Work on Dona Bay projects also put on hold
On two separate motions on two separate days this month, the Sarasota County Commission first approved $10 million for use in the countywide Stormwater Infrastructure Maintenance, Repair and Restoration program and then $149,260 specifically for the dredging of Phillippi Creek from U.S. 41 to the boat ramp at Pinecraft Park in Sarasota.
Among the projects that will be delayed because of the $10-million funding decision will be the demolition of a dam on Phillippi Creek, near Southgate Circle, Spencer Anderson, director of the county’s Public Works Department told the commissioners prior to their July 8 vote on the $10 million budget amendment. Altogether, he said, $500,000 would be removed from the funding for that undertaking.
Before the July 8 vote, Commissioner Teresa Mast had asked Anderson, “What, if any, projects that were previously either requested or funding allocated for … will not be done or delayed” by the $10-million budget shift?
“There were several things that we had earmarked for these funds,” Anderson told her. They will be delayed, he added, unless the Public Works Department staff can find grants to replace the money that had been dedicated to them out of the county’s stormwater assessment revenue.
Mast then asked that he provide information about those projects for the record of the meeting, likening that action to a public service announcement. The dam project was fourth on the list.
In early April, a discussion about the dam prompted commissioners to reiterate concerns they previously had expressed this year, in regard to whether county staff was taking the necessary steps to ensure that stormwater maintenance was being pursued in a timely fashion.
On July 8, Commissioner Mark Smith asked Anderson whether putting the dam’s demolition hold would “affect the dredging of Phillippi Creek in any way?”
Anderson replied that he did not believe it would. “There’s already a way to move through that structure,” he explained.
Instead, the delay would affect staff work following the dredging, Anderson noted. “Right now, the evaluation is to see if there are any good alternatives for removing it or keeping it or keeping it in part,” he continued, referring to the dam.
Staff will be back before the commission, Anderson added, with details after that evaluation has been completed.
On April 8, Paul Semenec, manager of the Stormwater Division, responded to a question from Smith, who confessed a bit of confusion in regard to a $1,131,091 budget amendment that staff was seeking that day for the project.
“My understanding is that we were just going to be removing the dam,” Smith told Semenec. Yet, the backup materials, Smith continued, referred to “partial construction,” as well.
Semenec responded that staff anticipated “that the entire structure will be removed,” along with sediment in the creek, between Tuttle Avenue and Webber Street.
He explained that staff included the term “partial construction” in the agenda materials because staff does not have all of the necessary funding for the project. The money that staff was asking the board to approve that day in early April, Semenec added, would pay for the design of the project and the permitting process. That total was $1,131,091, with $304,290.70 awarded from the Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM). The latter money would come out of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), which is federally funded, FDEM’s webpages explain.
The staff memo in the April 8 agenda materials explained, “A historical dam lies approximately 3.6 miles upstream of the Phillippi Creek confluence with Roberts Bay. This dam was used as a salinity gate for agricultural purposes prior to the conversion of lands for residential use. Approximately 100 feet of the dam remains, extending from the [northwest] side of Phillippi Creek and causing suspended sediment to deposit upstream and downstream of the structure. This increased sedimentation from upstream erosion reduces channel conveyance capacity, increasing the risk of flooding to the surrounding residential areas, degrading water quality, and [causing] further erosion. There are several homes within the region that have repeatedly flooded or are on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) repetitive loss list. Additionally, this dam has degraded the project area’s overall natural stormwater conveyance and ecosystem.”
Moreover, the memo pointed out, “Removing the historic dam barrier and reinforcing the creek embankments will mitigate the risk of channel erosion and creek flooding in the project area and downstream, reducing the risk of future damage to structures along the creek. The proposed project will increase protection against stormwater flooding, improve creek water quality, and reduce channel erosion. The mitigation measures will reduce the risk of future damage, bodily injuries, and loss of life. Activities for this effort will include conducting a study to determine the effect of removing the dam on sediment transport upstream and downstream, design and permitting the removal of a remnant dam, and any associated activities such as stream restoration or dredging.”
When Smith asked Semenec what the “construction” aspect of the proposed project would entail, Semenc told him, “The removal of sediment and the dam and the construction of a sump, to keep sediment from continuing to build up in that part of the creek.”
Further, When Smith asked how soon the dam initiative would begin, Semenec replied that if the commissioners approved the April 8 agenda item, staff would proceed with hiring a consultant to update a 2018 study necessary for the work. After that step, Semenec said, “The study design and permitting could take up to a year …”
Both Smith and Commissioner Tom Knight expressed concerns about that timeline, given the number of residents who live on that portion of Phillippi Creek who experienced repetitive flooding during the 2024 storm season.
Two phases of Dona Bay project put on hold
The other projects that would be delayed by the July 8 vote, Anderson explained to the commissioners, were the following:
- Phase 2 of the Dona Bay Watershed Restoration Project. A county webpage explains, “As part of the [county Commission’s] commitment to water quality and preserving local [watersheds], Phase 2 of the Dona Bay project will help improve water quality in the Venice area by reducing excessive nutrients and sediments that are transported in freshwater runoff into Dona Bay. The Surface Water Storage Facility project includes construction of approximately 1.5 miles of 72-inch pipeline that will deliver water from the Dona Bay Phase 1 wetland rehydration area to an existing 364-acre lake.”
On June 7, 2022, the commissioners seated at that time approved an $11,785,499.71 contract with Cobb Site Development of Wauchula for construction of that facility.
Before the July 8 board vote, Anderson of Public Works pointed out that reallocating the $10 million, as proposed on the agenda that day, would delay repairs of damage to the banks of Dona Bay that resulted from the 2024 storm season. Staff is evaluating the potential of using fill from project sites for that work, Anderson said.
- Phase 3 of the Dona Bay project, which involves plans for “the design and construction of an aquifer recharge system that will beneficially redirect the flow of freshwater,” as noted in the July update on that undertaking, published by the county’s Capital Projects Department.
“Bid documents have been submitted to [the county’s Procurement Department] for review and advertising,” the update added. Generally, the Capital Projects staff issues the updates for select projects at the beginning of each month. Test wells were being developed for that project, Anderson noted on July 8.
- General repair and rehabilitation projects, though Anderson pointed out that “extraordinary rehabilitation, replacement and repairs” will be pursued.
- A flood mitigation initiative for multiple road segments, including Avenue A, which intersects with Stickney Point Road near Siesta Key, and areas of The Legacy Trail, Anderson said, characterizing those as minor projects.
- Future capital projects related to flood mitigation and water quality.
After Anderson answered Smith’s questions that day about the Phillippi Creek dam, Chair Joe Neunder told Anderson that it appeared “We’re doing a little triage … here … You really have to have an order of operations as it relates to priority.”
The Dona Bay projects, “while fantastic, needed,” Neunder continued, “seem to be able to be paused for a little bit to address the immediate needs of our community, such as Phillippi Creek, swales, ditches, etc.”
He added, “I think this is a great step in the right direction to get that work done. And, certainly … later on down the road, we can have those conversations” about where those projects Anderson had mentioned “fit into the equation.”
Using the word “triage” again, Neunder emphasized his support for the plans for use of the $10 million.
Commissioner Smith ended up making the motion to approve the budget amendment, Commissioner Mast seconded it, and it passed unanimously.