed with what has been suggested. County Manager Jim Mudd summarized that the Commissioners want the staff to come back at the next LDC Amendment cycle effective in June with a change to the sign code that allows proprietors of businesses to have an "open" sign on their window to let the public know they are open. An open type sign in a window that is readily seen by customers, but not overbearing in a store front. Commissioner Henning stated he has heard from the Commissioners is that the majority would like to allow businesses to have a size status of "open or closed" and for it to be illuminated if they so desire. Not the "neon" open or closed but illuminated. Break - 11 :22 AM Reconvened - 11 :45 AM 3. Janet Starnes - SFWMD Commissioner Coletta wanted to discuss the road situation in Collier County as it relates to the public lands. He does not want to act too fast as it moves through to the Governor for consideration. Mr. Mudd introduced Trudy Williams Chairman ofthe Governing Board ofthe South Florida Water Management Dist. who gave a presentation on the South Golden Gate Estates Hydraulic Restoration Project. Ms. Williams introduced several persons involved in the project. She turned it over to Janet Starnes. Janet had handed out a packet to the Commissioners. She covered the location on the visualizer. It is a 94 mile real estate development that has had significant difficulties through the years in the early 1970's. She gave a history: -The State of Florida determined it was an important piece of restoration effort in restoring the Fakahatchee Strand, the Pickinew Strand and the 10,000 Islands. It was in the 70's when the State of Florida starting looking at acquiring the lands in the southern Golden Gate Estates project area. - It has 460 miles of road and 48 miles of canals that interrupts historic flow ways and over drain the landscape. -1985 - SGGE included in "Save Our Everglades" Plan - Present: CARL Land Acquisition -1986 - COE feasibility study was done -1992 - Governor Chiles directive to SFWMD was to develop a conceptual hydrologic restoration plan for SGGE using the Corps of Engineers Feasibility Study as primary reference. Page 9 January 29, 2003 -1996 - Restoration Plan was submitted to the Governor -1997 - SGGE Project Ranked #7 on Critical Restoration Project List -2000 to present - Component of Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan She showed the major and minor flowways. She did not address all the goals and objectives as they are in the Commissioners packets. Basically their goal is to reestablish the historic flowways and the historic hydrology and therefore reestablish the historic habitat values within Southern Golden Gate Estates. They are actually maintaining more upland than what would have been there historically because of critters and primarily the panthers. The Corps of Engineers did an analysis of flooding impact. The analysis is required by the Water Resources Development Act of the "Savings Clause". The Savings Clause says a Federal Project under the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program can cause no additional flooding in an adj acent area. If existing 6 inches of flooding in an adjacent area, they cannot increase the flooding in that area at all over the 6 inches. It doesn't mean the project will resolve the 6 inch flooding issue, just means there will be no additional flooding in terms of flood or duration of flood. They looked back at the 1996 plan in which they found did potentially cause some additional flooding in the Northern Golden Gate Estates portion. The Corps of Engineers came up with a plan known as "3-D". It took the design of the original plan and creates the pump size in order to assure that the flooding impact in the NGGE were no way aggravated and move the water out ofthe Northern GGE effectively resulting in a larger pump size. Then presented to management in which they directed staff to look again to see if a more efficient and effective manner of restoring Southern Golden Gate Estates at the same time not having a flooding impact in Northern GGE, but doing in a less technology based way. They looked at several alternatives which is listed in the handout. Alternatives #8 & 9 did not cause additional flooding in Northern Golden Gate Estates and moved forward with assessing habitat and restoration impacts. They compared the new alternative to 3D. The 3 alternatives are: she showed slides in her presentation- 1) She showed what Southern Golden Gate Estates would look like if they did nothing and allow it to continue to drain in the current situation and would become a very dry area and not what use to be there historically. 2) Alternative #8 - looked at backfilling two canals, no pumps, putting in weirs in FakaUnion and Miller Canals. Less than 30% restoration 3) Alternative #9 - backfill three canals, Miller, Prairie and Merit. No pumps and install adjustable weirs in FakaUnion Canal. For alternative #8 to work they would have to widen the FakaUnion Canal by 100 feet, same depth. 4) Alternative 3D has three pump stations. Would plug the canals. Three spreaders and create overland flow. All alternatives would remove the majority of the roads in the area. She showed the results. Page 10 January 29, 2003 As a result of a meeting in Jacksonville with the Water Management District, the Corps of Engineers, the Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Div. of Forestry discussed at length all the alternatives presented. They tentatively selected a recommended plan of which is "3D". In doing the analysis it gives them over 60% restoration, #8 was less than 30% and #9 was 38% restoration. In looking at the costs - 3D is the least costly ofthe three. It is the best alternative to recommend to management and recommend to Congress for approval. Their goal is to have a draft report - combined report that needs to go to Congress which will include the environmental impact statement required, available for public release and public workshop for comments in early April. They will have a 40 day comment period, address them and give a final report. They then hope to have a Chief of Engineers report which is the document that gets sent to Congress reporting the recommendation on the Project. Hope to have the report ready in July 2003. Questions from the Commissioners were taken and a lengthy discussion followed on the different alternatives, the panther habitat, the upland areas and moving the water. Increasing the elevations in Southern Golden Gate Estates could cause a backwater effect. To prevent that - the current plan is to build a pump station so the water comes out of Northern Golden Gate Estates into the very northern end of the canals pumping it so as not to create the backwater. The operation and maintenance of the pump stations will be the responsibility of the South Florida Water Management District in conjunction with the Corps of Engineers. The Water Resources Development Act provides for a 50/50 cost share between the Corps of Engineers and the SFWMD in terms of operation and maintenance. Commissioner Henning asked about an interlocal agreement between the emergency services provided now in that area with the SFWMD. Janet answered once the project is built and constructed the actual management of the land will still be maintained through the division of Forestry and any cooperative agreements that need to be made will be done. The intent is no individuals living in the study area at that time, so only a minimum need for routine emergency services are needed. Division of Forestry is manned 24 hours a day in case of emergency responses. The Div. of Forestry is responsible for such things as road maintenance and controlled burns. The Water Management Dist. is responsible for the canals and water maintenance. The reason for the study and recommendations is: back when the area were canals and the roads were built and the developments were sold, and not known then, it disrupted the natural flowways of 10,000 Islands. It is a natural nursery for fish and other marine critters. The water was actually increased and caused it to become fresher rather than maintaining the salinity that is appropriate. They need to actually reduce the flows with overland flow, which is slower, water is treated as it travels south, which is much cleaner, therefore reestablishing the natural mix of fresh and salt water in the 10,000 Island area. That helps put a healthier system in place. Another purpose is its use to be a wetlands area which is a key part ofthe Florida landscape. They provide surface water and help Page 11 January 29, 2003 recharge the aquifers. People depend upon the aquifers for their drinking water. Increasing the elevation of ground water through the project they will help stabilize the aquifers in the area and have a positive impact on the existing well fields in the area. It will increase the stability ofthe well fields so it doesn't have as many salt water intrusion problems. SPEAKERS: Nancy Peyton - Florida Wildlife Federation - they are supporters ofthe acquisition and restoration of Southern Golden Gate Estates. The flooding issue is a sensitive issue and the members are concerned about de-watering of Northern Golden Gate Estates. The members are concerned about water tables being lowered and increasing fire risks. There needs to be a balance of not flooding Northern GGE and they can't dewater. The pumps will pump and they will look at the operational plans. Another issue is that Southern Golden Gate Estates is a restoration project and therefore all water that flows into SGGE should remain there. There should be no straws in Southern Golden Gate Estates draining offwater or urban areas or agricultural uses. The Water Management Dist. knows of their concerns and she is sharing them with the Commissioners. Brad Cornell- Collier County Audubon Society - they support the alternatives and modeling maps with 3D being the best solution. They also have concerns about pumps being an opportunity of over draining areas that need to be as wet as possible for a variety of reasons. He is hoping the 3D alternative will be the proper water quality going into the FakaUnion. They do support the restoration project. County Manager Jim Mudd wanted to talk about the issue of roads and accesses. They need to remove 270 miles of roads - 200 plus for County plus a number of bridges. There is some fear of stopping access to that particular area, which is correct, due to the roads and bridges not existing any longer - that is part ofthe wetland restoration project. There may be some zoning changes for what is allowed for recreational purposes. Janet stated the actual access to the property is not something they are doing as part of the restoration plan. The restoration plan is based entirely what they need to do with the water to manage it better to restore the property closer to something closer to historic. The Div. of Forestry is currently managing the property under an interim management plan. As soon as they have an approved plan, restoration plan, they will move forward with finalizing their management plan for the property. Because Federal dollars are being expended in the purchase and acquisition of the properties the management plan requires going through an environmental impact statement assessment. It will go through public review like the restoration plan. It will not have to go to Congress. Commissioner Henning stated they are the Counties roads and the State or whomever will need to reimburse the County before giving them up. There is also an issue with Miller Boulevard in the courts with acquisition issues. Page 12 January 29, 2003 County Manager Jim Mudd stated if the Governor signs eminent domain the Miller Blvd extension issue will fall off the plate and they are then paying the County for that road and would be the end of that issue. Eminent domain could go to court. William Pettit has been working with attorneys from the Dept of Environmental Protection in which they approached him indicating condemning, without admitting they have any easement interest, they were going to assume ifthere was any interest they were going to condemn and recommend to the Governor and Cabinet. The issue did get tabled for two more weeks. If there was a condemnation proceeding, they would have to make a good faith offer where they go to court. Not being a condemnation lawyer he thinks they could go through a "quick take" proceeding putting a sum of money in the court of registry and acquire whatever interest the County has. Offers will be made for any of the County lands. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting/workshop was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 12:35 PM. ~', BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL -i-~ TOM HENNING, HAIRMA , ,. ""...."',...:0."...",\, ' , .......... \'\ \ ., ... ... "Ii<. e '1~ ~. '. -- ""..\it.iU >lJe...~(>, 'If '. ^ ff"'" S'1".... ..,.....:-: O"'~ 'i; IT ~ .-!,'t"". .~. II b~}('j~t~tl'~B09&:~LERK '" ...~-:. ,.... 'l.;\~tl ~'J-! "'>-;--" - 010 r-:. ~ i .._. ~\ >,'l ' . n., ;</~ . -:,1r~, / i>~;~~~~".",!,.:,{~ ',: q' ?~ r-- .. ~!Jl\ \\. .: ,rS " ' " ':.}.,.:...L~:"..., ,..<~.-: Attest as to Cha f- . . '.. . ,. ....ans . .,-" ........ .'.'. Jlgnat t ihe~~! frii~~~~{ ~vP'roved b~:h~l1~ard on :J J ~.s () 3 As presented ~ - or as corrected Page 13