Submittal of the minutes of the January 21, 1998 Cabinet meeting.

REQUEST: Consideration of a request to amend Rule 18-21.019, F.A.C.

APPLICANT: Division of State Lands

LOCATION: Statewide

STAFF REMARKS: After the last amendment to this rule became effective on April 17, 1996, the Department of Environmental Protection was contacted by the Joint Administrative Procedures Committee (JAPC) with a request to provide a citation for the public interest test and to clarify the forms referenced. This proposed amendment will satisfy that request.

Notice for rule development was published in the Florida Administrative Weekly on December 27, 1996. No requests for a Rule Development Workshop were received. Notice for proposed rulemaking was published in the Florida Administrative Weekly on November 7, 1997, with a public hearing noticed for the Board of Trustees at its February 24, 1998 meeting.

(See Attachment 2, Pages 1-25)

REQUEST: Consideration of (1) authorization to acquire 100 percent interest in 255 acres within the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed CARL project from 41 separate owners; (2) designation of the South Florida Water Management District as lead managing agency; and (3) confirmation of the management policy statement.

COUNTY: Lee

LOCATION: Sections 27 and 28, Township 47 South, Range 26 East

CONSIDERATION: $346,500

STAFF REMARKS: The Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) CARL project is ranked number 8 on the CARL Bargain\Shared Project List approved by the Board of Trustees on February 11, 1997, and qualifies for purchase under the Division of State Lands’ Land Acquisition Workplan. The project contains 59,008 acres, of which 20,055 acres have been acquired by the South Florida Water Management District (District) and Lee County. After the Board of Trustees approves this agreement, 38,698 acres or 66 percent of this project will remain to be acquired.

On June 27, 1995, the Board of Trustees authorized staff to enter into an acquisition agreement with the District to acquire various ownerships located within the CREW CARL project in accordance with section 259.041(16), F.S., utilizing the procedures set out in section 373.139, F.S. At the time the original agreement was contemplated, the Land Acquisition Advisory Council (LAAC) had recommended a CARL "cap" on funding equal to $10 million and had limited the qualification for matched funding to "new" acquisitions occurring after November 20, 1992. While the original agreement could have provided for 100 percent Board of Trustees funding until the dollar match for District purchases was reached, it was determined that the remaining value of parcels to be acquired exceeded $20 million and therefore a 50/50 match on each succeeding acquisition would exhaust the Board of Trustees’ funding before the project acquisition was completed; therefore, a 50/50 agreement was recommended.

In 1995, the LAAC approved the expansion of the project boundary, eliminated the $10 million cap and designated the project a shared acquisition with the District. The action by the LAAC allows the District to receive credit for all prior purchases it made within the approved project boundary. Therefore, the acquisition agreement was amended to allow the District to acquire parcels within the project on behalf of the Board of Trustees with the Board of Trustees paying 100 percent of the cost and acquiring a 100 percent title interest until the dollars expended match the District’s expenditures. The agreement provides that the 50/50 acquisition formula will be resumed once the Board of Trustees’ expenditures in the project have equaled the District’s expenditures. The District has provided documentation, acceptable to the Division of State Lands, establishing the District’s expenditure in this project.

The District has contracted to purchase eighteen parcels within the project at 100 percent of the appraised value. In addition, the District has acquired twenty-three options to purchase the remaining parcels, at 100 percent of the appraised values, from The Nature Conservancy. Pursuant to the terms of the amended acquisition agreement, the District shall be reimbursed for all costs associated with acquiring the forty-one properties, including pre-acquisition and closing related costs. The Board of Trustees’ purchase price will be 100 percent of the contract price negotiated by the District plus 100 percent of the cost incurred in the purchase of the property. Title to the property acquired will vest in the Board of Trustees.

As provided for in the amended acquisition agreement, the Governing Board of the District adopted multiple resolutions requesting the Board of Trustees’ share of the purchase price for the forty-one parcels, reimbursement of 100 percent of its pre-acquisition and reimbursement of 100 percent of its closing costs. Pursuant to the amended acquisition agreement, the pre-acquisition and closing costs will be reimbursed from CARL incidental expense funds. The District’s resolutions contains all of the assurances required by the amended acquisition agreement.

Pursuant to section 259.032(9)(b)2., F.S., staff recommends that the Board of Trustees designate the District as the lead managing agency for the CREW CARL project which will be managed as a conservation and preservation area with passive public use.

Section 259.032(9)(b)2., F.S., requires that the Board of Trustees, concurrent with its approval of the initial acquisition agreement within a project, "evaluate and amend, as appropriate, the management policy statement for the project as provided by section 259.035, F.S., consistent with the purposes for which the lands are acquired." The management policy statement for this project was included in the 1997 CARL Annual Report adopted by the Board of Trustees on February 11, 1997. Staff recommends that the Board of Trustees confirm the management policy statement as written.

These acquisitions are consistent with section 187.201(10), F.S., the Natural Systems and Recreational Lands section of the State Comprehensive Plan.

(See Attachment 3, Pages 1-19)

REQUEST: Consideration of authorization to acquire an undivided 50 percent interest with the South Florida Water Management District in 38.29 acres within the North Fork St. Lucie River CARL project from Arthur C. Miller.

COUNTY: St. Lucie

LOCATION: Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East

CONSIDERATION: $110,007 (The Board of Trustees’ 50 percent share of the total purchase price of $220,014)

STAFF REMARKS: The North Fork St. Lucie River CARL project is ranked number 20 on the CARL Bargain\Shared Project List approved by the Board of Trustees on February 11, 1997, and qualifies for purchase under the Division of State Lands’ Land Acquisition Workplan. The project contains 2,869 acres, of which 981 have been acquired. After the Board of Trustees approves this agreement, 1,849.71 acres or 64 percent of this project will remain to be acquired.

On December 16, 1997, the Board of Trustees authorized staff to enter into an acquisition agreement with the South Florida Water Management District (District) and St. Lucie County to acquire the Miller ownership located within the North Fork St. Lucie River CARL project in accordance with section 259.041(16), F.S., utilizing the procedures set out in section 373.139, F.S.

The District contracted to purchase the Miller ownership at 81 percent of the appraised value. The Board of Trustees' purchase price will be 50 percent of the contract price negotiated by the District plus 50 percent of the costs incurred in the purchase of the property. Pursuant to the terms of the acquisition agreement, the District shall be reimbursed 50 percent of all costs associated with its attempt to acquire lands within the project, including all pre-acquisition and closing related costs. Title to the property acquired will vest jointly in the Board of Trustees and the District, with each owning an undivided 50 percent fee simple interest.

As provided for in the acquisition agreement, on December 11, 1997, the Governing Board of the District adopted Resolutions No. 97-67 and No. 97-68, requesting the Board of Trustees’ share of the purchase price for the Miller parcel, reimbursement of 50 percent of its pre-acquisition costs and reimbursement of 50 percent of its closing costs (recording, title insurance policy and survey costs). Pursuant to the acquisition agreement, the pre-acquisition and closing costs will be reimbursed from CARL incidental expense funds. The District’s resolution contains all of the assurances required by the acquisition agreement.

The property will be managed by the Division of Marine Resources as a state buffer preserve.

This acquisition is consistent with section 187.201(10), F.S., the Natural Systems and Recreational Lands section of the State Comprehensive Plan.

(See Attachment 4, Pages 1-40)

COUNTY: Indian River

LOCATION: Sections 25 and 36, Township 31 South, Range 39 East

CONSIDERATION: $1,957,500 (The Board of Trustees’ 75 percent share of the purchase price of $2,610,000)

REVIEW Baker Goodman APPROVED PURCHASE OPTION

NO. PARCEL ACRES (08/29/95) (08/29/95) VALUE PRICE DATE

803005 Irwin 8.07 $2,692,000* $2,692,000 $2,692,000* $2,610,000 150 days

after BOT

*Value was revised in 02/04/98 memorandum approval

to reflect deletion of 15-foot wide strip.

STAFF REMARKS: The Archie Carr Sea Turtle Refuge CARL project is ranked number 2 on the CARL Priority Project List approved by the Board of Trustees on February 11, 1997, and is eligible for negotiation under the Division of State Lands’ Land Acquisition Workplan. This project contains 1,018 acres, of which 490.57 acres have been acquired or are under agreement to be acquired. After the Board of Trustees approves this agreement, 519.36 acres or 51 percent of the project will remain to be acquired.

Pursuant to a multi-party acquisition agreement entered into between the Division of State Lands (DSL) and Indian River County (County), the County has optioned the 8.07-acre parcel from Susanne E. Irwin, Robert H. Irwin, and Peter Irwin for assignment to the Board of Trustees. After this assignment is approved, DSL will proceed to close this transaction, with the County contributing 25 percent of the purchase price of the property.

In transactions involving local governments, it has been the long-standing practice of the Board of Trustees to insist on unencumbered, fee simple title to the lands it acquires under the CARL program. This policy is based upon the fact that the CARL program is a state initiative with its goal being state ownership and control. Permitting other entities to hold an interest in the title or insist on deed restrictions raises the possibility of management conflicts in the future.

On July 9, 1996, in another joint acquisition with Indian River County, the Board of Trustees approved a partial assignment of two option agreements in which the right of re-entry was

granted. In this case, Indian River County is contributing 25 percent of the purchase price and is using the proceeds of a local bond issue for its share. The County’s bond counsel has advised that it may only use bond proceeds if it obtains some interest in the property being acquired. The Department of Environmental Protection recommends that the Board of Trustees grant the County a right of re-entry during the time the bonds are outstanding if the property is either sold or converted to another use. This right of re-entry language is identical to what was granted by the Board of Trustees previously and is acceptable to the County’s bond counsel.

All mortgages and liens will be satisfied at the time of closing. In the event the commitment for title insurance, to be obtained prior to closing, reveals any other encumbrances which may affect the value of the property or the proposed management of the property, staff will so advise the Board of Trustees prior to closing.

A certified survey and an environmental site assessment will be provided by the County prior to closing, and the state will reimburse 75 percent of the County’s DSL approved costs of these items.

Although sea turtle nesting occurs from the southern tip of Texas to the southern coast of Virginia, a 20-mile stretch of beach in Brevard and Indian River counties is one of the most significant nesting areas for Loggerhead Sea Turtles in the world; the most significant nesting area for Green Sea Turtles in the western hemisphere; and an occasional nesting area for the Leatherback Sea Turtle, one of the largest and rarest sea turtles. For thousands of years, these sea turtles have returned each year to these beaches to lay their eggs and continue the species. The Archie Carr Sea Turtle Refuge project is designed to help protect the habitat and assure the continued survival of these endangered sea turtles.

The property will be managed by Indian River County as a conservation area with compatible passive recreational public access, under the terms of a fifty-year management lease with the state with an option to renew for an additional fifty years.

This acquisition is consistent with section 187.201(10), F.S., the Natural Systems and Recreational Lands section of the State Comprehensive Plan.

(See Attachment 5, Pages 1-38)

COUNTY:  Charlotte

LOCATION:  Section 18, Township 42 South, Range 21 East

CONSIDERATION:  $55,000

APPRAISED BY

REVIEW Norris APPROVED PURCHASE OPTION

NO. PARCEL ACRES (03/21/97) VALUE PRICE DATE

803004 Anderson/18 10 $58,000 $58,000 $55,000 185 days

after BOT

approval

All mortgages and liens will be satisfied at the time of closing.  In the event the commitment for title insurance, to be obtained prior to closing, reveals any other encumbrances which may affect the value of the property or the proposed management of the property, staff will so advise the Board of Trustees prior to closing.

A waiver of the requirement for a survey of the parcel is requested pursuant to section 18-1.005, F.A.C., because in the opinion of the Bureau of Survey and Mapping, the parcel meets all the following conditions:

• the parcel is surrounded by state owned land;
• the referenced parcel is located within Section 18, Township 42 South, Range 21 East, which was appraisal mapped and field inspected in October of 1996, by Johnson Engineering, Inc.; and the map is acceptable for computing acreage;
• the parcel is in its natural unimproved condition;
• the boundary of the parcel does not adjoin fences or improvements other than those managed by the state; and
• the managing agency concurs with the survey waiver.

While a waiver of survey is recommended at this time, should a field inspection or the title commitment reveal a substantive surveying or surveying related issue which impacts the parcel, a certified survey will be provided by the purchaser prior to closing.

A title insurance policy, an environmental site evaluation and, if necessary, an environmental site assessment will be provided by the purchaser prior to closing.

Charlotte Harbor, one of the largest and most productive estuaries in Florida, supports an important recreational and commercial fishery, but is rapidly being surrounded by cities and residential developments, which could harm this important resource. By conserving mangrove swamps and salt marshes, the Charlotte Harbor project will help preserve the water quality of the estuary, protect habitat for the Florida manatee and other rare wildlife, and provide residents and visitors to the area with opportunities for boating, fishing, and other recreational pursuits.

This property will be managed by the Division of Marine Resources as an addition to the Charlotte Harbor State Buffer Preserve.

This acquisition is consistent with section 187.201 (10), F.S., the Natural Systems and Recreational Lands section of the State Comprehensive Plan.

(See Attachment 6, Pages 1-39)

RECOMMEND APPROVAL

COUNTY:  St. Lucie

LOCATION:  Section 24, Township 36 South, Range 40 East

CONSIDERATION:  $19,500

APPRAISED BY OPTION/

REVIEW Gray APPROVED PURCHASE CLOSING

NO. PARCEL ACRES (08/24/94) VALUE PRICE DATE

803001 Derenzo/#204 1.25 $ 6,500 $ 6,500 $ 6,500 180 Days

803002 Ingram/#264 1.25 $ 6,500 $ 6,500 $ 6,500 after BOT

803003 Lu/#269 1.25 $ 6,500 $ 6,500 $ 6,500 approval

3.75 $19,500 $19,500

All mortgages and liens will be satisfied at the time of closing.  In the event the commitments for title insurance, to be obtained prior to closing, reveal any other encumbrances which may affect the value of the properties or the proposed management of the properties, staff will so advise the Board of Trustees prior to closing.

A waiver of the requirement for surveys of these parcels is being requested pursuant to section 18-1.005, F.A.C., because, in the opinion of the Bureau of Survey and Mapping, the parcels to be acquired meet all of the following conditions:

• the parcels are surrounded by state-owned land or surrounded by land the state intends to acquire;
• the parcels are located within a subdivision or in a section in which the controlling land corners have been recently surveyed by GCY, Inc. and the survey drawing is acceptable for computing acreage;
• the parcels are in their natural unimproved condition; and
• the boundaries of the parcels do not adjoin fences or improvements other than those managed by the state.

Title insurance policies, environmental site evaluations and, if necessary, environmental site assessments will be provided by the purchaser prior to closing.

Around Fort Pierce a chain of marshes and lakes separating inland pine flatwoods from the coastal scrub on the high Atlantic Ridge has survived the rapid development of St. Lucie and Martin counties like a visitor from another time. The South Savannas project will conserve these coastal freshwater marshes and the nearby flatwoods and scrub so that the wildlife and plants of this area, some extremely rare, will continue to survive and the public can learn about and enjoy this scenic remnant of the original southeast Florida.

The properties will be managed by the Division of Recreation and Parks as part of the Savannas State Reserve.

These acquisitions are consistent with section 187.201 (10), F.S., the Natural Systems and Recreational Lands section of the State Comprehensive Plan.

(See Attachment 7, Pages 1-16)

RECOMMEND APPROVAL

COUNTY: Martin

APPLICANT: Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Forestry

LOCATION: Section 27, Township 38 South, Range 40 East

CONSIDERATION: $125,000

APPRAISED BY

REVIEW PARCEL Danner APPROVED PURCHASE CLOSING

NO. NAME ACRES (08/23/97) VALUE PRICE DATE

803006 P-4 Partners 8.70 $126,000 $126,000 $125,000 120 days after

BOT approval

STAFF REMARKS: This acquisition was negotiated by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Forestry (DOF) with funding from a general revenue appropriation.

All mortgages and liens will be satisfied at the time of closing. In the event the commitment for title insurance, to be obtained prior to closing, reveals any other encumbrances which may affect the value of the property or the proposed management of the property, staff will so advise the Board of Trustees prior to closing.

A certified survey and an environmental site assessment of the property will be provided by the DOF prior to closing.

The property will be managed by the DOF to develop a work center site for firefighting crews and for other DOF related purposes.

This acquisition is consistent with section 187.201(23), F.S., the Agriculture section of the State Comprehensive Plan.

(See Attachment 8, Pages 1-25)

REQUEST: Consideration of a request for conceptual approval of a conveyance of the W. T. Edwards Hospital site in Tampa to the Tampa Sports Authority.

COUNTY: Hillsborough

APPLICANT: Tampa Sports Authority (TSA)

LOCATION: Section 09, Township 29 South, Range 18 East

CONSIDERATION: To be negotiated

STAFF REMARKS: On February 22, 1994, the Board of Trustees approved in concept beginning negotiations under the direction of the Office of the Governor toward the goal of the Tampa Sports Authority acquiring the 62.8 acre W. T. Edwards site. Payment to the state was to be accomplished through conveyance of appropriately zoned alternative land and facilities in which to relocate the state programs housed on the site. Subsequently, 30 acres of the property was transferred to Hillsborough County and has become the site of the Legends Field complex, the winter home of the New York Yankees. A state detention facility and several small houses used for social service programs were relocated to accommodate the baseball stadium. The remaining property contains the Department of Children and Families District (DCF) Headquarters, two Department of Corrections (DC) dormitories, the Department of Health (DH) Regional Laboratory, and two Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) facilities.

Since that time, the Tampa Bay 2012 organization has been constituted for the purpose of putting in a bid to make Tampa the host city for the 2012 Olympic Games. It is now the wish of the TSA to acquire the remainder of the W. T. Edwards site in order to expand its existing programs and, additionally, to enhance the number and character of available sites for amateur athletic facilities and venues. The TSA envisions several possible community benefiting uses for the site, including the potential for the development of a public sports complex that might include an enclosed, year-round, Olympic standard swimming and diving facility and a multi-purpose building and required parking areas, both of which could attract numerous amateur athletic competitions from around the country. Acquisition of this site by the TSA might also be seen as favorable in the process by which the United States Olympic Committee makes its selection of a Host City candidate for the 2012 Olympic Games.

Conceptual approval by the Board of Trustees, as owner of the W. T. Edwards property, would allow the affected parties to begin serious negotiations on a relocation plan. Dennis Harmon, Director of Tourism in the Office of the Governor, has agreed to coordinate the efforts of the state agencies in the development of the plan.

A consideration of the status of the local government comprehensive plan was not made for

this item. The Department of Environmental Protection has determined that the proposed action is not subject to the local government planning process.

(See Attachment 9, Pages 1-6)

COUNTY: Dade

Deed No. 19447

APPLICANT: City of Miami

LOCATION: Section 31, Township 53 South, Range 42 East, Watson Island, Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve, Class III waters, within the local jurisdiction of the City of Miami

STAFF REMARKS: Watson Island originated as fill that was placed to construct a causeway. This spoil island was owned by the state until it was deeded to the City of Miami (City) on February 24, 1949 (Deed No. 19447). The deed to the City prohibits the sale, conveyance or lease of the land to private persons, firms or corporations for private uses or private purposes, and restricts the use of the property to public and municipal purposes. The deed contains a reverter in the event the deed restrictions are violated.

The City has entered into an inter-local agreement with the Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority for the purpose of constructing a visitors center and public aviation project. The project will consist of a municipal heliport with space for at least three operators, a seaplane base, a visitors center, an air museum, administrative offices and terminal, customs and immigration facilities, and a restaurant. The City considers the project to meet the public and municipal purpose requirements of Deed No. 19447 and requests the Board of Trustees’ concurrence.

Chapter 163.3194(3)(b), F.S., states that a local development approved or undertaken by a local government shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan if it meets all criteria of the plan and all other criteria enumerated by the local government. Therefore, since local governments do not permit themselves, the proposed project is deemed to be consistent and no letter of consistency is required.

(See Attachment 10, Pages 1-13)

RECOMMEND APPROVAL

REQUEST: (1) Conceptual approval of the acquisition of certain federally-owned mineral interests within the state; and (2) approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service and the Board of Trustees, which provides for substituting certain appraisal procedures for those normally followed under chapter 259, F.S.

COUNTY: Statewide

CONSIDERATION: To be determined by appraisal (value-for-value)

STAFF REMARKS: Many tracts of state-owned land that were originally acquired from the federal government do not contain the associated mineral rights which were retained by the federal government. Pursuant to federal law, the Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in 1995 approved a resource management plan for Florida which includes a provision for those mineral interests retained by the federal government underlying those parcels owned by the state. A list of the state-owned lands involved is attached to the Memorandum of Understanding. Realizing that the surface estate is being managed by the state for conservation purposes, BLM has offered the state the opportunity to purchase the federal mineral interests and reunite these surface and subsurface estates. The federal mineral interests have been added to the CARL list as part of the Pinhook Swamp CARL project.

The two largest tracts of state-owned land for which the federal government owns the mineral rights are the Withlacoochee and Blackwater River State Forests. Since the federal government had originally acquired these lands with U.S. Department of Agriculture trust funds, BLM has reached an agreement with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) whereby the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) will receive the benefit of the state’s purchase. The conceptual plan agreed to by BLM, USFS and the state agencies is to value the federal mineral interests and then allow USFS to apply that amount of money toward acquiring parcels within the corridor between the Osceola National Forest and the Okeefenokee National Wildlife Refuge. At closing the state will receive title to the federal mineral interests and the USFS will receive title to an amount of land equal in value.

Under federal law, this proposed transaction will constitute an exchange since the federal government will be giving up title to the minerals and receiving title to land in exchange. From the state’s perspective, the transaction will be a straight purchase since the state will be paying cash and receiving an interest in land. Where the state is acquiring an interest in land, the normal process is to obtain two appraisals (if the value exceeds $500,000) and then to negotiate a purchase agreement. Under federal law, however, when doing an exchange, federal agencies are required to obtain a single appraisal and then to negotiate an exchange agreement in which the value of the land being received is equivalent to the value of the land being given up. Recognizing the different procedures called for under the respective laws, the federal and state agencies have come up with a process acceptable to both parties.

Under the recommended process, memorialized in the attached Memorandum of Understanding, the parties agree to jointly select one appraiser from the Division of State Lands’ (DSL) list of approved appraisers and DSL will contract with that appraiser. DSL will pay up to $10,000 for the first phase of the appraisal. USFS will pay any amount in excess of $10,000 for the first phase. The first phase of the appraisal will be limited to a highest and best use analysis to determine if the mineral reserves in the subject parcels listed in the Memorandum of Understanding are practically and economically mineable. If the minerals are practically and economically recoverable, Phase II may need to involve a detailed geological

investigation, including drilling test holes, to determine the quality, quantity and depth of the minerals. To do this type of analysis could be relatively expensive, and the parties have agreed to negotiate how that cost should be shared at that time. If the highest and best use analysis in Phase I concludes that the mineral reserves are not practically and economically recoverable, then Phase II will consist of completion of the appraisal and estimating the market value of the subject mineral parcels. Under this second scenario, a detailed geological investigation would not be necessary. Since these appraisal procedures are different than DSL’s normal procedures, it is necessary for the Board of Trustees to agree, pursuant to section 259.041, F.S., to substitute these standards. The Board of Trustees can substitute other appraisal standards so long as it believes them to be adequate to protect the public’s interest. Considering that this transaction involves two governmental agencies, both subject to various laws and rules, staff believes these alternative procedures are reasonably prudent and will protect the public’s interest.

This acquisition is consistent with section 259.101(9)(a)3.(c), F.S., and with section 187.201(10), F.S., the Natural Systems and Recreational Lands section of the State Comprehensive Plan.

(See Attachment 11, Pages 1-4)

APPLICANT: Office of Greenways and Trails

COUNTY:  Orange

During the 1994 legislative session, several significant changes to the state’s land acquisition procedures were adopted and incorporated into section 259.041, F.S., to facilitate the timely acquisition of conservation and recreation lands. Section 259.041(1), F.S., allows the Board of Trustees to waive statutory requirements or to substitute for its own, other reasonably prudent procedures so long as the Board of Trustees believes that the public’s interest is being reasonably protected.

Federal laws and regulations governing right-of-way activities are applicable to all federal projects, regardless of whether funds are authorized for the right-of-way. A project becomes federalized when federal funds are slated for use in any phase of the project, including planning, environmental design, acquisition, construction, etc. pursuant to the Department of Transportation Right-Of-Way Procedures 525-010-300, and Local Agency Program Manual, chapter 2, section 5.

In order to recommend the federal procedures, staff has reviewed the Florida Department of Transportation Local Agency Program Manual (Chapter II - Section 5, Right-Of-Way Procedures), Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions and the U.S. Department of Transportation Real Estate Guide for Local Public Agencies and is prepared to recommend that the Board of Trustees adopt these procedures for the acquisition of the proposed phase III of the West Orange Trail. The most notable differences in procedure are that the agency appraisal(s) utilized to establish value may be exchanged with the owner prior to contracting, and relocation costs, severance damages, and business damages may be a consideration. Staff believes these procedures to be reasonably prudent and that the public’s interest is being reasonably protected and recommends these procedures be substituted for the procedures provided for in section 259.041, F.S., pursuant to 259.041(1), F.S.

(See Attachment 12, Pages 1-5)

RECOMMEND APPROVAL

APPLICANT: Office of Greenways and Trails

COUNTY:  Leon

LOCATION:  Sections 12, 13, 14, and 15, Township 01 North, Range 01 East

CONSIDERATION:  $4,050,000

APPRAISED BY

REVIEW Griffith Wright APPROVED PURCHASE OPTION

NO. PARCEL ACRES (10/02/97) (10/02/97) VALUE PRICE DATE

97-4247 Mettler Parcel 501.4 $3,742,000 $4,060,000 $4,060,000 $4,050,000 03/30/98

This parcel represents a corridor of approximately 5.7 miles along Miccosukee Road, a designated canopy road in northeastern Leon County. This project has opportunities for hiking, biking, equestrian activities, boardwalks, nature trails, and interpretive displays. This parcel is being acquired as a multi-use recreational trail system.

The subject property adjoins Dove Lake, as do neighboring properties. Dove Lake acts as a natural storm water reservoir for the surrounding area. TPL has expressed concerns that improvements on the subject property which may be constructed by the managing agency may alter the natural hydrology of the area and adversely impact the level of the lake, which may result in the flooding of adjoining properties. TPL has been assured by the Department of Environmental Protection that considerations will be made as to the impact of any improvements on adjoining properties and that it is not the state’s intent to flood or cause damage to the holdings of neighboring landowners by any willful act or omission by the state or a sub-lessee.

The original conceptual use plan submitted by the project applicant to the Office of Greenways and Trails identified possible recreational uses for the site. One such use outlined on the conceptual plan was that of a youth sports complex. This particular proposed use is opposed by the Arendell Homeowner Association (Association). The Association consists of residents who reside across the street from the project site. The Association has expressed concerns as to whether the state may purchase this parcel under the Florida Greenways and Trails program and should the state acquire the parcel, may any portion of the parcel be used as a youth sports complex. Staff has determined that this acquisition does qualify as a trail under section 260.013(1), F.S. Use of the parcel as a recreational youth sports complex is consistent with section 375.045(3), F.S.

Leon County is the managing agency and is responsible for the development and implementation of a management plan as required under section 259.032(10), F.S. Specific uses for the parcel, to include any proposed use as a sports complex, will be defined during a public management plan development and review process. The management plan will be presented to the Land Acquisition and Management Advisory Council for review and approval prior to its implementation.

All mortgages and liens will be satisfied at the time of closing. A preliminary title report identified utility, ingress and egress, and drainage easements located on the property. These easements were a consideration of both fee appraisers in the determination of market value and have been determined by staff to not adversely interfere with the management of the property. In the event the commitment for title insurance, to be obtained prior to closing, reveals any other encumbrances which may affect the value of the property or the proposed management of the property, staff will so advise the Board of Trustees prior to closing.

A certified survey, a title insurance policy, and an environmental site assessment will be provided by the seller prior to closing, with the costs being reimbursed as follows by the purchaser. The purchaser shall reimburse the seller’s title insurance costs, the cost of the survey not to exceed $65,000, and the cost of the environmental site assessment not to exceed $10,000.

This acquisition is consistent with section 260.015, F.S., and section 187.201(10), F.S., the Natural Systems and Recreational Lands section of the State Comprehensive Plan.

This project will be managed by Leon County as a recreational greenway.

(See Attachment 13, Pages 1-31)

RECOMMEND APPROVAL

LOCATION: Statewide

STAFF REMARKS: On February 25, 1997, the Board of Trustees reviewed a draft policy regarding the use of Board of Trustees’ lands for mitigation and mitigation banking and authorized a one-year moratorium on any further mitigation banks. The February 25, 1997 action allowed project mitigation to be continued, if the long term management needs were addressed. A copy of that agenda item is attached. The year allowed time for staff to further evaluate a number of issues and to present the draft policy at public workshops. Staff held five public workshops in July, l997 in Tallahassee, Jacksonville, West Palm Beach, Tampa and Orlando, where additional issues and concerns were identified. Representatives of business, environmental groups and other government agencies attended. A summary of the various comments received to date is attached. Staff also met with managers of Board of Trustees’ lands, the Land Acquisition and Management Advisory Council (LAMAC), the water management districts (WMD) staffs, and with other entities involved with mitigation banking or public lands management. Staff also presented the issue at a workshop on mitigation banking in Ft. Lauderdale which was attended by more than 100 people and circulated an early draft of this item to more than l50 persons.

The major issues, identified by the Board of Trustees for further evaluation, or from public comment are noted below:

1. Are there Board of Trustees’ lands which would be appropriate for mitigation banks?

2. Under what conditions, based upon our experience with Little Pine Island and other private mitigation activities, would project mitigation or mitigation banking be recommended, should these activities be authorized on Board of Trustees’ lands?

3. What additional financial safeguards would be recommended for mitigation banking?

4. Does the use of Board of Trustees’ lands for mitigation support or encourage wetlands destruction?

5. Will the use of Board of Trustees’ lands result in a reduction of public support for land management activities?

6. Will the use of Board of Trustees’ lands reduce the amount of private lands which would otherwise be protected?

7. Does the use of Board of Trustees’ lands result in a loss of net environmental benefit?

8. What fees should be charged for the use of Board of Trustees’ lands for either project mitigation or mitigation banking?

These issues are discussed below.

Issue l. There are many unfunded restoration needs on Board of Trustees’ lands. There are more opportunities for project mitigation because many of the Board of Trustees’ restoration needs involve smaller, discrete projects or there is not sufficient market for a mitigation bank. There are also opportunities for mitigation banks, though fewer in number, for the larger scale restoration needs. An inventory of restoration needs on managed Board of Trustees’ lands has been conducted and currently identifies 350 projects on l22 areas managed by the Division of Recreation and Parks, Division of Marine Resources, Division of Wildlife (FGFWFC) and the Division of Forestry (DACS). These projects have been mapped in a GIS database and represent over 237,500 acres of proposed restoration projects on these managed areas. A subset of these sites may be suitable as mitigation banks.

In order to better understand the potential for mitigation banks on Board of Trustees’ lands, staff conducted a preliminary evaluation of six managed sites identified in the inventory as possible candidates for mitigation banks: Port Bougainville (Key Largo State Botanical Site), Tosohatchee State Reserve, Kissimmee Prairie, Tomoka State Park, Paynes Prairie State Preserve and Estero Bay State Buffer Preserve. The restoration needs at Port Bougainville and Tosohatchee are being completed through other means. The other four sites are more likely candidates though additional analysis might indicate that they are unsuitable. For example, the Kissimmee Prairie site is in an area which has low development activity and likely renders the site not economically viable as a mitigation bank. The Tomoka and Paynes Prairie sites are in high development areas but the cost of the restoration relative to the potential return might make these sites not economically viable as mitigation banks. The Estero Bay State Buffer Preserve has potential but there may be sufficient mitigation alternatives available in that basin. A further analysis of any potential site would be conducted before presentation for conceptual approval by the Board of Trustees. At this time, the only site that staff is prepared to recommend as a potential bank is the site along the St. Johns River which already has been reviewed by the Board of Trustees.

Issue 2. Construction of the first of seven phases at the Little Pine Island Mitigation Bank is almost complete and the second phase has just been started. The restoration project appears to be quite successful and has proved to be an effective and efficient means of accomplishing land management restoration needs. As described in more detail in Exhibit l, only a few credits have been sold to date and we have learned that:

f) credit and service area decisions are determined through the regulatory process,

Issue 3. Financial responsibility forms have been developed and proposed as amendments to the regulatory rules. These are based upon financial responsibility requirements used for existing programs in the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) such as storage tanks, hazardous waste, and solid waste closures. Standardization of these financial mechanisms will make application review more efficient. Final adoption of regulatory changes is expected by July, l998.

Issue 4. Some persons have commented that mitigation and mitigation banking undermines wetland protection and makes wetland destruction easier. Mitigation as a component of the regulatory process has been authorized by the legislature and safeguards are provided by the regulatory process. These include requirements that wetland impacts must be minimized or avoided to the greatest extent practical, prior to mitigation. The rules also provide that any mitigation must offset otherwise unpermittable losses of wetland functions. The use of Board of Trustees’ lands, or any other public lands, for these activities does not alter nor weaken the regulatory requirements. Mitigation banking has been designed to address the shortcomings of project mitigation and provides certain advantages over other forms of mitigation such as the requirement that mitigation be done in advance of impacts and financial safeguards to ensure the construction and long term management of the mitigation project.

Issue 5. There is a recognition, as supported by passage of chapter 97-164, F.S., that there are not sufficient funds available to support public land management. This law directs managers to consider opportunities to support their programs through public/private partnerships and allows revenues derived from these activities to be segregated into trust funds for management of land. Mitigation banking may be a more desirable use of Board of Trustees’ land than other potential revenue-generating activities.

Issue 6. The decision to use Board of Trustees’ lands can and should be evaluated in a systems context. In some cases, public lands may provide a more effective and sustainable mitigation option than the use of private lands because the public lands are managed and because they are larger and closer to other lands of regional significance. On-site mitigation still is a preferred option in the regulatory rules. The use of Board of Trustees’ lands would only be an option, not a requirement, and would only be available if the land management activity is consistent with the mitigation requirements of chapter 373, F.S.

Issue 7. Mitigation is designed to create improvement in one area as an offset for impacts at another site. The use of Board of Trustees’ lands neither alters nor weakens the regulatory offsetting standard. Mitigation on Board of Trustees’ lands would only be authorized if the land management need was not already being met through other means. Allowing mitigation on Board of Trustees’ lands would avoid continued loss and accomplish something that was not otherwise being accomplished. In instances where revenues are being generated from these activities, the additional revenues would provide opportunities for more land management improvements - a net gain.

Many public lands, including Board of Trustees' lands, need ecological restoration. While these lands are protected through public ownership and many are in a preservation status, they must be restored or enhanced. Restoration needs on managed uplands and submerged lands have been identified in management plans and in the inventory that has been developed. There

are also restoration needs on submerged lands which are not actively managed. These latter needs have been identified through other resource protection programs such as the Surface Water Improvement Management Act (SWIM). There are public funds dedicated to implementing many of the above identified restoration objectives; however, the needs are greater than the available resources. Where these restoration needs are consistent with mitigation requirements of chapter 373, F.S., allowing mitigation on Board of Trustees’ lands could provide an additional tool to accomplish activities which are not otherwise funded and is consistent with chapter 97-164, F.S., which encourages land managers to consider public/private partnerships and revenue-generating activities to accomplish land management objectives. Authorization for these activities is being considered because it could allow unfunded management objectives to be implemented and it has the potential to raise revenues.

As noted above, there are potential concerns and potential advantages which may result from this use of Board of Trustees’ lands. A more detailed discussion of the concerns is included in Exhibits 2 and 3. Staff believes that conditions can be established to ensure the integrity of our resource protection efforts and recommends that project mitigation and mitigation banking be authorized with the conditions noted below:

1. Continue to authorize project mitigation on Board of Trustees’ lands, provided:

e) the lands will be managed in a preservation status, consistent with the mitigation banking permit, which will assure long term sustainability of the mitigation project;

These activities may be authorized by staff, via a letter of consent, use agreement or contract, depending upon the extent of the long term management needs. For these projects, staff recommends that fees be waived. However, reimbursement for costs associated with processing and oversight may be negotiated. Staff believes that the restoration work being accomplished is adequate compensation for the use of the land and is consistent with existing rules and policies regarding other fee-waived activities.

Authorize mitigation banking, provided:

a) the mitigation project implements an identified restoration objective and the mitigation design has been approved by staff. For actively managed lands, the restoration needs must be reflected in an approved management plan and the mitigation design must be approved by the land manager;

b) the activity is consistent with statutory, bond, or deed restrictions;

c) regulatory and proprietary oversight of the mitigation banking project is available;

d) the mitigation design will be self-sustaining with routine maintenance;

e) the lands will be managed in a preservation status, consistent with the mitigation banking permit which will assure long term sustainability of the mitigation project;

f) funding for the needed restoration is not available at the time that the site is presented as a request for proposal. In the event that funding is available and is being replaced through a mitigation bank project, the mitigation bank project will be considered if the existing funding can be and is re-directed toward another land management objective;

g) any site identified as a potential bank be evaluated to determine whether the restoration needs are related to an unauthorized use of Board of Trustees’ lands, and if so, whether enforcement is a viable option to achieve the restoration objective;

h) revenues derived from the use of the lands and credit sales are distributed to the land management entity and deposited into a trust fund for other land management activities;

i) proposals are competitively processed through a request for proposal (RFP);

j) equitable compensation, which may include the costs for project development and oversight, is negotiated. The Board of Trustees reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and may waive fees in relation to the degree of public benefit resulting from the project;

k) the proposal is consistent with the proposed amendments to chapter 62-342, F.A.C., now being processed. If those amendments have not been codified at the time a site is presented to the Board of Trustees for final approval, staff recommends that the application be withdrawn unless the applicant chooses to comply with the proposed changes, notwithstanding the fact that the amendments have not yet been adopted as rules; and

l) the Board of Trustees gives conceptual and final approval.

A specific instrument for mitigation banks will be developed by staff.

If the Board of Trustees approves staff recommendations, staff will proceed to rulemaking. In the interim, staff recommends that proposals to utilize Board of Trustees’ lands for project mitigation or mitigation banking be allowed, provided they are consistent with the conditions noted.

(See Attachment 14, Pages l-24)