Title: Memorandum re: Water Storage Land Acquisition Fund Nominations. December 13, 1982. 4p.
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00052587/00001
 Material Information
Title: Memorandum re: Water Storage Land Acquisition Fund Nominations. December 13, 1982. 4p.
Physical Description: Book
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00052587
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text
77-. Lcr+- Ar rVIA 7 .

December 13, 1982


TO: TOM FOX, Sr. Right-of-Way Agent, Real Estate Department

FROM: FRITZ H. MUSSEIMANN, Director, Real Estate Department

RE: Water Storage Land Acquisition Fund Nominations

1. I would like the WSLAF Program summary sheet, which is page one of our
brochure updated as follows:

A. The City of Dunedin/Pinellas County nomination of Subarea No. 2
(Jerry Lake) should appear first on the summary sheet as it does
now, however, it should include the following revisions: the
name of the nomination should also include and/or state the following:
Subareas Nos. 2 and 3 (Jerry Lake and Maple Swamp) the size and acres
should be broken down so that it will show that Jerry Lake has 63
acres and the Maple Swamp has 47 acres showing the total of 110 acres.
As for the Estimated Cost Totals, it should show that the Jerry Lake
is $756,000 with the Maple Swamp having a cost of $470,000 totaling
$1,226,000. The Estimated Cost Per Acre should show $11,145. The
Present Zoning should show RPD-5 with an "*". Down at the bottom of the
sheet it should state that it has been designated a preservation area
by Pinellas County. A definition of a preservation area should also
be typed at the bottom of that sheet so that the Board, as well as other
lay-people will understand exactly what that means. Under Justification
an "X" should be included for this particular nomination under the
Wetlands Protection.

B. The next nomination to show on the sheet should be Pinellas County as the
agency. The nomination would be the Brooker Creek Riverine System. As
for the Size and Acres the Board elected to down-size the Brooker Creek
Riverine System, therefore, Tam, if you will get with me, I will show
you the area that they have designated and you will have to get Survey
to figure the acreage on that portion of the Brooker Creek Riverine
System. Of course, the Estimated Cost Per Acre will also be changed.
As for the Present Zoning, it should show that it has been designated
a preservation area by Pinellas County. At this point, all the other
items for this nomination appear to remain the same.

C. The next item that should show on the summary sheet is the nomination of
Pasv County, Parcel Nos. 4 and 5. The Size, Estimated Cost, etc. remains
the same.

December 13, 196.
Page two

2. Next a separate WSLAF Program Summary Sheet should be prepared and
above the heading on the Summary Sheet, it should state "Naminations
Held in Abeyance". Please list them as follows, on that summary

A. The first one will be the City of Dunedin/Pinellas County Subarea No.
1 (Spring Lake) and all of the information that we have on there
presently will stay the same except for the fact that under Justifi-
cation for that project, Acquifer Recharge, an "X" should be added for

B. The next project should be Pinellas County's nomination of the Anclote
River Tributary. All the information will remain the same except for
the fact that the Present Zoning should indicate that it has been desig-
nated as a preservation area by Pinellas County.

C. Lastly, the City of Tarpon Springs' nominations should appear on that

3. The next item of business is to update each one of the summary descriptions
for the projects. On those projects that have been held in abeyance by the
Board, it should so noted on the very top of the sheets. The following
revisions should be made:

A. Jerry Lake: Under item no. 1 of the description it should read "Jerry
Lake (Subarea No. 2) and the Maple Swamp (Subarea No. 3)". Under the
Area Covered it should indicate 63 acres for Jerry Lake, 47 acres for
the Maple Swamp with a total of 110 acres. The Number of Landowners
should read "3". Estimated Cost should indicate $756,000 for Jerry Lake
and $470,000 for the Maple Swamp with a total of $1,226,000. The
Present Zoning should also indicate that the land has been designated a
preservation area by Pinellas County. At the bottom of the summary des-
cription it should give a definition of a preservation area. Under
item no. 8, Reasons for Acquisition, in the second line, the word "rain"
should be changed to the word "raw". In item no. 10, the Owners Willing-
ness to Negotiate, in the second line, rather than "60 acres" it should
read "107 acres".

The following information needs to be determined prior to the next P-A
Basin Board Meeting in regard to the Jerry Lake and Maple Swamp nominations:

1. First of all, we need to have it appraised, not a full-fledged
appraisal, but something that we can hold the appraiser to as to
value, taking into consideration the fact that the property has
been designated a preservation area. The appraiser should also
take into consideration a possible density transfer to the uplands
ofwhat the property used to be zoned as (I believe that was RPD-5)
i.e. the possibility of transferring those units to the uplands.

This will probably require a meeting between the City of Dunedin,
the Pinellas County representatives, as well as our staff, to determine
what, if anything, can be done about the density transfers.

December 13, 1982
Page three

2. The next item of business on this particular project is that we
need to talk to Mr. Blain about acquisition alternatives i.e.
possibly entering into some sort of agreement with Mr.Douglas
whereby we could preserve the lands through that and pay him
compensation for whatever rights we acquire. I would assume that
this would be the development rights to the property, thereby,
preserving the property without actual fee acquisition, and at
the same time allowing Mr. Douglas to use the property in a manner
which will not be inconsistent with the Board's planned use for
the property. You should also look at the Board minutes to see
if there are any other questions that need to be resolved.

3. Lastly, once we get our ducks in a row as to density transfers,
and definition of a preservation designation by Pinellas County
and so on, we will need to meet with Mr. Douglas to determine
whether or not he would be receptive to selling his property to
the District, whether it be in fee or some other title interest
in the property so that the property can be preserved.

B. The next project is the Spring Lake project, which is one that is being
held in abeyance. The only change is the Number of Landowners, it should
state one major and 30 with riparian rights.

C. Brooker Creek Riverine System. As I stated earlier when discussing the
project summary sheets, the Number of Landowners will, of course, change,
the Area Covered and Acres, as well as the Estimated Cost inasmuch as
this project has been down-sized. In this particular case we will need
to determine whether or not the owner will be willing to sell the property
(i.e. the properties now covered by the revised Brooker Creek Riverine

D. As for the Anclote River Tributary project, Number of Landowners is now
determined to be 10+. That is another one that is being held in abeyance.

E. Hidden Lake and Vicinity. The Number of Landowners was determined to
be 3 rather than 2. This one is another one that is to be held in
abeyance. On item no. ten of this project on the second sheet (i.e. where
it is being continued) where the acreage is shown as 45 and 95 a total
should be put underneath that of 140 acres.

F. The last project to be considered is the Pasco County Project. We need
to determine a tighter cost figure on these parcels (from the appraisers),
something we can rely on for future negotiation. We also need to deter-
what the landowners mean when they say the property shall be left in its
natural state. To what extent do they intend this covenant to cover?
Also, Pasco County is to determine how much money they can contribute to
the project. At the present time they would be contributing an amount
equal to the purchase of the 4 acres in the corner of the property so that
they could realign Perrine Ranch Road. I do not know what that figure
would be in relation to the total (i.e. would it be 10% of the total, 20%
of the total, or whatever). The Pinellas-Anclote Board has requested
that the staff determine from the County Commission whether or not that
commission would be willing to contribute at least 20% of the total cost
of the property.

December 13, 198.
Page four

Again, I would ask you to review the Board Minutes to determine if
I have missed anything.

Also, after reviewing this memorandum, I would appreciate you discussing it
with me if you have any questions I will try to answer them. But the bottom
line is we have to get all this information together, if at all possible,
prior to the February 15, 1983 P-A Basin Board Meeting for their consideration.

This will require you to meet with Pinellas County, the City of Dunedin
Pasco County, and so on. I will be happy to attend as many of the meetings as
I possibly can to assist you.


cc: L. M. Blain


D L C 1 5 198Z

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs